Laserfiche WebLink
<br />JUSTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT <br />FOP <br />NDV C-88-011 <br />This Notice of Violation (NOV) was written for failure to perform the required <br />tri-annual monitoring of Trout Creek and the alluvial well; failure to perform <br />the required annual mine inflow study and sump water analysis; and failure to <br />perform the required quarterly sedimentation pond inspection. <br />Peter O'Connor provided details concerning the operator's past failure to <br />provide the required hydrologic monitoring as reouired by the Cnal Permit <br />No. C-81-011 and the Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board <br />for Cnal Mining. A handout was provided which contained the permit <br />requirements for mine inflow study and sump water analysis, and surface water <br />monitoring and sampling of Trout Creek. This handout also contained a copy of <br />pages 213, 278 and 219 of the Regulations pertaining to the specifics of this <br />NOV. <br />David Canning of Sunland Mining Corporation presented comments concerning the <br />facts of the violation. The operator's failure to monitor and sample Trout <br />Creek resulted from the site being in temporary cessation and the operator <br />being out of state. Mr. Canning stated that this requirement was simply <br />forgotten. The sediment ponds had not had a quarterly report for five years, <br />with nn comment form the Division, therefore, the Division shared in the <br />"blame." Lastly, and most importantly, the mine inflow study and sump water <br />analysis was in process nn the date that the NOV was issued (t':arch 9, 1988) <br />showing that the operator recognized the problem and was taking immediate <br />steps to correct the deficiency. <br />Peter O'Connnr's testimony also indicated that NOV C-88-011 was abated, in <br />part, nn schedule and, in part, ahead of schedule. <br />The Division Assessment officer, f4ike Savage, proposed the following Civil <br />Penalty Assessment: <br />History $ 0.00 <br />Seriousness $200.00 <br />Fault $500.00 <br />Good Faith $ 0.00 <br />Tnta1 proposed Penalty $T00.60 <br />NOV Flo. C-88011 was abated within the required abatement deadline. In fact, <br />the operator had commenced corrective ac tinns prior to receipt of the NOV, <br />resulting in completing one of the required ahatements (lahoratory analysis) <br />in the shortest possible time, on April 12, 1988 rather than the deadline of <br />May 15, 1988. Asa result of this effort, I am imposing a good faith <br />ad,iustment of -$200.00, resulting in the following penalty assessment: <br />History $ 0.00 <br />Seriousness $200.00 <br />Fault $500.00 <br />Good Faith -$200.00 <br />Final Penalty Assessment $3D~QII <br />James B. McArdle <br />Assessment Conference Officer <br />7236E <br />