Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT <br />Energy Fuels Coal, Inc.; The Southfield Mine <br />Permit No. C-81-014, Notice of Violation No. CV-97-002 <br />April I5, 1997 <br />The following materials were reviewed in conjunction with the preparation of this Assessment. <br />1. EFCI's Permit Application Package, specifically portions of Section 2.05.3 and Exhibit I8. <br />2. EFCI's Coal Processing Waste Bank Inspection Reports (2nd Quarter 1993 - 4th Quarter 1996). <br />3. October 23, 1995 letter from EFCI to the Division, regarding "Pond and Refuse Pile inspection <br />Reports -Responses to DMG Questions/Comments dated July 19, 1995 and August 1, 1995." <br />4. December 9, 1996 Report prepared for EFCI by TerraMatrix, entitled "Review of Existing <br />Compaction Data and Testing Frequency for the Existing Refuse Pile, Southfield Mine -Florence, <br />Colorado," submitted to the Division on January 27, 1997. <br />History (5.04.5( )3 (a)l: <br />(Possible Assessment Range: $0 - $1,750) <br />Assessment: $0.00 <br />There have been no DMG Notices of Violation issued [o [his operation within the year preceding <br />the issuance of this NOV. The assessment component for History is therefore set at $0 <br />(5.04.5 (3)(a)(i i)(c )). <br />2. Seriousness (5.04.5(31(b)~: Assessment: $500.00 <br />(Possible Assessment Range: $0 - $1,750) <br />It is apparent that the waste pile inspection reports submitted to the Division failed to properly <br />document that the Southfield waste pile was not being constructed in accordance with DMG - <br />approved plans (Page 1 of December 9, 1996 TerraMa[rix report, last paragraph). As such, the <br />Division's NOV appears to correctly reflect violations of both performance (construction) <br />requirements (4.10.4(3)(a) and (b)) and administrative (reporting) requirements (4.09.1(1 I)(b)). <br />Failure to adhere to the waste pile conswction rules is a violation in itself. Further, by <br />implementing these construction variances without first obtaining DMG and MSHA approval, <br />violations of 4.09.1(3) and 4.10.4(3)(c) have also occurred. Additionally, as the permittee's <br />December 26, 1996 waste pile inspection report states that the pile was "in general compliance" <br />