Laserfiche WebLink
Annette Quill <br />Dave :\kcrs <br />Jllni; 12, =0G0 <br />}'al;c ~ <br />Failure to Consider the Full Record <br />"fhe settlement agreement fails m consider the full record which was available for this <br />violation. ;t5 presentCd ahuvc, information in the record rcco~nized the hydrological and <br />gcochcntical processes which resulted in thi; ,ii;charge. The record also supports a more <br />extensive history of pas[ violation, which th~''impltmt:tlinb agencies" MLRB and <br />Divisiau of Ylinerals and Geology have cited against li~i. /d The failure to consider all <br />such information undermines the legitimacy of the Settlement, its statements of f1ct, its <br />conclusions of law, and its penalty assessment. <br />~. F~ilurc to Yrescut the Data Rrlied Upon in SelllCmcut <br />The settlement agreement tails to include critical data relied upon for the detctnt nation <br />of impacts and asscsstncnt of civil pertaltics. Of paiticttlar concert is the lack of data <br />indicating actual maintenanec of water quality consistent with designated uses, ar data <br />indicatin6 the termination of surface or groundwater rlischargcs associated with the <br />seeps. The assumption of prompt contpliancc is undcnnined by the lack of <lala rlcmon- <br />slmtino the cessation of seep-related discharges or documenting the reversal of Erowtd- <br />watcr flow from the pit to the Kito Scco, <br />(. MLRB Permit <br />The settlement fails to consider relevant information provided in HM's MT.RH pcnnit <br />and the record established through the <levclopmcnt, amendment, and approval of the <br />permit. Furthermore, the settlement fails to consider relevant information provided by <br />tltc plctltora of tccltttical revisions developed during tltc past decade. The settlement <br />indicates shat CI)YHii only reviewed and referred to these docuntenls selectively. <br />Tltc MLRD permit application included knowledge of seepage areas in the fault zones. It <br />also cictermincd, although not witltottt contestation, that there would be no discharges (a <br />"zero discharge" facility). Finally, concerns regarding the interaction between the Wcst <br />Pil and tdhn ial aquifer were so substantial that preventative measures (the slums wall) <br />were included as pan of the application and permit. <br />r Vaor an.wn•nr w+~ re dun.n~rnnr.gd <br />