Laserfiche WebLink
mitigation measures. Cotter submitted a revised EPP to the Division on April 19, 2010 to <br />address these additional concerns. <br />16. On May 18, 2010, the Division inspected the Mine site to conduct water quality <br />tests and other activities. On May 19, 2010, the Division found the revised EPP to be <br />inadequate, based in part on the alleged results of the site inspection, and advised Cotter that the <br />Division would be commencing an enforcement action against it. <br />17. On May 21, 2010, the Division issued a "Notice of Reason to Believe a Violation <br />Exists at the Schwartzwalder Mine" ("May 21, 2010 Notice"). The May 21, 2010 Notice alleged <br />that Cotter <br />has failed to adequately minimize disturbances to the prevailing hydrological <br />balance of the affected land and surrounding area and to the quality of surface and <br />ground water systems during mining and/or reclamation. Elevated levels of <br />uranium are present in the mine pool, the alluvial area adjacent to Ralston Creek, <br />and in Ralston Creek. <br />(Exhibit A - May 21, 2010 Notice of a Reason to Believe a Violation Exists at the <br />Schwartzwalder Mine, p. 1.) It has never been defined by the Division what the "prevailing <br />hydrological balance" has been. <br />18. The May 21, 2010 Notice further alleged that the situation was a violation of: <br />• § 34-32-116(7)(c), C.R.S. for failure to handle acid-forming or toxic-forming material in <br />a manner that will protect the drainage system from pollution. <br />• § 34-32-116(7)(g), C.R.S. for failure to minimize disturbances to the prevailing <br />hydrological balance of the affected land and of the surrounding area and to the quality of <br />water in the surface and ground water systems after the mining operation and during <br />reclamation. <br />• § 34-32-116(7)(h), C.R.S. for failure to protect areas outside the affected area from slides <br />or damage occurring during the mining operation and reclamation. <br />• § 34-32-116(7)(i), C.R.S. for failure to protect all surface areas of the affected land so as <br />to effectively control erosion and attendant water pollution. <br />• Failure to comply with Rules 3.1.6-General Requirements for Water and 3.1.7-Specific <br />Requirements for Ground Water. <br />(Exh. A, p. 1.) The Division subsequently withdrew the allegation relating to C.R.S. § 34-32- <br />116(7)(1). <br />4