ENFORCE26810 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Nov c-9~-ola Bowie Resources Ltd., Bowie No. 2 Mine This NOV was issued for failure to obtain regulatory approval prior to implementing s b~ttificant changes to a mining plan. Construction of bench facilities on a slope with a demonstrated history of geologic instability was completed in the field to specifications which were significantly different than those in the approved mine plan. HISTORY No NOV's have been issued at this mine during the past twelve months. No penalty is assessed for history. SERIOUSNESS This was an administrative NOV. The regulations indicate that assessement of civil penalties for administrative violations should consider the extent to which enforcement of the Act was obstructed by the violation (Rule 5.04.5(3)(b)(ii)). In this case, construction of mine portal azea facilities was significantly altered following approval of plans for those facilities. By denying the Division an opportunity to review plans for the revised facilities, the operator obstructed the Division's ability to ensure that regulatory performance standazds would be met. In particular,, the Division did not have an opportunity to review implications of the revised construction plans with regazd to geotechnical stability of the azea, surface water control plans, or the feasibility and cost of reclamation. Those implications aze not known at this time; however, they certainly have the potential to be severe and, possibly very difficult to mitigate. Due to the extent to which the Division's ability to enforce the Act was obstructed, I am assessing $1500 for a severe level of seriousness. FAULT The regulations indicate that civil penalty assessments where a greater degree of fault than negligence is encountered shall consider whether the violation results from actions which aze reckless, knowing, or intentional (Rule 5.04.5(3)(c)(iii)). In this case, the operator implemented major changes to the approved mining plans without obtaining required approval of those plans. Having recently obtained a mining permit, the operator was certainly awaze of the need to obtain Division approval for mine plans prior to implementation. The only conclusion that can be drawn from the operator's decision to proceed with a plan which had not been submitted for Division approval is that this violation occurred with the operator's knowledge. $1250 is assessed because this violation was the result of knowing conduct on the part of the operator. GOOD FAITH This violation has not yet been terminated so, good faith is not relevant.