My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE30449
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE30449
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:42:39 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 12:37:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981018
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
3/4/1994
Doc Name
REVIEW OF VIOLATIONS
From
DMG
To
MICHAEL B LONG DIRECTOR
Violation No.
CV0000000
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.
/
2
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-93-157 Failure to certify impoundments by a Professional <br />Engineer and submit quarterly reports <br />All seven notices have been through the appeal process. All except <br />one (NOV C-93-155) were upheld. The operator has signed any <br />applicable settlement agreements, and the status of the notices is <br />now final. <br />The problems cited in the notices are unrelated. NOV C-93-010 was <br />a discharge-related violation; NOV C-93-103 was a refuse pile <br />drainage problem; NOV C-93-153 and NOV C-93-157 were administrative <br />oversights; NOV C-93-154 was a ditch maintenance problem, and NOV <br />C-93-156 was a geotechnical problem. Although NOV's C-93-010, C- <br />93-103 and C-93-154 are all hydrology-related NOV's, the nature of <br />the NOV's are not similar. NOV C-93-010 resulted from a pond <br />discharge; NOV C-93-103 involved drainage off the face and working <br />surface of a refuse pile where no discharge was involved, and NOV <br />C-93-154 involved ditch maintenance and did not involve a <br />discharge. <br />Considering that, prior to the issuance of the 1993 notices, WFU <br />had only received one notice of violation in seven years, and that <br />the problems cited in the above violations are unrelated, I do not <br />believe that a pattern of violations exists at the Deserado <br />Mine.Because the violations were isolated departures from lawful <br />conduct, I recommend that the Division determine that there is not <br />a pattern of violations at the Deserado Mine and that WFU not be <br />issued an order to show cause why the permit should not be <br />suspended or revoked. <br />If you have any questions or need additional information to <br />complete your review, please let me know. <br />xc: Steve Renner <br />Larry Routten <br />Murari Shrestha, WFU <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.