My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE35162
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE35162
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:44:49 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 2:30:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
10/16/1995
Doc Name
NOV C-95-016 MOUNTAIN COAL CO PN C-80-007
From
DMG
To
MOUNTAIN COAL CO
Violation No.
CV1995016
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.
/
4
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
iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLORAUU <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Depanmem of Natural Resources <br /> <br />I J 13 Sherman SL, Room 215 ~ <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 I~~~~ <br />Phone: 13031866-7567 <br />FAY. (3031812-8106 <br /> DEPARTMENT OF <br /> NATURAL <br />October 16, 1995 RESOURCES <br /> <br />Ms. Kathleen Welt Ruy Romer <br />Gnve,no, <br />Mountain Coal Company lames 5. LxhheaA <br />P.O. BOX 591 e.ecmi~e Dneaor <br />Somerset CO 81434 Michael tl. Long <br />. Drvismn Drtcclor <br />Re: Notice of Violation No. C-95-016 <br />Mountain Coal Company, Permit No. C-80-007 <br />Dear Ms. Welt: <br />In response to your.letter of October 10, 1995, I have reviewed the facts and evidence surrounding <br />Notice of VioLLtion No. C-95-016. It appears that the existing evidence may not fully substantiate <br />that portion of the violation pertaining to topsoil segregation. For this reason, I hereby vacate the <br />portion of Notice of Violation No. C-95-016 alleging noncompliance with Rule 4.06. The other <br />citations and aspects of the violation not pertaining to topsoil salvage and segregation will remain in <br />effect. <br />As a result of this modification, the civil penalty is also adjusted as follows: <br />Seriousness <br />It appears that the required drainage control system for the waste pile was not maintained so as to <br />ensure the proper function of perimeter drainage control ditches and sediment control fences. Such <br />structures are designed to control drainage resulfmg from a 100-year, 24-hour precipitation event. <br />There is no evidence that sediment or coal mine waste left the disturbed area; however, the potential <br />for such an occurrence existed. The penalty is assessed in the ntid-range of the low/moderate <br />category ($500). <br />Fault <br />It appears that Mountain Coal Company was aware of the approved and required drainage control <br />design for the coal mine waste pile. While there is no evidence of intentional misconduct, it does <br />appear that Mountain Coal Company was negligent in not implementing the approved and required <br />drainage control plan. The penalty is assessed in the mid-range of the negligence category ($500). <br />Good Faith <br />It is my opinion that good faith credit can be granted in this case since Mountain Coal Company went <br />to extra effort by installing a fence around the coal mine waste pile site. This fence was not <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.