1994-08-04_ENFORCEMENT - C1981022

• Permit No: C1981022
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 8/4/1994
• Doc Name: SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
• Violation No.: CV1994007
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

The proposed civil penalty was :
History $200 . 00
Seriousness $1000 . 00
Fault $1000 . 00
Good Faith $0 . 00
Total $2200 . 00
History
There have been four NOV's issued during the past four months .
Seriousness
The justification of the proposed penalty was that it is
impossible to asses mining impacts without an adeauate monitoring
program.
Based on the information presented in the conference I am
recommending a reduction to $750. 00 in the seriousness component.
The operator did conduct all NPDES and mine water monitoring as
required to assess the quality of and flow of water from the .
mine. No critical data was lost. The Division has been
discussing a reduction in the monitoring of the surface and
ground water sites for several months.
gatilt
The proposed penalty was assessed based on the operator's
intentional decision not to monitor based on weather conditions.
However, the inspector felt the sampling could have been
conducted during this period based on the aerial photos .
Based on the information presented in the conference, I believe
the penalty is too high. The operator had hired a consultant to
conduct the monitoring and the consultant felt the conditions
were unsafe, whether they were or not is questionable. I
conclude the operator was negligent in not supervising the
consultant more closely during this time. $750.00 is proposed
for a high level of negligence.
Good Faith
I am not recommending a good faith reduction. It is my feeling
that lost data cannot be retrieved and thus the NOV is
unabateable. However, a minor revision was submitted as required
by the abatement within the required time frames .
Settlement Agreement Penalty
History $200 . 00
Seriousness $750 . 00
Fault $750 . 00
Good Faith $0 . 00
Total $1700 . 00