My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE34973
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE34973
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:44:42 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 2:25:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
4/29/1994
Doc Name
TRAPPER NOV C-94-006 REQUEST FOR VACATION
From
DMG
To
MIKE LONG
Violation No.
CV1994006
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
• • III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLUKADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1 313 Sherman 51., Room ? 15 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: 13071 866-3567 <br />FAX: U03) 832 8106 <br /> <br />DATE: April 29, 1994 <br />TO: Mike Long <br />FROM: Steve Renner <br />RE: Trapper NOV C-94-006, Request for Vacation <br />~-'" <br />~~~~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Fov Romer <br />Governor <br />Ken Salaear <br />E ~eculi~a• Dneclnr <br />M ~ehael B Lone; <br />D:vumn Dve¢ Ior <br />I have reviewed the correspondence dated April 11, 1994 from Trapper Mine concerning <br />their request for vacation of NOV C-94-006. In addition, I have discussed this matter with <br />the concerned members of my staff and based on this information my recommendation is that <br />Trapper's request for vacation be denied. <br />My reasons for this recommendation is as follows. Trapper acknowledged in their <br />correspondence "that the erosion problems stated in the NOV did in fact exist." However, <br />they further go on to state that "the erosion problems were not a result of neglect by Trapper <br />and constitute nothing more than routine maintenance." I do not agree that erosion problems <br />into the category of repair or maintenance, especially when they occur beyond the NPDES <br />outfall and below engineered structures designed to control the sediment generated by such <br />erosion. I fmd that Kent Gorham acted properly and according to Division policy by issuing <br />a violation for these spillway erosional problems. <br />The issue of the inclusion of spillway erosion which had been previously cited by the <br />operator and reported to the Division is valid. The operator acted properly by submitting <br />this information within 10 days of the date of the violation. While this information would <br />not be significant with regard to the request to vacate, it should be considered during penalty <br />assessment in the fault category. <br />If you have questions or need additional information let me know. <br />m: \oss\scm\mbhnemo. sgr <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.