Laserfiche WebLink
The proposed civil penalty was: <br />SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JUSTIFICATION <br />NOV C -93 -090 <br />Notice of Violation C -93 -090 was issued for "Failure to maintain <br />perimeter markers on all areas disturbed by surface operations ". <br />Dave Berry issued the NOV to Mid - Continent Resources (MCR) at the <br />Coal Basin Mines on June 17, 1993. Tony Waldron, representing <br />the Division at the assessment conference, said the areas <br />affected by surface operations were not clearly marked as <br />required by Rule 4.02.3. <br />Diane Delaney and Greg Lewicki, representing MCR, stated that <br />Rule 4.02.3 says areas shall be marked before the beginning of <br />surface coal mining operations. Since most of the surface <br />disturbance was created pre -law signs were not necessary. The <br />Sutey Refuse Pile which was built after the rules went into <br />effect was marked. Furthermore, they felt that since there is <br />no longer a permit no signs should be required. <br />I believe the rules require all surface areas are to be marked to <br />identify the disturbed area boundaries regardless of whether they <br />were initially disturbed pre -law. Pre -law areas are not exempt <br />from the sign requirements. Signs are to be maintained for the <br />duration of all activities even if there is not a permit. <br />Seriousness <br />Ms. Delaney stated that the disturbance is clearly defined by <br />trees at the mine site even though there are no signs. I agree <br />with her. I propose to reduce the seriousness to $250.00. <br />Fault <br />I agree with the proposed penalty. <br />Good Faith <br />I do not recommend a good faith reduction. <br />Settlement Agreement Penalty <br />History $50.00 <br />Seriousness $250.00 <br />Fault $500.00 <br />Good Faith $0.00 <br />Total $800.00 <br />