Laserfiche WebLink
.L~ <br />SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JUSTIFICATION <br />NOV C-93-100 <br />Notice of Violation C-93-100 was issued for "Failure to follow <br />the hydrologic monitoring program as approved by the Division. <br />The permit ( Section 2.05.6) requires 4 wells (USGS well, Montoya <br />dug well, hole 29-4 and Engleville Mine discharge) to be sampled <br />once per quarter for field parameters and laboratory analysis as <br />outlined in Appendix 4 of permit." The NOV was issued from the <br />office by Joe Dudash. Wally Erickson, filling in for Joe Dudash, <br />said that what the operator actually sampled was: <br />i) a composite of USGS well and Engleville mine Discharge <br />(EMD). A landowner piped the EMD, through a PVC pipe, into <br />the USGS well creating a composite sample. <br />2) Hole 29-4, and <br />3) Windmill well (mistaken for the Montoya Well). <br />At these locations no field sampling was conducted and only a <br />partial list of the lab analysis was done. The fourth quarter <br />sampling of 1992 was never done. A revised sampling schedule <br />allowed by the Division was not done on time. <br />Mark Kerr, representing Landmark Reclamation, thought he was <br />sampling the correct wells. He thought the well he was sampling, <br />the Windmill well was one of the sampling locations. He did not <br />know the landowner intended to divert the mine discharge to the <br />USGS well. Appendix 4 of the permit is confusing and he thought <br />the lab analysis was complete. No one at the conference had a <br />copy of this appendix though so the sample parameters could not <br />be determined. Mr. Kerr requested a reduction in the proposed <br />civil penalty. The proposed civil penalty was: <br />History $100.00 <br />Seriousness $750.00 <br />Fault $750.00 <br />Good Faith $0.00 <br />Total $1600.00 <br />Seriousness <br />Mr. Kerr stated that although the incorrect wells were sampled <br />there was an upgradient well and a downgradient well to monitor <br />the mines' impact. The mines' impact will be short term since <br />they only opened last fall, operated a couple of months and the <br />site is already reclaimed. Only one sampling time was missed. <br />Based on the information presented in the conference I feel a <br />reduction in the seriousness component to $500.00 is applicable. <br />The extent of damage is small and the duration is short. <br />u t <br />I agree with the proposed penalty. The sampling program was <br />clearly outlined. No field samples were taken as required. <br />To me this represents a high level of negligence. <br />Settlement Agreement Penalty $1350.00 <br />