My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE27187
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE27187
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:34:53 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:32:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981038
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
12/3/1993
Doc Name
NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMOUNT OF CIVIL PENALTY REQUEST FOR CONFERENCE
Violation No.
CV1993147
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />NOV C-93-147 <br />Cyprus Orchard Valley Mine <br />This NOV was issued for failure to conduct hydrologic monitoring as <br />required by the mine permit. <br />HISTORY <br />Three NOV's (C-92-035, 93-030 and 93-142) have been issued at this <br />mine during the past twelve months. <br />Environmental monitoring programs are an integral part of coal <br />mining permits since State statutes only allow mining operations <br />to occur with documentation that those operations are being <br />conducted in a manner which minimizes impacts to the hydrologic <br />balance of the mine area. Failure to follow significant portions <br />of the approved monitoring plan at a mine is a significant <br />deficiency. <br />COVCC maintains that the cited omissions from the monitoring plan <br />are not significant because adequate data has already been obtained <br />from those locations which were not monitored and because the <br />monitoring plan is more extensive than necessary. There may very <br />well be merit to these points. However, it would not be <br />appropriate for the civil penalty officer to make those <br />determinations. Those are matters for consideration by the <br />Division staff and the operator in the permitting process. <br />Based on the extent of omissions in the 1992 monitoring conducted <br />by COVCC and the variety of potential impacts which the monitoring <br />plan was presumably designed to detect, $1000 is assessed for a <br />significant violation. <br />FAULT <br />COVCC contended that the failure to conduct all of the required <br />monitoring was due in part to limited time and resources. Climatic <br />and road conditions also apparently limited the company's ability <br />to do some of the absent monitoring. COVCC also points out that <br />they have intended to revise the monitoring plan for some time. <br />The fact remains that the operator was negligent in not conducting <br />operations which the company had committed to doing in the permit. <br />In this case, this negligence is in evidence over the better part <br />of a year. $750 is assessed for negligence. <br />GOOD FAITH <br />There is no evidence of good faith in the file. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.