Laserfiche WebLink
Proposed Civil Penalty Assessment <br />Bear Coal Company/ The Bear Mine <br />NOV CV-00-006 <br />Materials reviewed in conjunction with the preparation of this proposed assessment were: DMG NOV CV- <br />00-006 form; DMG inspection reports dated 4/19/00 and 7/13/00; DMG memo from Sandy Brown dated <br />8/4/00 with 4 photos attached; and a packet of 20 slides from 7/13/00 Bear Mine inspection. Permittee <br />apparently did not provide comments. <br />History [Rule 5.04.5(3)(a)]: <br />No NOVs have been issued [o Beaz Coal Company within [he twelve months preceding this NOV. <br />The History component of this assessment is proposed at $0. <br />Seriousness [Rule 5.04.5(3)(b)]: <br />The Seriousness component of a proposed assessment may range from $0 to $1750. The amount <br />assessed for Seriousness depends upon whether the permiltee failed to comply with an <br />adminisvative standard or a performance standard. This NOV was written for the permittee's <br />failure [o comply with a performance standard. <br />In the case of a permittee's failure to comply with a performance standard, the amount of the <br />Seriousness component is to be further based upon two additional factors: (I) the probability of <br />the occurrence of the even[ which the violated standard is designed to prevent, and (2) the duration <br />and extent of the actual or potential damage in terms of area and impact upon the public and the <br />environment. <br />(1) In this case, the event that the performance standard is designed to prevent did in fact occur. <br />Had the topsoiled pottion of [he Wes[ Yard Area been reseeded as required, the weed <br />infestation and loss of soil moisture and nutrients would likely have been much less. <br />(2) Given the size of the weeds in the photos, it would appear that the duration of this weed <br />infestation was several weeks. The extent of the weed infested area is reported as I.5 acres. <br />Based upon these factors, the Seriousness component of this assessment is proposed at $500. <br />Fault [Rule 5.04.5(3)(c)]: <br />The Fault component of a proposed assessment may range from $0 to $1500. Assessments for <br />"unavoidable" violations may range from $0 to $250. Assessments for violations that were the <br />result of "negligence" may range from $250 to $750. Assessments for violations that resulted <br />from "intentional conduct" may range from $750 to $1500. <br />As documented in a previous inspection report dated 4/19/00, Division staff requested the <br />permittee to immediately finish its [opsoiling and seeding work. It therefore appears that the <br />penni[tee's failure to comply was neither unavoidable nor the result of negligence, but intentional. <br />The Fault component of this assessment is therefore proposed at $750. <br />Good Faith In Achieving Compliance [Rule 5.04.5(3)(d)]: <br />As this NOV has yet to be abated, no reduction of this assessment is proposed at this time. <br />The Total Proposed Civil Penalty Assessment for this NOV is therefore set a[ $1250. <br />