2009-06-12_ENFORCEMENT - M1977211

Home Browse Search

Therefore, the Operator failed to protect areas outside of the affected land from slides or damage and violated § 34-32.5-116(4)(i), C.R.S. 30. Section 34-32.5-116(4)(q)(1), C.R.S., provides that the reclamation requirements shall be "carried to completion with reasonable diligence and conducted concurrently with mining operations to the extent practicable, taking into consideration the mining plan, safety, economics and other site-specific conditions relevant and unique to the affected land and the postmining land use...." Here, the Board finds the Operator violated this statute. The Operator did not mine Area H according to the mine reclamation plan. Greater than 25percent of Area H was mined, a deviation from the plan. This deviation was a contributing factor to the slope failure. 31. The Board also finds the Operator in violation of Construction Rule 3.1.5 (2), (3), and (4) of the Mineral Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for the Extraction of Construction Materials ("Construction Rules"). Construction Rule 3.1.5 describes the reclamation plan requirements for materials handling measures. Pursuant to Construction Rule 3.1.5(2) backfilling must ensure adequate compaction for stability. Pursuant to Construction Rule 2.1.5(3) the grading must be done in. a manner to control erosion and protect areas outside the affected land from slides. Also, if not eliminated, all high walls must be stabilized. And finally, pursuant to Construction Rule 3.1.5(4) the backfilling and grading must be completed as soon as feasible after the mining process. The Operator must establish a reasonable timetable consistent with good mining and reclamation procedures. The Board finds that the Operator did not meet the requirements of these rules. The major slide that occurred on December 2, 2008 was caused in part by slope instability. The Operator loaded part of the slope that failed with spoils from active excavation contributing to the slope instability. The Operator's failure to follow the reclamation requirements set forth in Construction Rule 3.1.5(2), (3), and (4), led to slope instability, which in turn led to the slope failure. 32. Section 34-32.5-124 (7), C.R.S., provides for a civil penalty of'not.less than $100 per day nor more than $1,000 per day for each day during which the violation occurs. Here, the Board may impose a penalty based on 42 days of violation (from the date the Inspection Report and Notice of Violation was sent on February 26, 2009 to the first scheduled hearing date on April 8) at $100 to $1,000 per day for a civil penalty of $4,200 to $42,000. 33. Pursuant to § 34-32.5-124(2), C.R.S., the Board may also issue a Cease and Desist Order if it determines that any provision of Article 32.5 of the Act was violated. ORDER Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Board hereby finds that the Operator violated § 34-32.5-116(4)(1), and (4)(q)(1), C.R.S., and Construction Rule 3.1.5(2), (3) and (4). Continental Materials Pike View Quarry, M-1977-211 MV-2009-012 6