U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING 

RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT 

DIRECTIVES 

SYSTEM 

Subject: Civil Penalty Conference Officers Manual 

Approval: Brent Wahlquist 

CHANGE 

ect Code: 

FIN-1-1 

Title: Director 

1. Purpose. This directive transmits changes to FIN-1, Conference Officer Operations 

Manual. This manual provides standards, policy, and procedures for use in planning, 

conducting, and reviewing civil penalty assessment conferences for compliance with Code of 

Federal Regulations, Title 30, Chapter 7, Part 845 - Civil Penalties. 

2. Summary of Changes. The manual is changed as follows: 

a. A definitions section has been added to Appendix A, Civil Penalty Conference 

Officer Manual. 

b. The title of the directive is changed from Conference Officer Operations Manual 

to Civil Penalty Conference Officers Manual to eliminate any confusion about the type of 

conference officer the manual was prepared for. 

c. References to rescinded directive CAA-1 (Civil Penalty Assessment Manual) 

have been removed. 

d. References to "Branch of Civil Penalties" and "BCP A" were eliminated since 

BCP A no longer exists. Where appropriate, references were changed to "assessment officer." 

e. References to "operator" have been replaced with "permittee" (see Definitions in 

Appendix A). 

f. Many examples of documents used in the conference process were eliminated. 

These included documents with references to BCP A and CAA-1 or information that can be 

obtained from the regulations. 

g. Examples of documents used in the conference process were updated and moved 

to a separate "Exhibits" section at the end of the manual. 

3. Procedures. See Appendix A: Civil Penalty Conference Officer Manual 
4. Effective Date. Upon issuance 

5. Distribution. By electronic format 

6. Appendices. Appendix A: Civil Penalty Conference Officer Manual 

Contact: Finance and Administration Directorate, Division of Financial Management 

- 2-
APPENDIX A

A-1

CIVIL PENALTY 

CONFERENCE OFFICERS MANUAL
APPENDIX A

A-2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1 Introduction and Overview A-4

1.1 General Background A-4

1.2 General Appeal Rights A-5

1.3 Definitions A-5

2 Conference Procedures A-7

2.1 Purpose of Assessment Conferences A-7

2.2 Responsibilities of the Conference Officer A-7

2.3 Scope of the Conference A-8

2.4 Scheduling the Conference A-8

2.5 Preparing for the Assessment Conference A-10

2.6 Conducting the Assessment Conference A-11

2.7 Settling the Case A-13

2.8 Preparing the Conclusion of Conference Report A-13

2.9 Conference Officer Audit Report A-13

2.10 Corrections of Conference Officer Documents A-14

3 Civil Penalty Assessment A-15 

 Point System for Penalties A-16

 History A-16

 Seriousness A-16

 Obstructions A-17

 Negligence A-17

 Good Faith A-19

4 Exhibits A-21

List of Exhibits A-21

Number

A Citation A-22

Form

B Mine Site Inspection form (MEIR) A-25

C Citation Modification A-27

D Inspector’s Statement A-30

E Citation Vacation/Termination A-33

F-1 Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty A-36

Assessment (NOPA)

F-2 Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty A-38

Assessment (NOPA)

G-1 Conference Request form A-43

G-2 Conference Request form A-44

H Conference Request Approval A-48
APPENDIX A

A-3

Number Form Page

I Conference appointment letter A-49

J-1 Conclusion of conference report A-50

J-2 Conclusion of conference report A-56

J-3 Conclusion of conference report

(revised assessment) A-58

J-4 Conclusion of conference report

(settlement agreement) A-66

K-1 Conference Officer Audit report A-69

K-2 Conference Officer Audit report A-70
APPENDIX A

A-4

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

This chapter presents general information about the establishment of the Office of Surface 

Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) and a discussion of the Civil Penalty Conference 

Officer Program.

1.1 General Background

National concern over extensive environmental damage caused by previous coal mining 

activities led to the passage of Public Law 95-87, the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation 

Act of 1977 (hereafter referred to as the Act). Section 201(a) of the Act established OSM within 

the Department of the Interior. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 30, Chapter VII (parts 700-

899) contains the regulations that establish procedures for implementation of the Act. 

Section 518 of the Act states that any permittee:

. . . who violates any permit condition or who violates any other provision of this 

title, may be assessed a civil penalty . . . . Each day of continuing violation may 

be deemed a separate violation for purposes of civil penalty assessments. In 

determining the amount of the penalty, consideration shall be given to the 

permittee's history of previous violations at the particular surface coal mining 

operation; the seriousness of the violation, including any irreparable harm to the 

environment and any hazard to the health or safety of the public; whether the 

permittee was negligent; and the demonstrated good faith of the permittee 

charged in attempting to achieve rapid compliance after notification of the 

violation.

A civil penalty is assessed only after the permittee fails to avail him/her self of the opportunity 

for a public hearing or other appeal rights. The permittee is then issued an order requiring 

payment of the assessed penalty amount.

The Act, clarified and amplified by the CFR, allows permittees the opportunity to have a public 

hearing when they are issued violations that require cessation of mining and are to be assessed 

civil penalties for actions contrary to the Act. In addition to public hearings, a procedure has 

been initiated allowing for informal assessment conferences to be conducted after a permittee has 

been issued a Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty Assessment (NOPA). The Conference Officer 

position was established in order to provide trained personnel to conduct these assessment 

conferences. This manual is written to establish procedures and guidelines for the Conference 

Officers, including the requirements for conducting assessment conferences.
APPENDIX A

A-5

1.2 General Appeal Rights

A. Within thirty (30) days after receiving a Notice of Violation (NOV) or Cessation 

Order (CO), the permittee may file an application for review and request for hearing under the 

provisions of 43 CFR Part 4. 

B. As set forth at 30 CFR 843.15 and OSM Directive INE-6 (March 24, 1983), 

within thirty (30) days of being served a citation that requires cessation of mining, the permittee 

may request an informal public hearing (also known as a mine site hearing) to review or contest 

the violation. Forms for requesting the hearing are attached to the served citation. If the 

operator is dissatisfied with the results of the mine site hearing, a formal appeal may be 

requested under the provisions of paragraph A. above.

C. Upon receipt of the NOPA for the violation from the Assessment Officer (see 

Chapter 3, Civil Penalty Assessment), the permittee may request either 1. and/or 2. below:

1. Within thirty (30) days after receipt of the NOPA, the permittee may 

request an informal assessment conference to review or protest the proposed penalty amount. In 

accordance with 30 CFR 845.18, “The assessment conference shall be held within 60 days from 

the date the conference request is received or the end of the abatement period, whichever is 

later.” An assessment conference will not be held on violations that have not been terminated. 

The purpose of the assessment conference is to discuss the amount of the penalty, not the fact of 

the violation. The person requesting the conference is not required to pay the proposed amount 

into escrow to qualify for the assessment conference. Only citations with a proposed civil 

penalty will be included in the assessment conference process. 

2. As set forth at 43 CFR Part 4 and 30 CFR 845.19, the permittee may 

request a penalty hearing with the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) to contest the 

proposed civil penalty and/or the fact of the violation, if not already requested. The request must 

be made within thirty (30) days after receipt of the NOPA, and the permittee must pay the 

proposed civil penalty amount into escrow. 

D. After the informal conference, the permittee may contest the proposed penalty by 

submitting a petition to the OHA within thirty (30) days after the date of service of the 

Conference Officer’s action. The petition must be accompanied by an amount equal to the 

reassessed or affirmed penalty, to be held in escrow pending completion of the review process.

(30 CFR 845.19(a))

1.3 Definitions

A. Assessment Officer. A person who reviews NOVs and COs to determine if and 

for how much a civil penalty will be assessed (30 CFR 845.11) and who approves requests for 

informal assessment conferences.

B. Conference Officer. A person who conducts a civil penalty assessment 

conference.
APPENDIX A

A-6

 C. Permittee/Operator. 30 CFR 701.5 defines a permittee as “. . . a person holding or 

required by the Act or this chapter to hold a permit to conduct surface coal mining and 

reclamation operations issued by a State regulatory authority pursuant to a State program, by the 

Director pursuant to a Federal program, or, where a cooperative agreement pursuant to section 

523 of the Act has been executed, by the Director and the State regulatory authority.” Operator 

is defined as “. . . any person engaged in coal mining that removes or intends to remove more 

than 250 tons of coal from the earth or from coal refuse piles by mining within 12 consecutive 

calendar months in any one location.” Violations of the Act are most often issued to permittees. 

If there is a separate entity identified as an operator on the permit, the operator is also issued the 

same violation. An operator, who is conducting mining operations without a permit or as a coal 

exploration operation, can also be issued a violation. For the purposes of the Civil Penalty 

Conference Officer Manual, the term “permittee” is used throughout to identify the individual 

representing the person or company to whom a violation was issued. 

 D. Reviewer/rater. A person who evaluates the Conclusion of Conference Report 

and approves the Conference Officer Audit Report, and who provides advice on Assessment 

Conference issues as requested by the Conference Officer.

 E. Violation. A violation of the Act, regulations, or permit conditions. Where such 

violations exist, a NOV, Imminent Harm Cessation Order (IHCO, or CO), and/or Failure to 

Abate (the underlying NOV) Cessation Order (FTACO, or CO) will be issued.
APPENDIX A

A-7

CHAPTER 2

CONFERENCE PROCEDURES

The procedures outlined in this chapter apply to informal assessment conferences. 

2.1 Purpose of Assessment Conferences

The assessment conference gives the permittee an opportunity to informally discuss the proposed 

assessment of penalty for a citation prior to the assessment becoming finalized and without 

placing any money into escrow. The assessment conference provides an opportunity for the 

permittee to present information that was not available at the time of the proposed assessment or 

to offer extenuating circumstances that may affect the proposed assessment. Any person has the 

right to attend and participate in the assessment conference.

The assessment conference is not a forum for discussing whether a violation occurred. 

Determining the validity of a violation is beyond the scope of the Conference Officer’s 

jurisdiction, and it must be accepted that enforcement actions taken by the inspector are correct. 

(However, if the Conference Officer identifies what he/she believes is a problem with an 

enforcement action, or if the permittee asserts facts which would indicate the violation was 

written in error, the Conference Officer may bring these facts to the attention of the Conference 

Officer’s supervisor. Where a dispute remains, the proper course of action for discussing the fact 

of the violation is the hearing procedure pursuant to section 525 of the Act.)

After the presentation and review of information, and upon obtaining concurrence from the 

reviewer, the Conference Officer makes a final penalty assessment decision. Settlement of all 

outstanding issues pertaining to the penalty assessed is to be accomplished, if possible, as it 

precludes further collection and legal action and the need to deny permits or take other remedial 

measures because of outstanding violations or penalties. 

2.2 Responsibilities of the Conference Officer

As informal assessment conferences are the means for the permittee and the general public to 

discuss and resolve the merits and aspects of proposed assessments, it is essential that the 

Conference Officer be regarded as just, consistent, and accurate in the interpretation of law and 

procedure. The Conference Officer must be knowledgeable in the application of laws pertaining 

to the coal mining industry. 

The Conference Officer must be impartial but objective in the decision-making process. 

Communication is essential so that all affected parties feel that justice prevailed and the right of 

expression and appeal was served. The mission of enforcement of the Act is prevalent in all 

decisions, but the intent of the law must always be considered. The permittee should be educated 

in the requirements of the Act and, more importantly, become endowed with the spirit of 

cooperation in endeavoring to fulfill the provisions of the Act on a voluntary basis.
APPENDIX A

A-8

The Conference Officer must possess the ability to research pertinent information in order to 

prepare for the conference and to evaluate presentations made at the conference. In addition, the 

Conference Officer must possess the technical ability to obtain and understand the facts relating 

to violations, including intent, seriousness, and potential or actual environmental harm. 

Negotiations are to be conducted rationally in order to settle the issues involved in the 

assessment conference process. The Conference Officer must possess the ability to listen, 

perceive, and evaluate information to arrive at a final conclusion about the penalty assessed, 

based on fair, impartial decisions rendered by facts rather than impressions or preconceived 

concepts. 

The Conference Officer should construct and maintain a complete file for each assessment 

conference (see 2.5, Preparing for the Assessment Conference). Fully documenting the 

procedures, decision-making processes, and other efforts used in rendering a final assessment is

essential. A log or history sheet can be used to record activities and other actions taken in the 

conference process. This form does not replace other required documents but is a brief 

recapitulation of actions and events encountered or contemplated during the assessment 

conference process. In the event of transfer or other monitoring of the case, a log or history 

sheet will allow continuing action to transpire without unnecessary duplication of effort.

The Assessment Officer (see Chapter 3, Civil Penalty Assessment), who is responsible for 

issuing the NOPA will create, establish, and maintain a case file of pertinent documents that will 

be provided to the Conference Officer to be made a part of a conference case file. The 

Conference Officer is responsible for ensuring that all documents relating to the violation(s) are 

received and made a part of the conference case file.

The Conference Officer will send a Conclusion of Conference Report to the permittee after the 

conference is concluded. (See 2.9, Conference Officer Audit Report, for more information.)

Typical forms and documents used by a Conference Officer are shown in the Exhibits at the end 

of this manual.

2.3 Scope of the Conference

A Conference Officer may affirm, increase, lower, or vacate a proposed civil penalty. Subject to 

the approval of the appropriate management official as specified in OSM Directive OPM-5, a

Conference Officer also has the authority to modify an assessment in excess of 25 percent and 

$500 of the original assessment (30 CFR 845.18 (b)(4)).

2.4 Scheduling the Conference

The permittee must request a conference in writing within thirty (30) days of receipt of the 

NOPA. A form for requesting a conference will be included with every NOPA where a violation 

is assessed a civil penalty. Requests for an assessment conference will be sent to the Assessment 

Officer in the following offices:
APPENDIX A

A-9

• Mining operations in Appalachian Region states will be sent to: Inspection Group, 

Knoxville Field Office;

• Mining operations in Mid-Continent Region states will be sent to: Program Support 

Division, Mid-Continent Regional Office; and

• Mining operations in Western Region states will be sent to: Program Support 

Division, Western Regional Office.

After the conference is approved by the Assessment Officer, a copy of the conference approval 

and assessment case file is sent to the Conference Officer in the jurisdiction where the violation 

was issued.

The assessment conference must be scheduled at the earliest practical date and concluded no 

later than sixty (60) days after receipt of the approval letter or the end of the abatement period, 

whichever is later. (“Provided, That a failure by the Office to hold such conference within 60 

days shall not be grounds for dismissal of all or part of an assessment unless the [permittee] 

proves actual prejudice as a result of the delay.” 30 CFR 845.18) The permittee should be given 

an opportunity to have the conference scheduled at a convenient date, time, and place. As the 

conference may be attended by the public, the conference site will be a location where public 

access is available.

Pursuant to 30 CFR 845.18(b)(2), a notice of the assessment conference must be posted at the 

state or OSM field or area office closest to the mine at least five (5) days prior to the scheduled 

conference. A copy of the letter scheduling the conference may be used as the notice. Any 

person shall have a right to attend and participate in the conference.

Assessment conferences may also be held by telephone or by letter. The public will be included 

in the following ways: 

A. Telephone conferences will be arranged in advance to ensure all parties, including 

the public, are available. The scheduling letter should provide instructions for participation by 

the public.

B. An assessment conference conducted by mail will require that the permittee and 

all parties, including the public, provide information to be considered no later than the scheduled 

conference date. Mail from the permittee will be available, upon request from the public, the day 

on which the conference is scheduled. The scheduling letter should provide instructions for 

participation by the public.

The purpose of the assessment conference is to provide a forum for the permittee and other 

participants to discuss the proposed assessment. The permittee is contacted either by phone, by 

e-mail, or by regular mail to confirm the time and place for the conference; or by certified mail if 

prior phone contact was not possible. If the permittee cannot make the scheduled appointment 

and fails to reschedule the conference, or fails to appear at the conference, the conference may be 

concluded without any further information from the permittee. The permittee will be sent a 
APPENDIX A

A-10

Conclusion of Conference Report concluding the conference to allow the permittee the 

opportunity to request a penalty hearing, and to finalize the case for collection purposes if the 

permittee does not request a hearing.

2.5 Preparing for the Assessment Conference

In preparing the conference case file, the Conference Officer should make certain that all basic 

documents are included in the file. Documents (see Chapter 4, Exhibits) may include:

A. Enforcement documents:

Copy of citation, including modifications/vacation/termination

Copy of inspection report narrative, MEIR, and inspection statement

B. Assessment documents:

Copy of enforcement documents (above)

Log sheet (used to monitor the status of a citation)

NOPA (including assessment worksheet/explanation) 

Conference Request Form

Conference Request approval letter

Conference appointment letter

The Conference Officer should review the case file materials before the assessment conference 

so that missing documents can be obtained and questionable issues can be resolved prior to the 

conference. Missing documents should be secured from the originating office of the document. 

In addition, the Conference Officer should compare the Inspector’s Report and Inspector’s 

Statement with the assessment worksheet to ensure the documents are in agreement and 

consistent with regulations, policies, and procedures. Other offices within OSM may be 

contacted if clarification is needed.

The Conference Officer will also compare the date(s) for abatement, along with any 

modifications, to determine if any good faith points can be awarded (see Chapter 3). If good 

faith points are available, the permittee should be contacted regarding the documentation 

required to award good faith points. The Conference Officer should review any new material 

submitted by the permittee prior to the conference. If the material may lead to a revision of the 

NOPA, it must be verified and documentation secured to substantiate any proposed revision.

After reviewing the case file and conducting the pre-conference analysis, the Conference Officer 

may contact the inspector by telephone or in person to discuss the violations(s). (Similarly, the 

Conference Officer may contact the inspector post-conference if additional information is needed 

to clarify issues and address questions that result from the conference.)

Documents that may be added to the case file prior to the conference include:
APPENDIX A

A-11

A. Phone logs of conversations to clarify information;

B. Pre-assessment conference notes containing questions to be addressed;

C. A copy of the letter scheduling the conference; and

D. Sign-in sheet.

In addition, the Conference Officer may wish to have a copy of pertinent regulations (e.g., 30

CFR 845, Public Law 95-87, Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act) and the Civil Penalty 

Conference Officer Manual available for reference. 

2.6 Conducting the Assessment Conference

The Conference Officer is responsible for maintaining accurate and complete notes of 

assessment conference proceedings. The Conference Officer will open the conference with an 

explanation of the purpose of the conference. The Conference Officer will remind those 

attending the conference that the proceedings are an informal assessment conference and that it is 

not governed by section 554 of Title 5 of the United States Code, regarding requirements for 

formal adjudicatory hearings.

The Conference Officer will provide a sign-in sheet to record the attendance of those 

participating in the assessment conference.

After the opening remarks by the Conference Officer, the permittee may present information that 

is relevant to the assessment. The conference should cover the assessment points assigned for 

the criteria considered in the assessment process. (The criteria considered for violations are 

history, seriousness [including obstruction], negligence [fault], and good faith. Refer to Chapter 

3 for specific information about points.) The review and analysis of assigned points will be 

considered in conjunction with the information provided by the permittee, the public, and other 

offices within OSM. The permittee may provide information that was not available at the time 

of the proposed assessment or offer extenuating circumstances that may have a bearing on the 

case. Any revisions to the points assessed must be fully documented and in accordance with the 

Federal regulations at 30 CFR 845.13. Good faith will be discussed if it was not considered in 

the original assessment. (Because of the length of the abatement time, the penalty may have 

been assessed prior to the end of the abatement period.)

Pursuant to 30 CFR 845.18(b)(2), any person has the right to attend and participate in the 

assessment conference. Any presentations by the public are made after the permittee’s 

presentations are completed. Comments made by the public will be recorded by the Conference 

Officer and will become a part of the conference file. If the public presents testimony that is 

contrary to documentation present in the file, the Conference Officer will, following the 

conference, seek assistance from other offices, within or outside of OSM, to verify the public 

testimony.
APPENDIX A

A-12

The Conference Officer must direct the discussions to facts relevant to the assessment, not the 

fact of the violation. The proper forum for a permittee to contest the fact of the violation is a 

hearing in accordance with section 525 of the Act, not the assessment conference.

After hearing all of the evidence and testimony presented in the assessment conference, weighing 

all of the factors found in the case file and by personal interviews, and upon receiving 

concurrence from the reviewer, the Conference Officer will render a decision on the final 

assessment of the civil penalty. 

30 CFR 845.14 (Determination of amount of penalty), as revised, will be used to convert points 

assigned to a violation to a civil penalty assessment amount. The Conference Officer may make 

the decision to affirm, raise, lower, or vacate the proposed penalty during the assessment 

conference, or he/she may defer the decision until further documentation is obtained. A 

Conference Officer also has the authority to modify an assessment in excess of 25 percent and 

$500 of the original assessment, but must first obtain approval of the appropriate management 

official.

When the Conference Officer has determined the final amount of penalty assessed, the following 

actions may occur to conclude the assessment conference:

A. The permittee may sign a settlement agreement and pay the penalty in full within 

thirty (30) days.

B. The penalty may be reduced to No Penalty Assessed.

C. The permittee may state that he is unable to pay the penalty. The Conference 

Officer will explain that if the penalty assessed amount is not paid within thirty (30) days, and 

neither the penalty assessed nor the fact of the violation are appealed within thirty (30) days of 

receipt of the Conclusion of Conference Report, the penalty assessment will become a Final 

Order and will be referred to OSM’s Division of Financial Management for debt processing, 

including billing and collection procedures.

D. The permittee may state that he is going to contest the penalty (or the fact of the 

violation if not previously contested) by filing a petition for review with the OHA. The 

Conference Officer will discuss the timeframes for application for a hearing and will explain that 

an amount equal to the reassessed or affirmed penalty, to be held in escrow, must accompany the 

application. The permittee can be tactfully reminded that further appeal will require additional 

time and effort. The permittee’s plan for further appeal should not have any bearing on the 

conference proceedings or final penalty assessed.

E. “The Conference Officer may terminate the conference when he or she determines 

that the issues cannot be resolved or that the [permittee] is not diligently working toward 

resolution of the issues” (30 CFR 845.18). The permittee will be sent a Conclusion of

Conference Report to allow the permittee the opportunity to request a hearing and to finalize the 

case for collection purposes if the permittee does not request a hearing.
APPENDIX A

A-13

In closing the conference, the Conference Officer should thank the permittee and the public for 

attending. If applicable, the permittee should also be advised of the right, pursuant to 

30 CFR 845.19, to request an appeal hearing. In addition, the permittee should be counseled on 

avoiding future violations and on abating any other existing violations as rapidly as possible.

2.7 Settling the Case 

The Conference Officer should attempt to settle cases through the conference process. In many 

cases, agreement can be reached through conference, and this prevents additional expenditure of 

time and effort in the preparation of a final order and subsequent collection procedures.

2.8 Preparing Conclusion of Conference Report

The Conference Officer will send a written Conclusion of Conference Report to the permittee

within thirty (30) days after the conference is held. Although the Conclusion of Conference 

Report should be prepared as soon as possible following the conference, there may be slight 

delays pending the arrival of affidavits or other documentation from the permittee, the receipt of

payment with signature of permittee consenting to settlement, or for time for consulting with 

other officials regarding the case.

The report will document NOV or CO numbers, the original point totals and proposed 

assessments, the modified point totals, and modified assessments for each NOV and/or CO 

considered in the conference. This report should provide documentation of any revised civil 

penalty for each violation considered at the conference, changes in points, and the rationale for 

changes. The reasons for changing points must be documented, be consistent with policy, and be 

accurate reflections of facts made available to the Conference Officer. 

2.9 Conference Officer Audit Report

The Conference Officer will prepare an audit report summarizing the conference findings to 

submit (along with the Conclusion of Conference Report) to a person designated to review the 

documents to ensure accuracy and compliance with regulations and established procedures. The 

reviewer will initial each section that is determined to be complete and accurate and will note 

any sections that require additional work or clarification. If additional work is required, the 

Conference Officer completes or corrects the documents and submits to the reviewer again for 

approval.

Within thirty (30) days of the assessment conference and following approval by the reviewer, the

Conclusion of Conference Report (and forms relating to the conference) can be dated with the 

approval date and sent to the permittee, retaining a copy for the case file. If payment is still due, 

the letter and forms should be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, so that OSM has a 

record of receipt by the permittee. The certified mail receipt should contain the NOV and/or CO 

number of the specific violation(s).
APPENDIX A

A-14

Copies of all documents sent to the permittee and reports and correspondence prepared by the 

Conference Officer will be made a part of the assessment case file. Documents (see Chapter 3, 

Exhibits) may include:

A. Enforcement documents (see 2.5 Preparing for the Assessment Conference);

B. Assessment documents (see 2.5 Preparing for the Assessment Conference); and

C. Conference documents:

1. History sheet (pre-conference notes)

2. Conference sign-in sheet

3. Conclusion of Conference Report

4. Conference Officer Audit Report

2.10 Corrections of Conference Officer Documents

If errors are discovered in a Conclusion of Conference Report or related documents that have 

been previously submitted and mailed, corrections will be made as follows:

A. Original pages, containing errors, should remain in the report, with a statement on 

the bottom of the specified page indicating that a correction follows.

B. Corrected pages follow the original erroneous pages. The Conference Officer 

initials and dates the correction(s).

C. The corrected Conclusion of Conference Report, and related documents if 

applicable, should be mailed to the permittee and a copy retained in the Conference Officer case 

file. The word “corrected,” followed by the current date, should be placed under the original 

date on the Conclusion of Conference Report.

A-14
A-15

CHAPTER 3

CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT

OSM has delegated the assessment process to Assessment Officers within OSM. The Code of 

Federal Regulations, Title 30, Part 845 contains amplification and clarification of the assessment 

process imposed by section 518 of the Act. The Assessment Officer reviews each NOV and CO

to determine whether a civil penalty will be assessed, the amount of the penalty, and whether 

each day of continuing violation will be a separate violation for the purpose of total assessed 

penalty.

This chapter provides guidelines that may be used in determining if and for how much a civil 

penalty should be assessed for a violation. The references for this chapter are 30 CFR 845.13 

Point system for penalties, and 30 CFR 845.14 (as revised) Determination of amount of penalty. 

3.1 Point System for Penalties

Points for violations are assigned for various individual criterion considered in the assessment. 

A penalty shall be assessed if a violation is assigned 31 points or more under the point system 

described in 30 CFR 845.13. OSM may assess a penalty for a violation assigned 30 points or 

less.

The criteria considered for each proposed assessment are history, seriousness (including 

obstruction), negligence (fault), and good faith. Points are accumulated in each criterion of 

history, seriousness, and negligence, but the point count may be reduced by the criterion of good 

faith. The total point count will determine the amount of penalty assessed. 

Within fifteen (15) days of service of an NOV or CO, the pemittee may submit written 

information concerning the violation to the Assessment Officer and to the inspector who issued 

the NOV or CO. The information submitted will be considered in determining the facts 

surrounding the violation and the amount of the penalty (30 CFR 845.17).

Within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the NOV or CO, the Assessment Officer sends a 

NOPA and a worksheet showing the computation of the proposed assessment by certified mail to 

the permittee. Mailed enclosures will include a Request for Assessment Conference form. This 

form must be returned to the Assessment Officer within thirty (30) days after the permittee 

receives the NOPA if a conference is desired.

The points assigned are derived from analysis of the case file, the inspector’s report and 

statement, and the actual NOV or CO. To render a totally accurate assessment, the data must be 

complete, comprehensive, legible, and contained in the case file. 

The categories within the assessment criteria are described below.
APPENDIX A

A-16

A. History. Up to thirty (30) points can be assigned based on the history of previous 

violations. The assignment of history points follows a given formula:

1. One (1) point for each separate violation in an NOV at the same site within 

a previous 12-month period; and

2. Five (5) points for each separate violation in a CO at the same site within a 

previous 12-month period.

Note: “Same site” has been defined as a permitted area.

To be assessed history points, the previous violations must have been finalized. Violations are 

not finalized until the entire review process is complete. If a permittee fails to exercise the right 

of review, the violation is complete as of the date the permittee’s right to review expires. If a 

violation is vacated, the violation is not used in assembling history points.

The Assessment Officer will review the previous violations found in the permittee case file and

assign points based on the findings. The Conference Officer must ascertain that the proposed 

assignment of points is valid and all violations were included. History points may be affirmed, 

raised, or lowered depending on the results of the research and also on information supplied by 

the permittee in the conference.

B. Seriousness. Up to thirty (30) points can be assigned based on the seriousness of 

a violation. In determining the assignment of points under the seriousness criterion, the first 

consideration is whether the violation is an event or potential event (environmental) or an 

obstruction (see C. below).

Events are violations that cause or potentially could cause environmental damage, personal 

injury, or property damage that could or did result from the violation of the regulation. 

In the assignment of penalty points, seriousness is subdivided into two elements of consideration: 

(1) the probability of occurrence, and (2) the extent of potential or actual damage. Under 

30 CFR 845.13(b)(2)(i), probability of occurrence points are to be assigned as follows:

1. occurred 15 points

2. likely to occur 10-14 points

3. unlikely to occur 5-9 points

4. insignificant 1-4 points

5. none 0 points

The extent of potential or actual damage points are assigned as follows:

1. damage that could extend off-permit area 8-15 points

2. damage confined within permit area 0-7 points
APPENDIX A

A-17

Based on the facts presented in the violation, the inspector’s report and statement, or other 

documentation concerning the violation, the assessor determines the applicable categories within 

seriousness and assigns points within the two elements. For instance, if damage would occur 

only within the permit area, the starting point assignment would be three (3) points. Moving up 

or down the point scale depends on mitigating circumstances. If damage could extend beyond 

the permit area, the starting point assignment would be eight (8) points and move up to the 

maximum of fifteen (15) points. The determination of occurrences should be fine-tuned to the 

compounding circumstances. In the insignificant, unlikely, and likely categories, the assessor 

begins at midrange, three (3), seven (7), and twelve (12), respectively, and moves up or down 

depending on the mitigating or exacerbating circumstances. Developing an understanding for 

the relative severity of particular situations will determine how an assessor or Conference Officer 

decides the points to assign.

In the assessment conference, the permittee may present information concerning the seriousness 

of the violation that may create the need to affirm, raise, or lower the proposed assessment. 

C. Obstructions. Obstruction (administrative) violations prevent the inspector from 

reviewing the overall operations of the mine to determine compliance with regulations. 

Similarly, violations that prevent the public from identifying the mine site (permit) or exercising 

rights under the Act are considered obstructions. 

Up to fifteen (15) points can be assigned for obstruction violations. When the violation 

constitutes an obstruction, the assignment of points is based on the degree to which the violation 

prevented or impeded enforcement by an inspector or enforcement initiated by the public. 

Obstruction violations generally involve the permittee’s failure to keep records, authorizations, 

approved plans, or maps at or near the mine site, thereby obstructing the inspector, or the failure 

to post proper permit or perimeter signs which might hinder public or inspector identification of 

the mine site. Also included are citations issued for failure to file the required quarterly Coal 

Reclamation Fee report (form OSM-1) and failure to pay reclamation fees.

The general guideline for assignment of points is that actual obstruction is assessed in the 10-15 

point range, while potential obstruction is assessed in the 1-9 point range.

When it appears that a violation could result in either an obstruction or an event, it may be 

necessary to contact the inspector to clarify the type of violation. Was the particular violation 

more of an obstruction to enforcement or was it clear that damage had already occurred or was 

likely to occur?

D. Negligence. Assigning points for the negligence criterion involves a 

determination of the permittee’s degree of fault in committing a violation, either through an act 

or failure to act. The regulations specify the standard of reasonable care for permittees. The 

permittee is responsible for learning and following the regulations. Up to twenty-five (25) points 

can be assigned based on the degree of negligence.
APPENDIX A

A-18

30 CFR Part 845.13 (b)(3)(iii) states: “In calculating points to be assigned for negligence, the 

acts of all persons working on the coal exploration or surface coal mining and reclamation site 

shall be attributed to the person to whom the notice or order was issued, unless that person 

establishes that they were acts of deliberate sabotage.”

Following are the categories of degree of fault as defined by regulations:

1. no negligence 0 points

2. negligence 1-12 points

3. recklessness; knowing and willful conduct 13-25 points

“No negligence” means an inadvertent violation that was unavoidable by the exercise of 

reasonable care. (For instance, the permittee acted prudently but a violation occurred anyway 

due to an unpredictable event.) While the permittee cannot prevent the occurrence of the 

violation, points can be assigned for negligence if the permittee does not promptly abate the 

violation. When no negligence on the permittee’s part can be discerned, no points should be 

given.

Ignorance of the law does not constitute grounds for a finding of “no negligence.” Permittees are 

conclusively presumed to have knowledge of all applicable regulations. “Negligence” is the 

failure of a permittee to prevent the occurrence of, or failure to abate, any violation due to 

indifference, lack of diligence, or lack of reasonable care. Negligent acts include committing an 

act that constitutes a violation, failing to do something that is required, or attempting to do a 

requirement but doing it improperly.

As the regulations establish what is considered the standard of reasonable care, almost every 

violation involves some degree of fault. In assigning points for negligence, the assessor should 

always start at twelve (12) points and work down for any moderating circumstances. 

“Recklessness” is a greater degree of fault than negligence, implying knowing or intentional 

conduct. Thirteen (13) to twenty-five (25) points are assessed for recklessness depending on the 

specifics of the violation. Generally, where recklessness is involved, the assessor starts at 

thirteen (13) and assesses upward depending on compounding circumstances. The legal 

definition of recklessness is disregard of a known or obvious high risk. A permittee is reckless 

where it would have been obvious to a reasonable operator that the course of action (an action or 

failure to take action) was likely to cause a serious amount of damage or harm, and the operator 

followed the course anyway. Reckless conduct also exists in those instances where the operator 

is engaged in activities inherently dangerous, requiring a greater degree of care to ensure safety.

“Knowing or willful conduct” is when the permittee is aware there is, or will be, a violation of 

the regulations and fails to correct or avoid the situation. A permittee is considered to be 

knowing or willful when:
A-19

1. A specific permit condition is violated.

2. The state has previously warned or cited regarding the same situation on 

the same site and there is documentation of the warning or citation.

3. OSM has previously warned or cited regarding the same situation on the 

same site and there is documentation of the warning or citation.

Specific permit condition violations are assessed at twenty-one (21) to twenty-two (22) points 

depending on the seriousness of the violation. If there were state warnings or citations, twentythree (23) points are assessed. If there were prior OSM warnings or citations, the point total 

should be twenty-four (24). When a wildcatter (an operator without a permit) is involved, the 

maximum of twenty-five (25) points should be made.

E. Good Faith. The Assessor and/or Conference Officer will consider the good faith 

of the permittee in attempting to achieve rapid compliance by using extraordinary measures after 

notification of a violation. Rapid compliance means that measures were taken to abate the 

violation in the shortest possible time and abatement was achieved before the time allowed for 

abatement. Normal compliance is when the permittee abated the violation at the time given for 

abatement, but extraordinary measures were not used.

The good faith criterion is considered only after a violation has been abated and normally is not 

considered by the Assessor. Per 30 CFR 845.13 (B)(4)(iii), “If the consideration of this criterion 

is impractical because of the length of the abatement period, the [civil penalty] assessment may 

be made without considering this criterion and may be reassessed after the violation has been 

abated.” Points for good faith may be awarded as follows:

1. Normal compliance or lack of abatement 0 points

2. Rapid compliance + extraordinary measures -1 to -10 points

Considerations of good faith include the examination of initiative, consistency, and commitment 

of resources to determine if extraordinary measures were employed to achieve rapid compliance. 

Initiative would be how quickly or thoroughly the permittee began work to abate the violation. 

Consistency would measure or examine the degree of effort or completeness employed to 

eliminate the problem or violation. Commitment of resources would involve securing additional 

equipment or personnel, interrupting coal removal, expending extra man hours and resources, or 

other special measures taken to remedy the situation in the fastest available means. 

The following can be used as a guide in awarding good faith points, recognizing that in order to 

award good faith there should be documentation that extraordinary measures were used, in 

addition to rapid compliance. In calculating the time set for abatement, include any extension of 

time given by the inspector for extenuating circumstances. 

Good Faith Determination Points

Abatement occurs immediately or within 10 percent of time set -10

Abatement occurs within 11 to 20 percent of time set -9

Abatement occurs within 21 to 30 percent of time set -8
APPENDIX A

A-20

Abatement occurs within 31 to 40 percent of time set -7

Abatement occurs within 41 to 51 percent of time set -6

Abatement occurs within 51 to 60 percent of time set -5

Abatement occurs within 61 to 70 percent of time set -4

Abatement occurs within 71 to 80 percent of time set -3

Abatement occurs within 81 to 90 percent of time set -2

Abatement occurs within 91 to 98 percent of time set -1
APPENDIX A

A-21

CHAPTER 4

EXHIBITS

Number Form

A Citation A-23

Page

B Mine Site Inspection form (MEIR) A-26

C Citation Modification A-28

D Inspector’s Statement A-31

E Citation Vacation/Termination A-34

F-1 Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty A-37

Assessment (NOPA)

F-2 Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty A-39

Assessment (NOPA)

G-1 Conference Request form A-44

G-2 Conference Request form A-45

H Conference Request Approval A-49

I Conference appointment letter A-50

J-1 Conclusion of conference report A-51

J-2 Conclusion of conference report A-57

J-3 Conclusion of conference report

(revised assessment) A-59

J-4 Conclusion of conference report

(settlement agreement) A-67

K-1 Conference Officer Audit report A-70

K-2 Conference Officer Audit report A-71
CHAPTER 4

EXHIBITS

Number Form

A Citation A-23

Page

B Mine Site Inspection form (MEIR) A-26

C Citation Modification A-28

D Inspector’s Statement A-31

E Citation Vacation/Termination A-34

F-1 Notice of Proposed Assessment (NOPA) A-37

F-2 Notice of Proposed Assessment (NOPA) A-39

G-1 Conference Request form A-44

G-2 Conference Request form A-45

H Conference Request Approval A-49

I Conference appointment letter A-50

J-1 Conclusion of conference report A-51

J-2 Conclusion of conference report A-57

J-3 Conclusion of conference report

(revised assessment) A-59

J-4 Conclusion of conference report

(settlement agreement) A-67

K-1 Conference Officer Audit report A-70

K-2 Conference Officer Audit report A-71

A-22
EXHIBIT A

A-23

1. Notice of Violation Number 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 

. NOTIC~ 9f7 .VIQ TIQN . ., , !' P~rrri ane nt · · 

o>- q o - /IX> ----a:> 

2. Permittee . . -r. I • '!' n No Permit .•, 

M P.ttNY -H'IL > •• • • 

! : 

: ~ .. : ;., . ; . \ . 

._ .... ; · - . 

9. Date of Inspection 

.Jh/ IJ <~- 11 2.tJ o~ 

10 . . Time of ,Inspection 1 !dO 

F ,~, t:Jd ...... . T. flm 

rom'tsJil> 4 ... .. o JIPO p.m. 

MSHA ID Number 

. .. "UNDER·:THE AUTHORifYOF'itHE'SURFACE·MINING CONTROl AND RECLAMATION ACt OF · 

1977 (P.L. 95·87; 30 U.S.C. 1201), THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE 

: SEC~TA~Y. QF T!il= .I NTERIOf.\ h~s. c_onducted aq.inspec;:~ io(l o_f t~e abo.v.e mioe on the above date , and.tias found vi~laiion(s) of )he AcUh-e,regulations or required permit coridi!ion(s) listed in the.attachinent(s). This Notice constitutes a separate Notice oiViolation' for each violation listed. . 

)' 

,. You roust abate each· of these vi olation(s) within the designated abatement tiJne. You are respon· 

sibledor doing all work: in a safe and workmanlike manner. ~ , .. • •. ; 1\ 

, .. ,rn:oe•~NED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HEREBY FINDS THAT THIS NOTICE 

NOT 0 DOES REqL.JJRE CESSATION OF MINING EXPRESSLY OR IN PRACTICAL EF· 

. . Jherelore, ):Oti"O ~e')t 'are n~.i entltlet io an il)fqrmiil public bearlng ~n reque t, ~ithin 30 

days after serviqe'of tJ:lis notice {30 CF.R 84;3.15).- . . . , . . . . . . . . . . ·. ' . 

. This Notice shall remain in effect until it expires as provided on the reverse or is modified, ter· 

minated,_:or vacated by written notice of ~n authorized re~resentative of the Secr~.~..I..h,e..\i[1'1A.JQ.C. 

correction _may be extended by an authonzed representative for good cause. If yo~tl1tiV<tnW 

. time to .c.orcect the violation(s), please contact. the field office named above. 

Jul. 2 c, 20u:i 

OSM KNOXVILLE 

IDNumber 

/tJtJ Olllce File, Blue-Permittee, Yellow-Assessment IE-161 (3/81) 
A-24

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR te~~umber I~" _L}b Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement _ qb 

Violation Number 

NOTICE OF VIOLATION (CONTINUATION) J of '£ 

NATURE OF PERMIT CONDITION VIOlATED, PRACTICE OR VIOLATION 

,:;;/ttrt' 70 "'"evt!'l'l-j- 7'.:07!11/ av,7//L~7i~J.r ~~ c-/~~ •. I .,/ {'ob::lr 

-to ~" .PLw ~-rs7~ ffi.e Aer/h/ 7 Ar~.-.. ' blfl~/'h (Jt?/ d/J dt:t/'dt"' 

lk.r. t!n!Dr t:l &P WL;~~·vl"n tf dre4m aYA CA • - J r/ ..., 

PROVISION(S) OF THE REGULATIONS, ACT OR PERMIT VIOLATED 

'3CJ CFR ~l/z H"/7. <II (d) (I) And tf~2 ~/7 4 .2. tTh~ 

+k /1/?P.Ef /.7&/nt./f. 

, 

PORTION OF THE OPERATION TO WHICH NOTICE APPLIES 

/);~,),tiTAP . t:)-f J, JJ~ at7 I 

../ 

CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED (Including Interim Steps, if Any) 

f3}p f.6p "'n • ~ll!fld' .s "'tMJ .$ '1C r-P-1/I" .. IiT i"Jt?n'"J71i~-tn:,M c-fl 

S~-t<-AA· ~ .1 :soh/::k ..-J~.;~L' Are Muf/Ao. df~colt?r/~~ 

o-1' 7k 1?/':f'!;//;ha -f'EP hr _..., 

_.J -

--r...-n lr-" r"\ 

t(C.vt:.l v l-LJ 

llll 2 .;:, 20u~ 

u~t~L ~~,.~FFICE ... 

TIME FOR ABATEMENT (Including Time for Interim Steps, if Any) 

AlfiAIM'-r I '7 zoo> 4 T ~:J ~b 111 </ ., 

Copy DlstnbuHon. Wh•te·O•stnct Off10e File, Slue-Permittee. Yellow-Assessment Off1ce. Plnk·Futld Olhce. Grcen··lnspector IE-156A (12180) 
A-25

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE IN J R 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement -lOt) ~ 

Copy Distribution: While-District Office File, Blue-Permittee, Yellow·Assessment Oftlca, Pink·f ield Office, G;een-lnspector IE·156A (12/80) 
EXHIBIT B

A-26

u. s: EPT. OF THE INTK .-lOR 

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT 

Mine Site Inspection - Federal Program 

I. Penniuee/Person 9. Permit Number 10. Pennit Type · 

I'--3=CDOc=._ ______ __,l I PP I · 2. Address II. Inspection Date 12~on Type 13. Field Office Use 

I' 't MAPLE STREET I 0711412005 I L!£_J I I JIM · DD • J'YYY 

14. Permit Status 15. Site Status 

CD IAP I 

3. City 4. State 

jWHITWELL ~ 

16. Facility Type 

IB I 

5. ZipCode 6. Phone Number 17. OSMOffice# 18. RSI# 19. Land Code 

l37~97 1-1,..... -----, ~ l1oo 

M.S.H.A. ID # 21. State Code 

L_I _ _ _ _JI @J 

7. Operator if Different than Permittee 

8. MineName AVS Permittee Entity ID Number 

l1s2471 I 

22.

~ 

1 

CountyiCode 

061 

24. Control# 

j236s - 4063 - oo I 

25. Performance Standard Categories 3-.Not Cited 

A. Administrative 

l...l....Mining within Valid Permit 

2 . ...l...Mining within Bonded Area 

3 . .J.....Terms & Conditions ofPennit 

4 . ..l....Liability Insurance 

5 . .J.....Ownersbip and Control 

6 . .J.....Tempora.ry Cessation 

7._L.AML Rec. Fees-- Non-Respondent 

8 . ..L.AML Rec. Fees -- Failure to Pay 

B. Hydrologic Balance . l....l_,Drainage Control 

2 . ..l....lnspections & Certifications 

3 . ..1_Siltation Structures 

4._L.Discharge Structures 

5.l0iversions 

6 . ..l....Effluent Limits 

7 . .J.....Ground Water Monitoring 

8 . .J.....Surface Water Monitoring 

9.l0rainage --Acid-Toxic Materials 

IO . ..l.Jmpoundments · ll._l_Stream Buffer Zones 

C. Topsoil & Subsoil 

l.lRemoval 

2._.1._Substitute Materials 

3._L_Storage and Protection 

4 . .A_Redistribution 

D. Badadling & Grading 

l . ..l....Exposed Openings ~Contemporaneous Reclamation 

3.~Approximate Original Contour 

4 . .A....Highwall Elimination 

5._L_Steep Slopes (includes downslope) 

6 . .J.....Handling of Acid & Toxic Materials 

7 . .J.....Stabilization (rills and gullies) 

E. Excess Spoil Disposal 

l._.l...Piacement 

2._l_Drainage Control 

3._.1._Surface Stabilization 

4._l_Jnspections & Certifications 

F. Coal Mine Waste 

(Refuse Pilesllmpoundments) 

l...AJ)rainage Control 

2.~Surface Stabilization 

3 . ...l_.Placement 

4._Linspections and Certifications 

5 .... l . .Jmpounding Structures 

G. Use of Explosives 

!.~laster Certification 2.~Distance Prohibitions 

3 ....LBiast Survey/Scbedule 4.~ Warnings & Records 

5.~Control of Adverse Effects 

H • ....LSubsidence Control Plan 

I. Roads 

l...l....Road Construction 

2._l._Certification 

3._LDrainage 

4 . ..l....Surfacing and Maintenance 

5._.1._Reclamation 

J. Signs & Markers l._L_Signs 

2 . ....LMarkers 

K . ....Ll)istance Prohibitions 

L. Revegetation 

l.l Vegetative Cover 

2 . ..l....Timiog 

M. _LPostmining Land Use 

N. Other RECEIVED 

_1) _ ___ .,..-_ _ _ ___ _ 

__2) ________ JuL 2 0 20u~ _ 

3) -'0J'S~~""4 ....... ~<:.,.N .... o ... x..,.vUJu'-'l-'r-=---- -

FIELD OFFICE 

26. Acres 28. Bonded Acres 29. Inspection Hours 30. Signature Block a. Pennitted b. Disturbed (Est.) 

14.0 II 9.0 I 0.0 a. Total 2.0 I a. Permit bonded Review KM4<..,~~ 

27. Frequency previous 4 Calendar Qtrs. 0.0 b. Phase I 7.0 b. Inspection a. Nt.mborcl c. No.rnber cl 

=[I] $0 released Time 

lnspOctions . . o.o c. Phase II 2.3 released 
A-27

I 

U. S . . ~PT. OF THE INTE: OR OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT 

Mine Site Inspection 

I ~sr"tion I 0711412005 

Federal Program 

Continuation P age erson ae 

32. Off-Site Impact Datl and Identified Violation Datl 

List all Federal NOV or CO actions taken or reviewed during this current OSM site visit. List the 

off-site impacts associated with the Federal actions taken during this site visit. 

I. A. Specific State or Federal Law/Regulations Violated· 817 .U_!_dl Ill . 817 .&2 L. Ort:Sii!: lmRa~:ts 

People Land Water Struet 

B. Description: SOSP:I2mEI> SoLD)• '""T.nnn _,, -•• Blasting 0 0 0 0 

C. Perfonnance Standard: / Bl I D. Abated (YIN): ~ Stability 0 0 0 0 

0 0 E. OSM Action: I] F. OSM Action Number:/ NOS-090-100-003 I Viol.#: [!] [El 0 Hydrology 

G. Optional: I I H. Any Off-Site Impacts (YIN): I!J Encroachment 0 0 0 0 

L Longitude: I I J. Latitude: c::::::::J K. Elevation: I I Other 0 0 0 0 

2. A. Specific State or Federal Law/Regulations Violated· 1n 7 "' 6 lh L. Off-Si&i: lml!al:&li 

People Land Water Struct 

B. Description: na """"'t.0P ,...,_ REMOVED FROM AJtZA Blasting 0 0 0 0 

C. Perfonnance Standard: ~ D. Abated (YIN): §] Stability 0 0 0 0 

E. OSM Action: I] F. OSM Action Number:/ NOS-090-100-003 / Viol.#: I] Hydrology 0 0 0 0 

G. Optional: I I H. Any Off-Site Impacts (YIN): I!J Encroachment 0 ~ 0 0 

L Longitude: I I J. Latitude: c=J K. Elevation: c=J Other 0 0 0 0 

3. A. Specific State or Federal Law/Regulations Violated· L. Off4lii!: ImRal:lli 

Peopl e Land Watel' Struct 

B. Description: Blasting 0 0 0 0 

C. Perfonnance Standard: I I D. Abated (YIN): D Stability 0 0 0 0 

E. OSM Action: 0 F. OSM Action Number: I / Viol.#: D 0 0 0 0 Hydrology 

G. Optional: I I H. Any Off ..Site Impacts (YIN): 0 Encroachment 0 0 0 0 

I. Longitude: I I J. Latitude: c=J K. Elevation: c::::::::J Other 0 0 0 D 

4. A. Specific State or Federal Law/Regulations Violated· I .. Qff~ii!: lmpadli 

People Land Water Struct 

B. Description: Blasting 0 0 0 0 

C. Perfonnance Standard: I I D. Abated (YIN): D Stability 0 0 0 0 

E. OSM Action: D F. OSM Action Number. I j viol.#: O 0 0 0 0 Hydrology 

G. Optional: I l H. AJiy Off-Site Impacts (YIN): 0 Encroachment 0 0 0 0 

I. Longitude: I I J. Latitude: c::::::::J K. Elevation: c=J Other 0 0 0 0 

OSMAction QIHiil~ lml!i! ~ 

3) NOV Issued Fot eadllype of mpact and resource aKecled, enlef 4) FT A-(:0 Issued 

5) IH-CO Issued (lnm1enl EnW...-Ham>J 'N, 0, or 1todesaile lie degree ololl-sile ~ct 

6) I [).CO Issued ~ Oallg•l1o N>loJ H -tllnor Occt:"ence 8) Abated durllg or before OSM lfflpecUon 

9) FoAow;lJP of Federal Action 0 -Moderate Ocxurence 

J • MajofOcclrtenoe r Page _..6_ of~ ~J__,.I,1'" 
EXHIBIT C

A-28

t Y\l.A- I 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 

MODIFrCATION OF NOTICE OF VIOLATION OR.CESSATION ORDER 

,::SS:: Permittee 

· U No Permit 

2. Mailing Address 

po Fox y w/,itwtll 7/1/ 3/397 

3. Name of Mine · 

. 16~e:S (fe.ek.. 4. Telephone Number 

'lz.I $5-55$~ . 6. Operator's Name 

~~ToRco lLC.. 7. Mailing Address 

J 

;:: Surface c; Other {Specify) l 

)(underground 

1 State 

: TA" 

1

11. NPDES Number 112. MSHA tO Number 

tN oo "71 J g''f 

10. Slate Permit Number 

ACTIONS TAKEN 

Originating Ollice Address 

Knoxville Fiel d Office · 530 South Gay street 

Knoxville,

1

TN 37902 

Inspection. Group 

Telephone Number 865-54 5-41 0 3 

111t IS"~ 

. 8. Date of.fnspection 

:JUI~ z'l~ os-· 

9. Time ot'lnspection itllllflttiiS ,-,. r;-Vf. 

From _ __ :::: To _ _ ::: 

Authority: Under the authority of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 

of 1977 (P.L 95-87; 30 U.S.C. 1201) the fol lowing action is taken: 

·14. Notice of Violation Number 

~~ - 1tJ - JOO - b03 1 D~ed 1 

/.. J 15. Cessation Order Number 

17 jl.?o'/$/jP.Si - - -

1 Dated I 

I . 

16. VIOLAT ON ~ OF 2... IS MODIFIED: (Desetibe Action and Justify) ) 

. -rf,e c.I!J(ffrl'l've lfCti'D#f /s bii!Jd,'f, t-~ . /c add S'tl!f' 3 /?e-n. ~11 

-t.fs~ ttl1lflt'f"J':PII;u/ t/evef~fh1Ml u/4S~ /b t:IJ~ r/'"1/ "/ t:ll't';, 

1{11(/ f.~~{t: I "f tf'f fhe -f'A.ct'"!f ;t;-'~11( • , · 

-r/f~ fi!J(~f"/1;, H'~-tf' fbi" tlte fff- ~~ '1l! ':'ItS~ RJ-tA rk -/ai AA"! '1 ~/ J; 

m11i 6~q) ft~l"~P/. -rite t:m46~/ .s skw.s '/114~ rAt: ~4$-k. t.s 

17. VIOLATION ___ OF_· _ _ IS MODIFIED: (Describe Action aqd Justify) / '"'J'21)<,'G • 

-,he time :rot" at.tte~Jilr 1'-s llbt Chn.11~t'd( Jlu~. 17~ ZbP.) 1#4...,) 

RECEIVED 

18. VIOLATION ___ OF ___ IS MODIF.fED:.(Describe Action and.Justi!YJ 

; j" OSM ·KNOXVILLE . cr 

Mailed to ('r\lt>JfN~fAN'f'J:l.X, ., Inc ., on August 3, 2005 , by 

Certified;..M'ail - Receipt #7003-3i 10-0004....:0.865-6796 . 

Copy mailed to (jfttf+ loR (C) LL.L on August 3 , 2005 . 

20. Signat~~Ll resentative ! 

Copy OisM'f,.<in: White-oip<ltct Fil~: Blue-P~Itlee, Yello~Assessment Oltice, Pin~-F el<l Olfice, Green-tnspectO< 

Identification Number 

/PO 

Eff'?'tive·';,llte 

7/~?/PJ 

. , . IE-158 (12/80) 
A-29

~ 

II!SPECTOR'S STATEKEIH 

(A) Event Violations (go to (8.] if this is ~n obstruction to eoforce.oent vfolotion). 

L 

2. 

3. 

\!hat hareful event was this r~ulation designed to prevent? (Insert the event listed on the Reference list and 

remember th<lt the event is not the same as the violation). 

Hltr"''tr p!lut.'o11 

. . 

(B). Obstruct ion to Enforcea.ent Violations (answer for obstruction violations only,.' such as violatiOns concerning record. keeptng, 110111tortng, plans, and certifications). · · . .• 

5. Describe how violation ~f this regulation actually obstructed enforcement by OS."! and/or the public. · 

Oegree of Faul t (only one question applies to ~ach violat.ion; first. decide which question to answer). ->.. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

Good faith to. 

If you think this violation was not the fault of the operator (Perhaps due to vandalisa or an act 'at God, for 

example}, explain. Reae~~ber that the perodttee is considered responsible.for the actions of~ll persons working cin 

the mine site. · 

If you think this violation was the result of not knowing about OSM ~ulations, indifference to OSM. regulatlons; _c:- t!>.e result of lack cf reasooab1e care, explain. ... _- · 

If the actua l or potentia·] environmental hara or harm to the public should have ·been evident to a careful operator, d~frib,e.l the situation and what. if anything, the operator did tp correct it prior to being ci~<:d- . ~ 

5/1!}11/A W~ J.~'lt eiiJ'dhtTJ J. '/' tl~ff'4 f4r Sttl lt J,t f/tlui~A -I' /t' lio,>t~tt/ll J,. ~ ... o>HJ lt~~t.J ,.1/,w~,( t:Jtl.".s '"' t- "1 "lftin~ J I-I' w,'fh J'l'l!I!Jt" t"t'l-ls /~"' ~/'J'I"#4/, .:r.; d##hf~,. lwA AS:Ittltl ,~ ,.,. ,'t' .::r (1'411/ -'"~<' ~"' "'"' IP. 

lias th~ operator in violation of a specific per•ft condition? Did the operator recewe prior ·warning of violatioo 

by the State or by OSll concerning ·.this violation? If so, give the dates and the type· of warning. · 

ln order to receive good faith for compliance with an NOV ~r CO, an operator IIIIISt have taken extraordinary aeasures to comply as rapidly as possible. The violation llUSt have been abated before the tiae set f(J(' abat ent. If you 

· think this applies, describe how rapid _the compliance was and what extraordinary llle4Sur>es oper or took. · · 

.? b::-_fu=_ 7fatt-'t?-
A-30

£~A U. S.'- lEPT. OF THE INTE-~IOR 

~~ ~;OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT 

'\..~~ ~ Mine Site Inspection - Federal Program . 

I. Permittee/Person 

~ N I 1\f&- CON'PAr-JY l:I'Jc.... 

9. Permit;.; N;...u;;.;m;;.;.be:..;.:.r _______ ___, 10. Permit Type 

I flOoo I I PP I 

II. Inspection Date 12~ion Type 13. Field Office Use 

I o8/t7noos I ~ I I UM · DD. rYl'Y 

14. Pennit Status 15. Site Status 16. Facility Type 

@] ITcl In I 

2. Address 

: eo llo.XY I 

3. City 4. State 

WHITWELL I I TNI 

17. OSM Office# 18. RSI# 19. Land Code 

@I] ltoo I ~ 

5. ZiE Code 6. Phone Number 

37397 1-1 I I· (423} 55s ~ss~ I 

7. Operator if Different than Permittee 20. M.S.H.A. ID # 21. State Code 22.

1 

County 

1

code 

1._ __ ___,1 @] 061 

23. A VS Penniuee Entity ID Number 24. Control # 

1152471 I 123{)5 - 4063 - oo 1 

8. MineName 

JAKES CREEK MINE 1 

25. Performance Standard Categories Codes: l o:Complian.,.,, 2=Noncomplianee, 3-Not P lanned, ~ot Started, 6...Noncomplio.nce Identified Elsewhere, ~Previously Cited 

A. Administrative D. Backfilling & Grading 

L_Mining within Valid Pennit !.___,Exposed Openings 

2._Mining within Bonded A:iea 2._ Contemporaneous Reclamation 

H. _Subsidence Control Plan 

I. Roads 

l.~oad Construction 

2._ Certification 

3.,.LDrainage 

3._Tenns & Conditions of Permit 3._Approximate Original Contour 4._Liability Insurance 4 . .A_Higbwall Elimination 

5._0wnersbip and Control 5._Steep Slopes (includes downslope) 4,_l_Surfacing and Maintenance 

s.~eclamation 6 . ..LTemporary Cessation 6._Handling of Acid & Toxic Materials 7.~ML Rec. Fees-- Non-Respondent ?._Stabilization (rills and gullies) 

S._AML Rec. Fees -- Failure to Pay E. Excess Spoil Disposal 

B. Hydrologic Balance I ._ Placement 

I . .LJ)rainage Control 2._Drainage Control 

2._Jnspections & Certifications 3._Surface Stabili:zation 

3._LSiltation Structures 4._)nspections & Certifications 

4._LDiscbarge Structures 

5._Diversions 

6._LEffluenl Limits 

?._Ground Water Monitoring 

8._Surface Water Monitoring 

9._Drainage ··Acid-Toxic Materials 

I O._lmpoundments 

!!._ Stream Buffer Zones 

C. Topsoil & Subsoil 

l._Removal 

2._Substitute Materials 

3._LStorage and Protection 

4._Redislribution 

F. Coal Mine Waste 

(Refuse Piles/Impoundments) 

!._Drainage Control 

2._Surface Stabilization 

3._LPJacement 

4._Jnspections and Certifications 

5._Jmpounding Structures 

G. Use of Explosives !._Blaster Certification 

2._Distance Prohibitions 

3._Blast Survey/Schedule 

4._ Warnings & Records 

5._Control of Adverse Effects 

J. Signs & Markets l._LSigns 

2 . ..1_Marlcers 

K. _Distance Prohibitions 

L. RengetatiOn 1._ Vegetative Cover 

2._Timing 

M. _.Yostrnining Land Use 

N. Othtr 

_J), _ _______ _ 

_2) _____ _:_ __ 

_3) _____ __ _ 

29. Inspection Hours 26. Acres 28. Bonded Acres ~~. ~tu~r ~,.,.ck a. Pennitted b. Distwbed (EsL) .bll_t_ ~, 

l.S I a. Pennit 

Review 

3.8 I b. Inspection 

I t4.o II 9.o 1 I o.o I a. to~ded 27. Frequency previous 4 Calendar Qtrs. t)o.,-1 1-k.,.\" a.Nunlle<of c.Nt.anberol I 0.0 I b.~~~ PmtNam« Time 

1.8 I c. Travel =.. requOed f4l 

~ =ed comjlle~ 141· ~Q' I L..2.J I I c. Phase U Date: '(gll'3/JS 

>.NI.Iflberof d.l'bllberof 0.0 released Time W~~~~ -·· r()l ~ 1"71 1 00 1 d.Pbasem 15 1 d. Report I r.;.;;..,., ~ ~""~ ~ . · . released · . Writing Date:Y"/J.-.Y 0 ~ I 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREF A) ---- Your Conunents Are Important . .J lhe Small Busiless and ~'h. ... R~OIY Er.:O.umeri OnWdsmM and 10 Rogonal Famess Board$""'" estal:6sled to receMI cornmenls from smal ~ ' " ~ . ... A .... ~ i lba4 ~agencyenlon:ementac:tians. The Ombudsman v.il amtalyevallalelheeNortemeltaci>itiesandlllleeadugencys ~to small V~ I< -,C.· 

JUSiness, f you are a sma1 busiless (a busineos will 500 a: fewer ~ees klCbing those at alliiat,.) and -.ish to commenrcn the enfortement a:~ 1'1 \.1>age 1 of _.6. 1dMtiesoiOSM. cai1~G FAJR(1-888-734-3247). · .....,, '·'"' 
EXHIBIT D

A-31

INSPECTION REPORT 

Permittee: 

Permit No.: 

Date of Inspection: . August 17. 2005 

Type of Inspection: . Partial and NOV Follow-up 

Inspector: Karl 

Administrative: 

This deep mine stopped producing coal on July 15. 2005. A temporary cessation 

notice was received today and a compliance conference was held. 

Hydrologic Balance: 

NOV05-090-100-003, violation 1 of2, was issued on July 14, 20051 for failure to 

prevent additional contribution of suspended solids from basin 001 to the receiving 

stream. Today basi.n 001 was discharging clearwater (pH of 7.0 and iron 1 mg/L), 

and was no .longer coloring Jakes Creek gray. The violation is terminated, effective 

July 25. 2005 .. the day permittee called and stated the pond water had been cleared 

up. 

Coal Mine Waste: 

· NOV 05-090-100-003, violation 2 of 2, was issued on July 14, 2005, for failure to 

follow the approved plans for underground development waste storage by allowing . 

waste to be hauled off the permit. A location map and laboratory analysis for the offsite waste was received on July 25., 2005. The waste material was toxic and on July 

29th, the corrective action was modified to require the permittee to return the waste to 

the permitted face-up area. The permittee stat~ the waste had already been 

returned to the site soon after the NOV was issued. There is a pile of waste at the 

face-up, and there was none at the off-site area, where a man had since used dirt to 

build his road. The violation is terminated effective July 29, 2005. 

Revisions: 

Revision #1 is still pending approval. -Jt will contain a plan for chemical treatment of 

suspended solids at basin 001. The permittee also intends to change the 

underground development waste storage plan in this revision. 

311~-KH/jyc Page2of2 · 
A-32

U. S.'-lEPT. OF THE INTE __ IOR 

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT 

Mine Site Inspection - Federal Program 

I. Permittee/Person 

Lf)\IN IN Cr (O('('Pf\N Y l:fi/G 

9. Permit Number 10. Permit Type 

==~--------~~ lwl 

2. Address II. Inspection Date I 2~on Type 13. Field Office Use 

Po iklx-Y I o8/t712005 I I.!!!...J I I /11114 ·DO· nYT 

3. City 4. State 14. Permit Status 15. Site Status 16. Facility TYJ?C? 

IWHI'IWELL ~ ~ !Tel In I 

5. ZipCode 6. Phone Number 

.--<4_23..::;;> -==. 55,::.:5-sss { OSM Office# 18. RSI# 19. Land Code . 

137397 1-'1 - ----, I ~ !too [£=:J 

7. Operator if Different than Pennittee 20. M.S.H.A. ID # 21. State Code 22.

1 

County ICode 

._I ______ .....JI @J 061 

8. MineName A VS Permittee Entity ID Number 24. Control# 

I JAKES CREEK MINE 1 lts24n I 1 2365 - 4063 - oo 1 

25. Performance Standard Categories 3-Not 

A. Administrative D. Backfilling & Grading 

!.__Mining within Valid Pennit !._Exposed Openings 

2.__,Mining within Bonded Area 2._Contemporaneous Reclamation 

3._ Terms & Conditions of Permit 3._Approximate Original Contour 

4._Liability Insurance 4._LHigbwall Elimination 

5._0wne¥ship and Control 5._ Steep Slopes (includes downslope) 

6.J_Temporary Cessation 6._Handling of Acid & Toxic Materials 

7._AML Rec. Fees- Non-Respondent 7._Stabilization (rills and gullies) 

8._AML Rec. Fees - Failure to Pay E. Excess Spoil Disposal 

B. Hydrologic Balance · l.__l'laeement 

I....L.Drainage Control 2._Drainage Control 

2._Jnspections & Cenifications 3._Surface Stabili:ution 

3._LSiltation Structures 4._lnspections & Certifications 

4 . ..L_Discbarge Structures 

5._Diversions 

6.J_Effiuent Limits 

?._ Ground Water Monitoring 

8._Surface Wat<:r Monitoring 

9._Drainage --Acid-Toxic Materials 

1 O._Jmpoundments 

ll.__$tream Buffer Zones 

C. Topsoil & Su bsoil 

!.__Removal 

2._Substitute Materials 

3 . ..L_Storage and Protection 

4._Redistribution 

F. Coal Mine Waste 

(Refuse Piles/Impoundments) 

!._Drainage Control 

2._Surface Stabiliution 

3 . ..L_Piacement 

4._Inspections and Cenifications 

5._1mpounding Structures 

G. Use of Explosives 

!.__Jllaster Cenification 

2._Distance Prohibitions 

3._ Biast Survey/Schedule 

4._ Warnings & Records 

5._Control of Adverse Effects 

26.Acres 28. Bonded Acres a. Permitted 

IL _Subsidence Control Plan 

L Roads 

!.__Road Construction 

2._Certitication 

3 . ...LDrainage 

Cited 

4 . ..L_Surfacing and Maintenance 

5.__Reclamatioo 

J. Signs & Markers 

l.J_Signs 

2._LMarlcers 

K. __Distance Prohibitions 

L. Revegeta_tion 

1._ Vegetative Cover 

2._Tirning 

M. -.Yostmining Land Use 

N. Other 

__ !). ________________ ___ 

--2)·----------~----

__ 3)·-------------------

b. Distwbed (Est.) 

14.0 II 9.o I 0.0 a. Total 1.5 a. Permit 

bonded Review 

27. Frequtncy previous 4 Calendar Qtrs. 

0.0 b. Phase I · 3.8 a. Nt.mber ol c. Numberol reqt.i1ed ITJ =~rr:r released 

~ C<lfl<b:led 0.0 c. Phase II 1.8 released 
A-33

INSPECTION REPORT 

Permittee: 

Permit No.: 3000 

Date of Inspection: . August 17, 2005 

Type of Inspection: Partial and NOV Follow-up 

Inspector: Karl 

Administrative: 

This deep mine stopped producing coal on July 15, 2005. A temporary cessation 

notice was received today and a compliance conference was held. 

Hydrologic Balance: 

NOV 05-090-100-003, violation 1 of 2, was issued on /uly 14, 2005; for failure to 

prevent additional contribution of suspended so/ids from basin 001 to the receiving 

stream. Today basin 001 was discharging clear water (pH of 7.0 and iron 1 mg/l), 

and was no longer coloring Jakes Creek gray. The violation is terminated. effective 

July 25. 2005,the day permittee called and stated the pond water had been cleared 

up. 

Coal Mine Waste: 

NOV 05-090-100-003, violation 2 of 2, was issued on July 14, 2005, for failure to 

follow the approved plans for underground development waste storage by allowing . 

waste to be hauled off the permit. A location map and laboratory analysis for the offsite waste was received on July 25,. 2005. The waste material was toxic and on July 

29th. the corrective action was modified to require the permittee to return the waste to 

the permitted face-up area. The.permittee stated the waste had already been 

returned to the site soon after the NOV was issued. There .is a pile of waste at the 

face-up, and there was ·none at the off-site area, where a man had since used dirt to 

build his road. The violation is tenninated effective July 29, 2005. 

Revisions: . . 

Revision #1 is still pending approval. ,It will contain a plan for chemical treatment of 

suspended solids at basin 001. The permittee also intends to change the 

underground development waste storage plan in this revision. 

3II $-KH/jyc Page2of2 
EXHIBIT E

A-34

u./ , " ,(_)) 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 

VACATION OR TERMINATION OF NOTICE OF VIOLATION OR CESSATION ORDER 

1. Name )<I Permittee Originating Office Address 

........,. ___ fh---.!_N_I N_{_i·(_d_f<'\_· _PAN __ 'f._J::N __ 0___ ,_·, _No_ P_e_rm_it--------1 f(n17x 11,'1/e p::·~ jJ O(F,·c.e 

2. Mailing Address S J G. 5 

ao 8o:x y wJ,t't,.,.Je I I 7/V 37 3 '7 7 s Jo... MTI1 4_; .,... 

~r~~--~~----------------~~~------~~~~-~--~s~ e~o~ 3. Name of Mine C Surface 0 Other (Specify)/ J('.,.,x.,.'//e ;:-v .3 7 "'t>2. 

:J;;Jes Ct'eek ·• X Underground 

Telephone Number 4. Telephone Number ,5. County 1 State 

~2.1 / 555 -S'5t; ~ Grt-mcl ';) : //'/ g~5"/S''I::.--tj/P ']. e.x"T ;56 

6. Operator's Name 8. Date of Inspection 

<Jf~AAToR (d L.t-G /;V~!:J 11 5 r 1 '7, :z.oo .s-

· 7. Mailing Address 9. Time of Inspection 

From 9.'1 S" ~ Ym. To J:oo ~ ·~ 

111 . NPDES Number 

IT.#'t70'711f?7 

10. State Permit Number 112. MSHA ID Number 

ACTIONS TAKEN 

Authority: Under the authority of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 

of 1977 (P.L. 95·87; 30 U.S.C. 1201) the following action is taken: 

I Dated . L 115. Cessation Order Number 

I 7/t]o'l'fjP.>l - - -

14. Notice of Violation Number 

16. VIOLATION --L-/_oF 2. IS }It Terminated for the Following Reasons: 

. 0 Vacated 

&$;n oo I 

di.s,-olor;"J 

;> d,jc~;.,r9in..3 deat~ t-<M/P r ~u1/ 1S no 

1-l" 'fhe receivi~ sfr~--rm. 

17. VIOLATION 2. OF 2. !~Terminated 

0 'lacated 

,4 I oud.·o/'1 1114p and I"' bo!'et fo!:J 

""n t!lt•r<j/P~mtl kvt>/v~l'/11'117 W.ts"te 

WA~/e .hAS bl'f'n yeTuorul 1D 

., f" -tfu< f<trl"u f .a ;'~4. 

18. VIOLATION _____ OF ____ IS 0 Terminated 

0 Vacated 

for the Following Reasons: 

.:TI/t?lys/s -f.•l' t"ht> .o..fl'-· 5/Te 

hA5 b€1"11 rf'ce,jvf'tfJ 4nd f'"ke 

the ft'1'11•1J r Af't'4 t:tn4 s7orPA 

for the Following Reasons: 

RECEIVED 

, 3 o 20u5 

n : 1 KNOXVILLE 

1Dated 

I 

l 

19. Print Name of Authorized Representative • •. ~ .D OFFICio :Identification Number 

1~ "'I _ . . : I Po 

20. S1 . 7gna;:tu"'re.·, o'l1tthorize\f Represe- ntative 1 Effective Date J. . 1 ·,.... fV. I ol 4 7tZS"f0J 

-------------~~~~~~~~--~~~~~Zou•f~~--7~/~.·.z~~qb/~o~~~ Copy 6;7;6U(rc)rf. Whill-Dfttrlct Ales. Blue·Permlttee, Yellow·Assessment Ollleo, Plnk·Field Office, Green·lnspector fE·159 (12/80) 
A-35

£~"- U. S.'-lEPT. OF THE INTE __ IOR 

~ Lq. ,Q>Sl <2- ~ 

~E ~OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT ~ ~ ~ ~ 

~ 

(; Mine Site Inspection - Federal . Program ~ 

1. Permittee/Person 9. Permit Number 10. Permit Type 

L'(Y\IN IN Cr (O~Pf\N Y l:f\/G I [1<XX> I IPP I 

2. Address II. Ins~tion Date 12~on Type 13. Field Office Use 

: Eo iklx Y I 1 o8/t71200s 1 FPl I I /11114 · DO· nYY 

3. Ci!l 4. State 14. Permit Status 15. Site Status 16. Facili!l Type 

IWHI'IWELL I ~ ~ !Tel IB I 

5. ZieCode 6. Phone Number I 7. OSM Office # 18. RSI# 19. Land Code 

j37397 

7. O~ratorifDifferent 

1-1 

than 

I 

Pennittee 

I· (423) 5SS-S'5S'~ I 

20. 

~ M.S.H.A. ID # 21. 

I too 

State Code 

I 

22.

~ 

1 

County !Code 

I I I I @] 061 

8. MineName 23. A VS Permittee Entity ID Number 24. Control# 

I JAKES CREEK MINE 1 I 1xs2m 1 1236s -4063 - oo 1 

25. Performance Standard Categories 

Codes: I =Compliance, 2=Noneomplianee, 8-Not Planned, 4=Not Started, 5=Noncomplianee Identified Elsewhere, 6=Previously Cited 

A. Administrative D. Backfilling & Grading IL _Subsidence Control Plan 

!.__Mining within Valid Pennit !._Exposed Openings L Roads 2.__,Mining within Bonded Area 2._Contemporaneous Reclamation 1.__..ll.oad Construction 3._ Terms & Conditions of Permit 3._Approximate Original Contour 2._Certification 4._Liabitity Insurance 4._LHigbwall Elimination 3 . ..LDrainage 5._0wncrship and Control 5._ Steep Slopes (includes downslope) 

6.J.._Temporary Cessation 6._Handling of Acid & Toxic Materials 4 . .l_Surfacing and Maintenance 

7._AML Ree. Fees- Non-Respondent ? ._Stabilization (rills and gullies) 5.__jl.eclamation 

8._AML Rec. Fees - Failure to Pay E. Excess Spoil Disposal J. Signs & Markers 

B. Hydrologic Balance · l.__l'lacement l.J.._Signs 

I....L.Drainage Control 2._Drainage Conlrol 2 . ...J..).1arlcers 

2._Jnspections & Certifications 3._Surfaee Stabifuation K. _Distance Prohibitions 

3 . ...L.Siltation Structures 4._lnspections & Certifications 

4 . .l_Discbarge Structures L. Revege~tion 

F. Coal Mine Waste 5._Diversions !._Vegetative Cover 

6 . .l_Effiuent Limits (Refuse Piles/Impoundments) 2._Timing '--

?._ Ground Water Monitoring !._Drainage Control 

M. __J>ostmining Land Use 

8._Surface Wat<:.r Monitoring 2._ Surface Stabilization 

9._Drainage --Acid-Toxic Materials 3 . .l_Piacement N. Other ' I O._Jmpoundments 4._Jnspections and Certifications 

ll.__.$tream Buffer Zones 5._1mpounding Structures _ I) 

C. Topsoil & Subsoil G. Use of Explosives 

!.__Removal l.__Jllaster Certification __2) 

2._Substitute Materials 2._Distance Prorubitions 

3 . .l_Storage and Protection 3._Blast Survey/Schedule _3) 

4._Red.istribution 4._ Warnings & Records 

5._Control of Adverse Effects 

26.Acres 28. Bonded Acres 29. Inspection Hours 30. ~atu~lock I a. Permitted b. Disturbed (Est.) 

I 14.0 II 9.o I 0.0 a. Total 1.5 a. Permit ~--4 ttn bonded Review . ~ 

l 21. Frequency previous 4 Calmdar Qtrs. ~~ 1-6\~ 0.0 b. Phase! ' 3.8 b. Inspection a. Nt.mber ol c. Numbe<ol Print Name: reqt.i1ed ITJ =~rr:r released 1irne 

~ Date: ~~.2~0.>' I C<lfl<b:led 0.0 c. Phasell 1.8 c. Travel 

>.Nt.mberol 

reqojred 0 d.Numberol released Time W~4~~ 

~ ~$[2] 0.0 d.Pbasem 1.5 d. Report 

cooducted released Writing Date: lrtJ...}' o? I 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) ---- Your Comments Are Important lheSmalllusiMssand~R~OIY er:on:anen~~ and 10Regional Fairness Boardsweoaslall&slad toreceM!convnents trom smallliusinesses W. · R. E-O.S" mru Fedenll a.rpv;y enforcement adlclns. The Ombudsman Ml arlfiJllly evaW!ellle erlortemer1t a<Mies and late eadl agency's responsiveness to sma1 -

JUSiness. K c:lS'i: n a sma1 buUiess (a t.mess will SOO"' ,._ ~ inc:lu<i1g lho$e ol alliiales) and wish to commenl'on !he enloo:emenl "'~ I \..Page 1 of .2,._ 

ldivilies ol 1.1. cal t-.REG-FAIR (t-888-734-3247). . .....,,_, '·'"' 
A-36

INSPECTION REPORT 

Permittee: 

Permit No.: 3000 

Date of Inspection: . August 17, 2005 

Type of Inspection: Partial and NOV Follow-up 

Inspector: Karl 

Administrative: 

This deep mine stopped producing coal on July 15, 2005. A temporary cessation 

notice was received today and a compliance conference was held. 

Hydrologic Balance: 

NOV 05-090-100-003, violation 1 of 2, was issued on /uly 14, 2005; for failure to 

prevent additional contribution of suspended so/ids from basin 001 to the receiving 

stream. Today basin 001 was discharging clear water (pH of 7.0 and iron 1 mg/l), 

and was no longer coloring Jakes Creek gray. The violation is terminated. effective 

July 25. 2005,the day permittee called and stated the pond water had been cleared 

up. 

Coal Mine Waste: 

NOV 05-090-100-003, violation 2 of 2, was issued on July 14, 2005, for failure to 

follow the approved plans for underground development waste storage by allowing . 

waste to be hauled off the permit. A location map and laboratory analysis for the offsite waste was received on July 25,. 2005. The waste material was toxic and on July 

29th. the corrective action was modified to require the permittee to return the waste to 

the permitted face-up area. The.permittee stated the waste had already been 

returned to the site soon after the NOV was issued. There .is a pile of waste at the 

face-up, and there was ·none at the off-site area, where a man had since used dirt to 

build his road. The violation is tenninated effective July 29, 2005. 

Revisions: . . 

Revision #1 is still pending approval. ,It will contain a plan for chemical treatment of 

suspended solids at basin 001. The permittee also intends to change the 

underground development waste storage plan in this revision. 

3II $-KH/jyc Page2of2 
1

EXHIBIT F-1 

A-37

United States Department of the Interior 

OARCEOFSURFACENUNrnNG 

Reclamation and Enforcement 

530 Gay St., S.W., Suite 500 

Knoxville, TN 37902 

e&TATION ENCLOIB Pilll2:;m 

RE: 

Remail 08/15/05 

NOTICE OP PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT (NOPA) 

C'tJiri.Prl.~ M/1' €-../ 

TA IO No. N05-090-100-003 PERMIT NO. 30<10 

Dear Sir: 

Under the authority of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, · 

30 U.S.C. 1201, et. seq., you were issued Notice of Viol ation N05-090-100-003. 

In accordance with 30 CFR Part 845, you are hereby issued a proposed assessment 

in the amount of $4,620.00. 

Carefully· read this letter and the enclosed information concerning the 

requirements for payment of civil penalty assessme~ts . Information regarding 

the requirements -for obtaining informal and formal review of the proposed 

penalty is also enclosed. 

If the encl osed Assessment Worksheet shows that good faith was not consi dered 

in making this assessment (due to the length of the abatement period), you may 

request a modification based on consideration of good faith. To obtain a 

reduction qf the penalty on the basis of good faith in attempting to achieve 

compliance, you must show that you took extraordinary measures .to abate the 

violations in the shortest possible time and that abatement was achieved 

~efore the date set for abatement. Your request for a modification should be 

made in writing, after the violations have been abated, and should be 

addressed to the Program Support Group at the above address. You should 

enclose a notariz_ea affidavit descri bing the extraordinary measures taken. 

A copy of the Inspector's Statement and Assessment ~1anation, which contain tr. 

rationale for the assessment, may be obtained by verbal or written request. 

Verbal requests may be made to Brenda Summerour at (865) 545-4103, Rxtension 186 

If you have questions, you may call a Civil Penal ty Assessment representative 

at (865) 545-4103, Extension 147 or 165. 

Sincerely, 

u+_l!.~ 

TAKE IN 1\ M£RifP.4. PRIDE 1 ~ upervi sor 

~ · rnspecHmf'Gro 
A-38

OSM 723 - 6 

Revised 03/19/92 Page 1 of 1 

Assessor: DE 

Date: 08/02/.05 

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET 

PERMIT # ,3fJOO 

NAME OF COMPANY: 

Violation 1 of 2 

1 . History of Previous Violations 

2. Seriousness 

A. (1) Probability of Occurrence 

(2) Extent of Damage 

Potential or Actual 

B. Obstruction to Enforcement 

3. Negligence 

4 . Good Faith 

TOTAL POINTS 

POINTS 

0 

15 

l3 

0 

12 

40 

ASSESSMENT 2200.00 

Citation #: NOS-090-100-003 

Violation 2 of 2 

1. History of Previous Vi olations 

2. Seriousness 

A. (1) Probability of Occurrence 

(2 ) Extent of Damage 

Potential or Actual 

B. obstruction to Enforcement 

3. Negli gence 

4. Good Faith 

TOTAL POINTS 

POIN'l 

0 

15 

1 1 

0 

16 

42 

ASSESSMENT 2420.00 
EXHIBIT F-2 

A-39

May4, 2008 

NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT (NOPA) 

RE: Notice of Violation N08-020-179-001, "McKinley mine", Federal Permit NM-00011 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Under the authority of THE SURF ACE MINING CONTROL AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 

1977, 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq., on April24, 2008, you were served; Notice of Violation 

NOS-020-179-001 via certified mail. 

Office of Surface Mining regulations at 30 CFR PART 845 establish a point system to evaluate 

each violation cited in a Notice of Violation or Cessation Order. In deciding whether to propose 

a penalty for a violation cited in a Notice of Violation, the permittee's history of previous 

violations, the seriousness of the violation, and the degree of negligence involved in the violation 

are considered. If the permittee has abated the violation by the time the proposed assessment is 

prepared, good faith in complying may also be considered. Under the point system, a penalty is 

not required when a violation is assigned a total of 30 points or less. 

However, in accordance with the regulations under 30 CFR 845.12(c) this office will exercise its 

discretion to assess a penalty for violations assigned 30 points or less, when points assigned 

under 30 CFR 845.13 to a particular violation reach a certain threshold limit, in any one of the 

following categories: "History" 12 or more points, "Seriousness" 21 or more points, 

"Obstruction" 12 or more points, and "Negligence" 15 or more points. 

Therefore, in accordance with 30 CFR Part 845, and the criteria above, you are hereby issued a 

proposed civil penalty assessment for this violation, in the amount of$1,100.00 

Carefully read this letter and the enclosed information concerning the requirements for payment 

of civil penalty assessments. Information regarding the requirements for obtaining informal and 

formal administrative review of the proposed penalty is also enclosed. 
A-40

If the enclosed Assessment Worksheet shows that good faith in achieving compliance was not 

considered in making the assessment, you may request a modified assessment based on 

consideration of good faith. To request consideration of good faith, you must show that 

extraordinary measures were taken to abate the violation(s) in the shortest possible time and that 

abatement was achieved before the time set for abatement. Your request should be made in 

writing, after the violation(s) have been abated, and should be addressed to the Program Support 

Division, at the address above. 

If you have any questions, you may call Carl R. Johnston, N01thwest Branch, at (303) 293-5038. 

Sincerely, 

James Fulton, Chief 

Denver Field Division 

enclosures 

cc: OSM Albuquerque Field Office 

OSM -Farmington Area Office 

BLM Farmington District Office 

BIA Navajo Area Office 

Navajo Nation Mineral Department 
A-41

Assessor#:~ Page ..L of _l 

ASSESSMENT EXPLANATION 

NOV # N08-020-l79-00 l 

Company Name I Permittee: _ """'/l '-'@1 '""' ~'"'""---....:..:=-=--'--"-"---

Violation# ..L of~ 

Nature of Violation: Conducting blasting operations using an unlicensed blaster. 

Provision Violated: 30 CFR 955.2 

History of Previous Violations: 

NONE 

Seriousness: (Part A or B) 

A. Event the standard was designed to prevent: 

Damage to Public and Private Property and Endangerment to the Public's Health and 

Safety 

(I) Probability of Occurrence: 

Damage to Public and Private Property and Endangerment to the Public's Health and 

Safety, as a result of the permittee's failure to employ a certified I licensed blaster for a 

shot on February 2, 2008, has an insignificant change of occurrence. Consequently the 

point scale for "Insignificant Chance of Occurrence" (0-4 pts) is warranted and 1 point is 

assigned. 

(2) Extent of Actual or Potential Damage: 

The Inspector did not indicate in his repm1 the exact location of the February 2, 2008, 

blast relative to the permit boundary other than stating the blast was in Pit l4C. No shot 

record for the blast was provided to indicate whether or not the blast was within the limits 

established by the regulations. However potential damage(s) would include the breakage 

of windows, cracking of walls and plaster, etc., at the residence as a result of permitting 

an uncertified I unlicensed to supervise the blast. Any damage to the residence would be 

considered to have occurred off the permit area. Consequently, the lower end of the point 

scale for "off-permit damage" (8-15 pts) is warranted and 8 points are assigned. 

TOTAL Seriousness: 
A-42

Assessor #:_fl._ Page_l_ of _1 

ASSESSMENT EXPLANATION 

NOV # NOS-020-179-00 1 

Company Name I Penni ttee: __,'--'(},_,_ __ "-di-=-7/l-'=-..:....:_ ~""''-'-' -=-- ------"---

Violation # _l_ of~ 

B. Obstruction to Enforcement: 

Negligence: 

Greater Degree of Fault than Negligence. Reckless. The Inspector indicates in his report 

that the blaster in charge of the Febmary 2, 2008, shot did have a blasting license issued 

by the State of New Mexico, however, his certification from OSM to conduct blasting 

operations on Indian lands operations had expired in May 2007. The Inspector also states 

that the permittee had at least three other blasters who hold current OSM certification to 

conduct blasting operations on Indian lands. Blasting is a dangerous operation to be 

conducted by only certified blasters trained in the use of explosives. As such, these 

trained personnel are required to undergo occasional retraining and recertification. 

Consequently, the scale for "greater degree of fault than negligence" (13-25 pts) is 

warranted and 21 points are assigned. 

Good Faith: 

No abatement time or measures were given for this point-in-time violation. 

Consequently, no good faith points can be awarded. 

0 
A-43

ASSESSOR #:_§J_ Page _L of J. 

ASSESSM ENT WORKSHEET 

PERMIT: NM-OOOIJ NOV: N08-020-179-00I 

Company Name I Permittee: _ /JaiJJ --

VIOLATION _L of j_ POTNTS 

I. History of Previous Violations: 

2. Seriousness (Part A (Event) or Part B (Obstruction)) 

A. Event vio lations 

(I) Probability of Occurrence: 

(2) Extent of Actual or Potential Damage: 

TOTAL Event Seriousness: 

B. Obstruction to Enforcement: 

3. Negligence: 

4. Good Faith: 

VIOLATION of 

I. History of Previous Violations: 

2. Seriousness (Part A (Event) or Part B (Obstruction)) 

A. Event violations 

(1) Probability of Occurrence: 

(2) Extent of Actual or Potential Damage: 

TOTAL Event Seriousness: 

B. Obstruction to Enforcement: 

3. Negligence: 

4. Good Faith: 

_ 1 

~ 

_Q 

_0 

TOTAL POTNTS: _.J.Q 

ASSESSMENT: $1,100.00 

POINTS 

NIA 

TOTAL POTNTS: N/A 

ASSESSMENT: N/ A 
EXHIBIT G-1 

A-44

United States Department of the Interior 

•; 6fACEOF SURFACE NITNrnNG 

Reclamation and Enforcement 

530 Gay St., S.W., Suite 500 

Knoxville, TN 37902 

·(Date) 

REQUEST FOR I NFORMAL ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE 

Wilfred R. Kl imas, Supervisor 

Inspecti on Group 

OSMRE - Knoxville Field Office 

530 Gay Street, S.W., Suite 500 

Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 

RE: Mlx~<t.frl\ (?)y> e... 

CITATION NO . NOS-09 0 - 100-003 

Dear Mr. Klimas: 

PERMI T NO. J(J()O 

RECEIVED 

AUG 3 , 2f!~ '3 

OSM KNOXVILLE 

FIELD OFFICE 

Pursuant to 30 CFR 723. 1 8 or 30 CFR 845 . 18, I request a conference on 

behalf of --~· d~~~~ ~~~~-~~~ ~~------------------------------­ / u 

to review the proposed assessment for violations of the reference citation. 

My telephone number is.J~ .... Cil__;;e..;;;_#_· ___ -=- • 

(Name and Title of Requestor) 

(Address of Requestor) 

Provided your request is received withi n 30 days of the date the proposed 

assessment or rea ssessment is received, as provided in 30 CFR 723.18 (a) or 

30 CFR 845. 1 8(a), you will be conta c t ed by a conference officer in order to 

arrange the time and p l ace of t he conference. Only the viol ations assessed 

a proposed penalty will be revi ewed . 

Pursuant to 30 CFR 845. 18(b) (2} , at l east 5 days prior to the conference, 

notice of the time and p l ace of the conference must. be posted at the Office of 

Surface Mining Reclamation and ~t(t! ~~at has. jurisdiction 

ov:er the mine. Any person has RAfitER~~·· · the conference. 
EXHIBIT G-2 

A-45

CONFERENCE REQUEST FORM 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Oflice of Surface Mining 

P.O. Box 46667 

Denver, CO 80201-6667 

ATTENTION: Carl R. Johnston, Northwest Branch 

Program Support Division 

FAX. to: 303-293-5032 followed by a signed original request. 

Pursuant to 30 CFR 845. 18, I request a conference to review the proposed assess!llent for 

violations of Notice of Violation # N08-020-179-001. 

My telephone number ..._-.~--_______ _ 

(Signature) (Date) 

(Please Print Name and Title) 

(Name of Pennittee or Operator) 

(Street Address or PO Box) 

(City, State, Zip Code) 

Provided your request is r eceived within 30 days as provided in 30 CFR 845.18, you will be 

contacted by a conference officer in order to arrange the time and place of the conference. 

Pursuant to 30 CFR 845.18(b )(2), at least 5 days prior to the conference, OSM wi II post notice of 

the time and place of the conference at the OSM field office that has jurisdiction over the mine. 

Any person has the right to participate in the conference. 

Please keep a copy of the completed for m for your files. 
A-46

PAYMENT AND APPEAL INFORMATION 

I. PAYMENT PROCEDURES 

Unless you request an informal assessment conference or formal administrative review of the 

penalty in accordance with the instructions set forth below, the proposed civil penalty assessed in 

the accompanying NOTICE OF PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT (NOPA) will be 

re-issued as a FINAL ORDER thirty (30) days after receipt of this letter. If there is a pending 

appeal for review of the citation under 30 CFR 843.16, the FINAL ORDER will be issued after 

conclusion of the appeal. Payment must be received by the Office of Surface Mining (OSM), 

Collections Team, within 30 days after the issuance of the FINAL ORDER or the debt will be 

considered delinquent and the following sequence of charges will be applied to your account: (1) 

Interest calculated at the current Treasury rate will be assessed from the day when payment of the 

civil penalty was first due. (2) Administrative costs will be incurred in the processing and 

handling of the delinquent debt, such as the cost of referring the account to a debt collection 

company. (3) If any portion of the civil penalty remains unpaid ninety (90) days after the 

assessment is first due, you will be subject to a 4 percent penalty per year upon the balance due 

calculated from the first day of delinquency. This penalty will accrue at the rate of one-half of 

one percent for each month or portion thereof that the balance remains unpaid. 

Payment should be made by check or money order, payable to the "Office of Surface Mining" 

and mailed to: 

Office of Surface Mining 

PO Box 979068 

StLouis, MO 63197-9000 

Payments by courier delivery should be sent to: 

U.S. Bank 

Government Lockbox 979068 

I 005 Convention Plaza 

SL-MO-C2-GL 

St. Louis, MO 63101 

314-418-1028 

To assure proper credit for your payment, please note on your check or money order the 

citation number for which payment is being made. If payment of the civil penalty in a lump 

sum will result in severe financial hardship please contact a collection specialist immediately at 

(303) 236-0330 to discuss installment terms. 

Please note that, even though payment is not delinquent until 30 days after the assessment 

becomes a Final Order, a record of this civil penalty will be placed on the Applicant Violator 

System (A VS) at the time a Final Order is issued. Placement on A VS may block the issuance of 

any pending permit. 
A-47

Federal law also authorizes the collection of the debt (created by issuance of a Final Order) by 

administrative offset against any payments or refunds due you from the Federal Government. 

You would have opportunity to inspect and copy OSM records pertaining to this debt, and/or 

enter into a written agreement with OSM to repay th is debt, before such offset occurs. 

IJ. TO REQUEST AN INFORMAL ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE 

If you wish an informal assessment conference with a representative ofOSM to review the 

amount of this proposed assessment, you must submit a written request within thirty (30) days 

afier you receive this letter as provided at 30 CFR 845.18(a) [30 CFR 725.18(a) for interim 

program operations]. You may use the enclosed form to request an informal assessment 

conference by sending your request to: 

Carl R. Johnston, Northwest Branch 

Office of Surface Mining 

P.O. Box 46667 

Denver, CO 80201-666 7 

or by telecopying to the number on the form. 

III. TO REQUEST A FORMAL HEARING 

If you wish a forma l hearing before an Administrative Law Judge under Section 518 of SMCRA 

[30 U.S.C. 1268) (30 CFR 845.19) to contest either the proposed penalty assessment or the fact 

of the violation, or both, you must file a Petition for Review together with payment for the full 

amount of the civil penalty assessed. Your payment will be deposited in an escrow account until 

there is a final decision on the amount, if any, that is due. The fact of the violation may not be 

contested if it has been previously decided in a formal administrative review pursuant to 30 CFR 

843.16. The dates for filing the Petition for Review are: (1) Ifyou are not requesting an informal 

assessment conference, you have 30 days from receipt of this letter to file the Petition for Review 

with escrow payment; and (2) If an informal assessment conference has been held, you have 30 

days from receipt of the conclusion of the conference to file the Petition for Review with the 

escrow payment. 

Your escrow payment must be made by check or money order payable to the "Office of Surface 

Mining'' In order to assure proper credit for your payment, please write the number of the 

NOV or CO and the pertinent violations(s) on the front of the check or draft. Attach the 

draft or check to the petition and send to: 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Office of Hearings and Appeals 

801 N. Quincy Street 

Arlington, Virginia 22203 

The requirements for the contents of the Petition for Review are set forth at 43 CFR 4.1152. 
A-48

If you wish a hearing to contest some, but not all, of the assessed penalties under Section 518, 

you must indicate the specific violation(s) for which you want a hearing. You must pay into 

escrow the proposed penalty for those violations. However, with respect to the uncontested 

penalties, you must pay them within 30 days ailer the assessment becoming a Final Order to 

avoid the additional charges described in Section I. 

If it is determined through administrative review of the proposed penalty that no violation 

occurred, or that the amount of the penalty should be reduced, OSM will refund the amount with 

appropriate interest. However, all refunds are subject to administrative offset for any other 

outstanding civil penalty debts and/or delinquent reclamation fe.es you may owe. You would 

have opportunity to inspect and copy OSM records pertaining to such other debt, and/or enter 

into a written agreement with OSM to repay such other debt, before such offset would occur. 

Please be advised that failure to forward the amount of the proposed assessment along with the 

Petition for Review under Section 518 of SMCRA will result in a dismissal of your Petition. 

Since you are requesting a fom1al hearing, you may want to have an attorney assist you in the 

presentation of your case. However, you are entitled to represent yourself. 

Locations for hearings arc selected by the Administrative Law Judge with due regard for the 

convenience of the parties and witnesses. 
EXHIBIT H

A-49

Mr. Todd j<.... 

Manager 

( 

United States Department of the Interior 

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING 

Reclamation and Enforcement 

710 Locust Street, Second Floor 

Knoxville, TN 37902 

September 7, 2005 

CONFERENCEREQUESTAPPROVAL 

Palmer, 1N 37365 

Subject: C~-:J- A ~Al ~ 

Violation: 1 of 1 of N05-090-1 00-003 

Permit: 3Wu 

Dear Mr. I<.... 

This is in response to your letter dated August 30, 2005, in which you requested a conference. 

Your request for the conference has been granted. One of our Conference Officers will be 

contacting you to schedule the conference. If you have questions or need assistance, please call 

me at (865) 545-4103, extension 186. 

Sincerely, 

Brenda A. Summerour 

Secretary 

TAKE PRIDE •i:F:J ~ IN ftMERICA · 
EXHIBIT I

A-50

• 

( 

United States Department of the Interior 

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING 

Reclamation and Enforcement 

. 710 Locust Street, Second Floor 

Knoxville, TN 37902 

September 8, 2005 

Mr. ToddK 

Palmer, Tennessee 37365 

Subject: 

Dear Mr. K 

Cblly% ~~~ ~"~~ hl e.,. . 

Violation N'o: 1 of 1 ofN05-090-1 00-003 

Permit: 3QJO 

You have been scheduled for an assessment conference on the above referenced citation for 

September 21, 2005 at 9:00a.m. at the following address: 

Department of the Interior 

Office of Surface Mining 

John J. Duncan Federal Building 

710 Locust Street, Second Floor 

Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 

Please be prepared to submit any material for consideration before or during the conference that 

addresses the violation or the penalty. You may be prepared to fmalize the case at the 

conclusion of the conference that may include making payment for the agreed penalty. This 

conference may be held in person, by telephone, or by submitting any written material received 

by the scheduled conference date. Any person has a right to attend and participate in the 

conference. 

If it is necessary to reschedule the confereqce due to circ\llllstances b_yyond your control, please 

contact me at (865) 545-4103, extension 165. Only one rescheduling will be considered. 

Sincerely, 

flJ~ !Yl'~ow~ Ron McDowell 

Assessment Conference Officer 

TAKE PRIDE •ft::: ~ 

INAMERICA ~ 
EXHIBIT J-1 

A-51

Mr./Ms. 

[Title] 

[Address] 

[Date] 

CONCLUSION OF CONFERENCE 

RE: Notice of Violation N00-000-000-000, "[Mine Name]," Federal Permit 00-00000 

Dear Mr./Ms: 

This letter formally concludes the conference relating to the above violation. 

After reviewing all of the information supplied to me at the conference and all other information 

available to me concerning the above violation, pursuant to 30 CFR §845, I am [raising, 

lowering, or affirming] the proposed assessment andEacating the penaltYJas shown on the 

attached Assessment Conference Report. · 

Office of Surface Mining regulations at 30 CFR PART 845 establish a point system to evaluate 

each violation cited in a Notice of Violation (NOV) or Cessation Order (CO). In deciding 

whether to propose a penalty for a violation cited in an NOV, the pem1ittee's history of previous 

violations, the seriousness of the violation, and the degree of negligence involved in the violation 

are considered. If the permittee has abated the violation by the time the proposed assessment is 

prepared, good faith in complying may also be considered. Under the point system, a penalty is 

not required when a violation is assigned a total of 30 points or less. 

However, in accordance with the regulations under 30 CFR §845.12(c), this office will exercise 

its discretion to assess a penalty for violations assigned 30 points or less when points assigned 

under 30 CFR §845.13 to a particular violation reach a certain threshold limit in any one of the 

following categories: 12 or more points for "History," 21 or more points for "Seriousness," 12 

or more points for "Obstruction," and 15 or more points for "Negligence." 

The Assessment Conference Report shows the dollar amount of the civil penalty associated with 

each violation for which the conference was held and reflects changes resulting from the 

conference. It also shows the point values assigned for the proposed assessment and the point 

values assigned as a result of the conference. 
A-52

If you wish a formal hearing to contest the revised assessment, you must submit a petition for 

review within 30 days after the date you receive this letter to: 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Office of Hearings and Appeals 

801 North Quincy Street 

Arlington, VA 22203 

In your petition, you may include a request for a formal hearing on the fact of the violation if you 

have not previously been granted or denied such a hearing. 

Your petition must be accompanied by a check or money order payable to "Office of Surface 

Mining" in an amount equal to the total of the revised assessment for which you are requesting a 

hearing. If you fail to submit the check or money order with your petition, or if the check is 

returned for nonpayment, or if the check or money order is written for an amount less than the 

proposed assessment, you may forfeit your right to a hearing. To assure proper credit of your 

payment, you must note on your check or money order the violation for which the contested 

assessment is being made. 

The proceeds of your check or money order will be held in escrow and if, after administrative or 

judicial review, it is found that there was no violation or that the proposed penalty was too high, 

the balance will be refunded to you with interest at the rate of 5 percent or at the prevailing 

Department of the Treasury rate, whichever is greater. 

If you do not make a timely request for a hearing with respect to a violation, the proposed 

assessment for that violation will become final and will be due and payable within 30 days from 

the receipt of this letter. Payments should be made by check or money order payable to the 

"Office of Surface Mining" and sent to: 

Office of Surface Mining 

PO Box 979068 

StLouis MO 63 197-9000 

For courier service, send payments to: 

U.S. Bank 

Government Lockbox 979068 

1005 Convention Plaza 

SL-MO-C2-GL 

St. Louis, MO 63 101 

314-418-1028 

2 
A-53

To assure proper credit of your payment, you must note on the check or money order the 

violation for which payment is being made. 

Please read this letter carefully. If you have a question which is not answered by this letter, you 

may call me at (000) 000-0000. 

Enclosures 

Sincerely, 

[Name of Conference Officer] 

Assessment Conference Officer 

cc: [OSM Field Offices and other applicable Government Offices] 

3 
A-54

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERlOR 

OFFICE OF SURF ACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT 

WESTERN REGIONAL COORDINATING CENTER 

P.O. Box 46667 

DENVER, COLORADO 80201-6667 

ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE REPORT 

Company Name: [Name ofCompany) 

Permit#: 00-00000 

Citation: N00-000-000-000 

Type of Conference: Telephone 

Date of Conference: [Date] 

Person(s) in Attendance 

[Attendee's Name] [Attendee's Title] 

[Attendee's Name] [Attendee's Title] 

Violation Number Amount of Assessment as Revised 

j_ of j_ $000.00 

Total: VACATE PENALTY 

Approved: ------------ - (Signature of Conference Officer) (Date) 

Pagel of? 
A-55

ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE REPORT 

(Continued) 

Permittee: [Name of Company] 

PenrrUt #:00-00000 

Citation: N00-000-000-000 

Violation: 1 of 1 

Violation: 1 of I 

1. Nature of Violation: Failure to maintain a diversion. 

(a) Provisions Violated: 30 CFR §816.43(a)(2)(i) and (iii) 

(b) Date(s) for Abatement: 00/00/00 and 00/00/00 (modified to 00/00/00) 

(c) Date Reinspected: 00100100 

(d) Date of Termination: 00100100 

2. Conference 

(a) History/Previous Violation 

(b) Seriousness 

(I) Probability of Occurrence 

Extent of Damage 

(2) Obstruction to Enforcement 

(c) Negligence 

(d) Good Faith 

Total Points: 

Total Amount of Assessment: 

Proposed 

Assessment 

_QQ_ 

_QQ_ 

NA 

_QQ_ 

_QQ_ 

_QQ_ 

$0000.00 

Conference 

Assessment 

_QQ_ 

_QQ_ 

NA 

_QQ_ 

_QQ_ 

_QQ_ 

$000.00 

VACATE PENALTY: The revised penalty assessment of$000.00 is vacated because (l) the 

assessment is less than 30 points and (2) none of the threshold limits in any one of the categories 

for "History," "Seriousness," or "Negligence" has been reached. 

Page 2 of? 
A-56

ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE REPORT 

(Continued) 

Permittee: [Name of Company] 

Permit#: 00-00000 

Citation: N00-000-000-000 

Violation: 1 of 1 

3. Narrative: 

HISTORY (0 points) 

The history points for this violation include the appropriate past violations for the entire 

surface coal mining operation. 

PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE (0 points) 

EXTENT OF ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL DAMAGE (0 points) 

NEGLIGENCE (0 points) 

GOOD FAITH (0 points) 

The violation was not abated at the time the assessment was made. Consequently, good 

faith points were not considered. 

Good faith points are awarded if abatement is achieved as rapidly as possible after 

notification of the violation by using extraordinary measures. Examples of such 

measures include initiative, continued effort, use of extra equipment and/or personnel, 

interrupted coal production, and working beyond normal hours. Rapid compliance means 

that the abatement occurred as quickly as possible, based on unique circumstances 

relating to the case, and that abatement was achieved prior to the time for abatement 

appearing on the NOV or prior to any modified time for abatement as determined by the 

inspector who wrote the NOV. To award good faith, there must be evidence that 

extraordinary measures were used in addition to rapid compliance. Applicable 

assessment guidance further states that good faith points are designed to motivate the 

operator to achieve compliance after notification of the violation. 

Page 3 of? 
EXHIBIT J-2 

A-57

CONCLUSION OF CONFERENCE 

Permittee 

Company 

Street or P.O. Box 

City, State and Zip cqde 

Re: Assessment Conference for: 

Dear Mr. 

Violation No. 1 of of 

Permit: 

This letter formally concludes the conference relating to the above violation. 

After reviewing all of the information supplied to me at the conference and all other information 

available to me concerning the above violation, pursuant to 30 CFR Part 845, I am affirming the 

assessment for the above violation as shown on the attached Assessment Conference Report. 

The Assessment Conference Report shows the dollar amount of the civil penalty associated with 

each citation for which the conference was held and reflects changes, if any, resulting from the 

conference. It also shows the point values assigned for the proposed assessment and the point 

values assigned as a result. of the conference. 

If you wish a formal hearing to contest the affirmed assessment, you must submit a petition for 

review within 30 days after the date you receive this letter to: 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Office of Hearings and Appeals 

801 North Quincy Street 

Arlington, Virginia 22203 

In your petition, you may include a request for a formal hearing on the fact of the violation if you 

have not previously been granted or denied such a hearing. Your petition must be accompanied 

by a check or mpney order payable to "Assessment Office--OSM" in an amount equal to the total 

of the affirmed assessment for which you are requesting a hearing. If you fail to submit the 

check or money order with your petition, or if the check is returned for nonpayment, or if the 

check or money order is written for an amount less than the proposed assessment, you may 

forfeit your right to a hearing. 
A-58

The proceeds of your check or money order will be held in escrow and if, after administrative or 

judicial review, it is found that there was no violation or that the proposed penalty was too high, 

the balance will be refunded to you with interest at the rate of 6 percent or at the prevailing 

Department of the TreaSury rate, whichever is greater. 

If you do not make a timely request for a hearing with respect to a violation, the proposed 

assessment for that violation will become final and will be due and payable within 30 days from 

the receipt of this letter. Payments should be made by check or money order payable to 

"Assessment Office--OSM" and sent to: 

Office of Surface Mining 

PO Box 979068 

StLouis MO 63197-9000 

To assure proper credit of your payment. you must note on the check or money order the 

violations for which payment is being made. 

Please read this letter carefully. If you have a question that is not answered by this Jetter, you 

may call me at ( 865) 545 4103. 

Sincerely, 

Conference Officer 

Enclosure 

cc: 
EXHIBIT J-3 

A-59

United States Department of the Interior 

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINlNG 

Reclamation and Enforcement 

7 10 Locust Street, Second Floor 

Knoxville, 1N 37902 

t-llV 2 9 200i 

CONCLUSION OF CONFERENCE 

Re: Assessment Conference for: ~~~l)'l <:::..__ 

Violation No.: 1 of2 ofNOS-090-100-003(2) 

Permit: 3d'o() 

DearMr.:K 

This letter formally concludes the conference relating to the above violation.· 

After reviewing all of the information supplied to me at the conference and all other information 

available to me concerning the above violation, pursuant to 30 CFR Part 845, I am revising the 

assessment for the above mentioned violation as shown on the attached Assessment Conference 

Report. 

The Assessment Conference Report shows the dollar amount of the il penalty associated with 

each violation for which the conference was held and reflects changes, if any; resulting from the 

conference. It also shows the point values assigned for the proposed assessment and the point 

values assigned as a result of the conference. 

As you chose to resolve this matter through a Consent Assessment of Civil Penalty (Full 

Payment) and payment was received, this matter has been settled. If you have any questions 

which are not answered by this letter, you may call me at (865) 545-410~, ext. 165. 

Sincerely, 

Ron McDowell 

Assessment Conference Officer 

Enclosure: 

Copy of signed Consent Assessment of Civil Penalty (Full Payment) 

TAKE PRIDE •~irf:? "t 

INAMERICA ~ 
A-60

ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE REPORT 

Page 1 of 3 

Knoxville Field Office 

Company Name: (~~(}_d'"/7\ e._ ,. 

Permit No: 3600 

Citation No: N05-090-1 00-003 . 

Type of Conferenc.e ~ in person .A_ telephone ~ letter_ 

Conference Started: September 21, 2005 at 9:00AM 

Conference Ended: September 21,2005 at I 0:15AM 

Persons in Attendance 

Todd K __ Manager 

Ron McDowell Conference Officer 

Amount of Assessment 

Violation No: 

I 

2 

Approved: -. ;z....;........:.o-Vt-_--;/11'-'--t/..ILIA~'{JC~~-=..~..ei/"'<-'-­ (Stgnature of Conference Officer) 

As Revised 

$ 1,430.00 

$ 1.430.00 

$. _____ _ 

$ _____ _ 

$ _____ _ 

$~-----

$ _____ _ 

Date: l·!DV I. 7 2005 

-,-
A-61

ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE REPORT 

(Continued) 

Company Name:· c~'!..yA"I'11 ePermit No: 3GtTO 

Citation No: NOS-090-l 00-003 

Violation 1 of2 

3. Narrative: 

Page 2a of3 

(Explanation of changes in assignment of points and information presented at the conference.) 

IMP ACT: Stream discoloration and sedimentation 

HISTORY: No information was submitted to change the assignment of points. 

PROBABILITY: Fifteen points, occurred event, were assigned. The company representative 

produced no information to change the points assessed for this category. 

The mine manager agrees the receiving stream was turned a gray color by the discharge from 

sediment basin 001. 

EXTENT: Thirteen points, damage extending outside the permit area, were assessed. 

The company representative contends the points assigned should be reduced. 

Mine manager contends he conducted his own sampling of discharge and the laboratory analysis 

showed a suspended solids level of only 24mg/l and not 44mg/l as indicated by the OSM sample. 

Also, he contends the company actually improved the quality of water to the recei_ving stream. 

Prior to mining, the company collected and hauled 23 tons of trash from the creek bed resulting 

in a more natura1 streambed and improved quality of flow. Findings: Both the OSM stream 

sample analysis and operator's sample analysis indicate a suspended solids level higher than the 

receiving stream. Because the basin discharge makes up a significant portion of the receiving 

stream flow at this point, the elevated level of suspended solids at discharge as indicated by 

either sample (44mg/l or 24 mg/1 vs 5 mg/Fupstream) would likely result (and actually did result) 

in a adverse coloration and water qua1ity impact. Both OSM inspector and operator agree the 

color change was evident. Also, sediment was was documented observed in the streambed below 

the basin 001 discharge. Streambed coating would adversely affect aquatic species. The 

operator's previous efforts to clean trash from receiving stream indicates a concern for improved 

water quality however this information cannot be considered for a reduction to extent of damage. 

Assessment for extent of damage remains at thirteen points. 
A-62

NEGLIGENCE: Twelve points, high negligence, were assessed. The Mine Manager contends 

the points assigned to this category should be reduced. He contends the suspended solids 

problem exists because the basin was located and constructed in a creek bottom where alluvial 

material exists. Also, the basin has internal seeps in the bottom which cause sediments pumped 

from the mine entry box cut to suspend. He contends the company did not ignore the problem 

prior to issuance of the violation. The company submitted a permit revision to address the 

problem. A company representative also checked the condition of in-pond waters each morning, 

before work began, to evaluate for needed treatments. Mine manager says company realized this 

permit could not be mined without repeatedly having the same situation occur and resulting in 

gray water discharges, therefore, active mining has been indefinitely suspended. He further 

explained that mine activity in the box cut cannot avoid suspended solids laden water which 

must be pumped to basin 00 I. Mining has been stopped to avoid repeatedly contaminating the 

stream and to avoid the resulting enforcement actions. Findings: The conference manual 

guidance allows a lower level of negligence when the operator was actively working to correct 

the problem when the violation was issued. The information provided above indicates the 

operator was working to address the situation when the violation was issued. However, 

information provided by the inspector indicates the permit revision to address impacts to 

receiving stream was previously ordered by the inspector. Also, inspector indicates the violation 

was issued because the operator was not diligent in implementing the approved treatment 

measures after permit revision was approved. 

GOOD FAITH: The violation was written on July 14,2005 with a specified abatement date of 

August 17,2005 or a period of 34 days. The violation was terminated by OSM on the effective 

date of July 25, 2005 or a period of eleven days from violation issuance. Therefore, the violation 

was abated by the company within 32% of the allowed abatement period. In accordance with the 

OSM Conference Manual, the operator is eligible for a reduction of7 points for good faith efforts 

with. submission of operator's statement of extraordinary measirres taken to abate. Operator 

submitted the required statement which was received by OSM KFO on October 11, 2005. The 

OSM issuing inspector agrees with awarding of good faith points. 

SETTLEMENT: Telephoned Mine Manager, Todd K on October 24, 2005, to explain 

conference conclusions, as described above, resulting in a assessement point reduction to 33 and 

corresponding penalty reduction to $1,430.00. Mr. K was offered and agreed to settle the 

penalty for violation #I for this amount. 
A-63

ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE REPORT 

(Continued) 

Company Name: «r(f-'l\uA' e._ 

Permit No: 3<kb 

1. Citation No: N05-090-1 00-003 

Violation 1 of 1 

Page 2 of3 

(a) Nature ofVio1ation: Failure to prevent additional contributions of suspended solids to 

stream flow outside the permit area; basin 001 discharge had colored the receiving stream gray. 

(b) Date for Abatement: 

2. Conference Result 

(a) History/Prev. Violation 

(b) Seriousness 

(1) Probability of 

Occurrence 

Extent of Damage 

(2) Obstruction to 

Enforcement 

(c) Negligence 

(d) Good Faith 

TOTAL POINTS 

TOTAL AMOUNT 

ASSESSMENT 

August 17, 2005 Date Served: July 14,2005 

Date of Termination: July 25, 2005 

Proposed 

Assessment 

0 

15 

13 

12 

0 

40 

$ . 2.200.00 

Conference 

Assessment 

0 

15 

13::;.__ 

12 

-7 

33 

1.430.00 
A-64

ASSESSl\1ENT CONFERENCE REPORT 

(Continued) 

Company Name: ~J'f\"~ e__ 

Permit No: JOO"O 

1. Citation No: NOS-090-1 00-003 

Violation 2 of2 

Page 2!, of3 

(a) Nature of Violation: Failure to follow the approved plans for underground development 

waste storage. The operator allowed underground development waste to be hauled off the permit. 

(b) Date for Abatement: August 17, 200'5 

2. Conference Result 

(a) History/Prev. Violation 

(b) Seriousness 

(1) Probability of 

Occurrence 

Extent of Damage 

(2) Obstruction to 

Enforcement 

(c) Negligence 

(d) Good Faith 

TOTAL POINTS 

TOTAL AMOUNT 

ASSESSl\1ENT 

'· 

Date Served: July 14, 2005 

Date of Termination: July 29, 2005 

Proposed 

· Assessment 

0 

15 

11 

16 

42 

$ . 2420.00 

Conference 

Assessment 

0 

15 

8 

16 

-6 

33 

$ 1 430.00 
A-65

ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE REPORT 

(Continued) 

CompanyName: C~Cf l\d/he._. 

Permit No: 6()00 

Citation No: NOS-090-100-003 

Violation 2 of2 

3. Narrative: 

Page_lb of3 

(Explanation of changes in assignment of points and information presented at the conference.) 

IMPACT: Off Permit disturbance with no environmental controls 

HISTORY: This permit has no points assigned for history 

PROBABILITY: No information was submitted to change the points assessed for this category. 

The operator agrees the underground development waste was hauled off the approved permit 

area. 

EXTENT: Operator contends the points assessed for this category should be reduced from 11 

points. Operator indicated the underground development waste was only allowed to remain off 

permit for a total of five days before the material was picked up and hauled back to the permit 

area. Operator also indicates that during this five day period no rainfall events occurred, 

therefore, no runoff could have drained from the waste into any receiving stream. The operator 

produced color photographs of the off permit disturbance showing the material which was being 

used to construct a fann access road. He also produced a color photograph showing the same 

affected area after this material was picked up and hauled away showing no waste material 

remained on the off permit site. Findings: Points for this category should be reduced from 11 to 

8. Information submitted indicates very little, if any, damage actually resulted from the material 

being placed off the permit. Material only remained off site for a 5 day period. Information 

submitted indicates no rainfall events occurred over this period thereby reducing chances for 

contaminated runoff to reach the receiving stream. 

NEGLIGENCE: Operator contends the points assessed for this category should be reduced. He 

indicates the area permitted for waste dumping was found to have evidence of subsidence after 

the area was cleared of vegetative growth. The operator believed placing the material in this area 

would cause problems with drainage flow due to the subsidence and its affects on flow. The 

operator was not aware taking the material off permit would present a problem. Findings: The 
A-66

above information does not warrant a reduction of the assessed points. Hauling mine waste 

material off permit to a unpermitted location with no environmental controls is disregarding an 

obvious high risk of environmental harm. 

GOOD FAITH: The violation was written on July 14, 2005 with a specified abatement date of 

August 17, 2005 or a period of 34 days. The violation was terminated by OSM on the effective 

date of July 29, 2005 or a period of 15 days from violation issuance. Therefore, the violation was 

abated by the company within 44% of the allowed abatement period. In accordance with the 

OSM Conference Manual, the operator is eligible for a reduction of 6 points for good faith efforts 

with submission of operator's statement of extraordinary measures taken to abate. The operator 

submitted the required statement which was received by OSM KFO on October 11,2005. The 

OSM issuing inspector agrees with awarding of good faith points. 

SEITLEMENT: Telephoned Mine Manager, Todd Kiscaden on October 24,2005 to explain 

conference conclusions, as described above, resulting in a assessment point reduction to 33 and 

corresponding penalty reduction to $1,430.00. Mr. Kiscaden was offered and agreed to settle the 

penalty for violation #2 for this amount. 
EXHIBIT J-4 

A-67

United States Department of the Interior 

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING 

Reclamation and Enforcement 

710 Locust Street, Second Floor 

Knoxville, TN 37902 

October 25, 2005 

c~~l\a~ e.--

Mr. Todd K . Manager 

Abdington, VA 24210 

Re: Assessment Conference for: t~ll J-/ld"/71 ~ '· 

Violation Nos. 1 of2 ofN05-090-100-003(2) 

Perrnit: 3«10 

Dear Mr. K . 

This confirms our conference of September 21, 2005 and settlement of above referenced 

citation. 

Attached are two copies of a Consent Assessment of Civil Penalty (Full Payment) for 

signature. The signed agreements should be returned within ten (10) days from receipt of this 

letter to: 

Office of Surface Mining 

John J. Duncan Federal Building 

710 Locust Street, Second Floor 

Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 

Attention: Assessment Conference Officer 

A check or money order in the amount of $2,860.00 should accompany the signed 

agreements. Upon receipt of the signed agreements and the full payment, acknowledgment 

will be made and one copy will be returned to you as receipt of full payment. 

If you have any questions, please call me at (865) 545-4103, extension.165. 

Sincerely, 

Ron McDowell 

Assessment Conference Officer 

Enclosure: 

2 copies Consent Assessment of Civil Penalty (Full Payment) 

TAKE PRIDE •RJ;::, ~ INAMERICA 
A-68

United States Department of the Interior 

OARCEOFSURFACE~G 

Reclamation and Enforcement 

710 Locust Street, Second Floor 

Knoxville, TN 37902 

NOV No.: NOS-090-100-003(2) 

CONSENT ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTY 

(Full Payment) 

TIDS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between~.-· _____ _ 

("the permittee") and the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 

("OSM"), U.S. Department of the Interior. 

WHEREAS, pursuant to its authority under the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977 ("the Act") and regulations promulgated thereunder, OSM has 

issued to the Permittee, Notice ofViolation (NOV) No.NOS-090-1 00-003(2), charging the 

Permittee with one or more violations of said Act and regulations at the Permittee's surface 

coal mining operation in Grundy County, Tennessee, operated under Permit No. 3115; and 

WHEREAS OSM has proposed a civil penalty assessment in the amount of $4,620.00 

for said NOV ; and 

WHEREAS the parties wish to settle all outstanding issues arising out of the issuance 

of said and proposed assessment; 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises and the conqitions set 

forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 

1. A civil penalty in the amount of $2,860.00 is hereby assessed for the violation cited in 

the above referenced NOV. This assessment is now final, and any rights the Permittee may 

otherwise have had to contest the proposed penalty assessment are expressly waived. 

TAKE PRIDE •ft::: ~ 

INAMERICA ~ 
A-69

1( 

2. Receipt of check no. 11 Z G in the amonnt of Z 1 ",l6D is hereby acknowledged in full 

payment of said penalty assessment (provided any personal check timely clears the financial 

institution on which it is written). 

Name (print or type) 

MIN€ 

Title 

OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING 

s~f}1;~ L_r-5-or 

~and Date 

111 (' [)v Ill(!? ( ( 

Name (print or type name) 

Assessment Conference Officer 

Title 
EXHIBIT K-1 

A-70

INSPECTION GROUP 

ASSESS:MENT CONFERENCE CONCLUSION AUDIT REPORT 

COMPANY NAME: C¥2f=l\tFR1 L... 

CITATION #: NOV NOS-090-1 00-003 violations # 1 and# 2 of 2 

PROPOSED PENALTY$ 4,620.00 RE~~~60.00 

CONFERENCE OFFICER SIGNATURE: ~UfA/~ 

DATE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW: __,O....,c=to::.::b=er'--=26=-=2=00=5'---------

1. Penalty revisions and/or conference conclusions follow guidelines in the 

Assessment Conference Officer's Manuals. 

2. The file contains sufficient information and documentation to support the justification 

presented in the Conclusion of Conference Report. 

3. Payments, if applicable, were transmitted timely and according to established guidelines. 

Comments: 

D~ - 11~ !4--ri 

(Imtt & date) ~ (Initials & date) 

1st Reviewer Concurrence 

Yes No Conference scheduling letter was posted at least five days before the conference was 

X held. 

Conference was held within 60 days of receiving the Conference Request or the end 

X of abatement period. 

X Conference was concluded and approved within 30 days of the conference end date 

Reason for marking an item "No": 
EXHIBIT K-2

A-71