INSPEC25618 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~, File No. 71-232 • -2- • February 9, 1981 Fault ~T Negligence is divided into three categories: ~~ ~~15 1. No prior notification of problem $250 ~/~ 2. Notified of problem in one prior inspection report $500 3. Notification in two or more inspection reports $~96~ ~`ISIi All categories are then totaled and the amount rounded to the nearest whole dollar. NOV 81-1 Seriousness 1. Probability of Damage Occurrence The operator failed to control erosion of the diversion ditch which resulted in a small gully. This erosion rate is in excess f what the system was designed for, therefore, since damage did occur 875 is assessed. 2. Duration and extent a. Duration The duration of this problem is relatively short. This problem was noted previously on December 2, 1980 therefore the excessive erosion occurred ove more than 45 days prior to issuance of the violation. Therefor 3"45.8 assessed. b. Extent of damage This problem resulted in very little da ce the sediment pond contained all the sediment. Therfor 145.80 assessed. Fault Negligence fits this violation rather than recklessness. This problem was in the previous inspection report on December 2, 1980. Therefore, $500 s assessed for negligence. . Total assessment for NOV 81-1 = $1,67.00 NOV 81-2 Seriousness 1. Probability of Damage Occurence Damage is likely to occur if the drainage ditches do not function properly. If a design storm were to occur, the drainage would be uncontrolled, potentially resulting in more sediment r ~ng the pond than it was designed for. Since damage is likely to occu 656.26 s assessed. 2. Duration and Extent d. Duration The duration of potential damage for the undisturbed drainage Ditch C road crossing and shallowness of Ditch I is long since they were in place prior to October 15, 1980. The duration of potential damage