My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE35739
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE35739
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:45:16 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 2:46:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981022
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
5/19/1994
Doc Name
MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE PN C-81-022 NOV C-94-007
Violation No.
CV1994007
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.
/
4
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
NOV C-94-007 1±~~`~C~VE~MAY <br />Somerset Mine _ 1904 <br />This NOV was issued for failure to conduct required surface and <br />groundwater monitoring. <br />HISTORY <br />Four NOV's have been issued at this mine during the past twelve <br />months. They are NOV's C-93-068, 117, 118, and C-94-002. $200 is <br />assessed for history. <br />SERIOUSNESS <br />The basic intent of the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation <br />Act is to minimize the environmental impacts of coal mining. <br />Without adequate monitoring program, it is impossible to assess <br />those impacts. Failure to conduct monitoring required by the mine <br />permit is a significant violation because it inhibits the operator, <br />the Division, and other interested parties from being able to <br />assess the environmental consequences of the mining operations. <br />$1000 is assessed for seriousness. <br />FAULT <br />The operator submitted information to the Division explaining that <br />they thought monitoring during January and February was <br />inappropriate due to weather conditions which made monitoring <br />difficult and potentially unsafe. While safety considerations <br />should certainly be a factor, the Division inspector determined <br />that the required sampling should have been conducted, as outlined <br />in the mine permit. While the operator's decision to monitor was <br />based on what they felt were sound reasons, the decision to not <br />monitor was intentional. $1000 is assessed for intent in the fault <br />category. <br />GOOD FAITH <br />The NOV has not been abated. Therefore, good faith is not a <br />consideration at this time. If this propos ed penalty is reviewed <br />in an assessment conference, it may be valid to consider the safety <br />factors cited by the operator i n regard to good faith. <br />c:\wp51\51094 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.