My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE37827
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE37827
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:46:42 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 3:46:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
7/16/1985
Doc Name
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT FOR NOV C-85-036
From
MLRD
To
WEST ELK COAL CO INC
Violation No.
CV1985036
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.
/
3
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
I ~ <br />Settlement Agreement - 2 - <br />NOV C-85-036 <br />This Notice of Violation was issued for "Failure to Protect Soi <br />Specifically, failure to recover all soil from the laydown are <br />buffer zone." Material on the south side of the temporary gob <br />Gunnison No. 1 Mine had covered a strip of unsalvaged topsoil. <br />representative, Mr. Robert Bowman, presented no contest to the <br />Notice of Violation. <br />July 16, 1985 <br />1 Resources. <br />a and maintain a <br />pile at the Mt. <br />The operator's <br />facts of this <br />The assessment officer proposed the following civil penalty assessment: <br />History: $0.00 <br />Seriousness $250.00 <br />Fault $500.00 <br />Total Proposed Penalty $750.00 <br />The operator's representative responded to the proposed civil penalty <br />assessment. Susan Mowry, the specialist issuing the Plotice of Violation, had <br />commented in her report of the March 21-28, 1985 inspection of the site, that <br />the buffer zone adjoining the pile should be maintained. In early April, the <br />operator began to widen this buffer zone. However, after grubbing of <br />vegetation, inclement weather prevented the topsoil removal. The violation <br />was written May 8, 1985. Topsoil removal was initiated May 9, 1985, but <br />because of the operator's environmental control officer's absence from the <br />site, the Contractor failed to Completely recover the topsoil. <br />Based upon the operator's willingness <br />their attempt to initiate the remedial <br />component by $125.00, resulting in the <br />assessment: <br />to comply in April, as demonstrated by <br />work, I have reduced the fault <br />following proposed final civil penalty <br />History <br />Seriousness <br />Fault <br />Final Proposed Penalty <br />$ 0.00 <br />$250.00 <br />$375.00 <br />$625.00 <br />Because the contractor's error necessitated an extension of the abatement <br />deadline, I do not believe any adjustment for good faith would be appropriate <br />in this instance. This violation did not represent an unwarranted or willfull <br />failure to comply with the act. <br />JAP/sjv <br />1975E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.