ENFORCE25752 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Civil Penalty Assessment Proposed Penalty Assessment History $ 150.OU Seriousness 1000.00 Fault 750.00 Good Faith 0.00 Total $1,900.00 History The History component was not contested. Seriousness The Operator argued that the seriousness of the violation should not be assessed as "significant" based on the fact that the sites which were not monitored in compliance with the plan were not associated with active mining areas or had not shown impacts in the past. It would appear to be true that the instances of non compliance were associated with sites for which potential impacts were apparently minimal. Had this not been the case, the violation would have been more serious. However, hydrologic monitoring is an extremely important component of the regulatory program, and in my view the extent and duration of the Operator's non-compliance with the approved monitoring program could have hampered the Division's ability to fully evaluate the hydrologic impacts of the operation relative to the impacts projected in the permit. I concur with the proposed assessment of $1000.00 for Seriousness. Fault The Fault component was not contested. Good Faith The NOV was abated on November 29, over five weeks prior to the abatement deadline of January 10, 1994. In addition to submittal of a comprehensive response to N:r. Gorham's hydrologic review memorandum, the Operator subsequently submitted an application for a technical revision to scale back the monitoring program, which the Division has indicated may be warranted. Based on the rapid response in abating the NOV in the shortest time possible, I recommend a reduction of $250.00 for good faith. Settlement Agreement Penalty Proposal.....$1,650.00