ENFORCE22982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Justification of Settlement Agreement for NOV C-91-006 Conference Summary NOV C-91-006 was issued, as modified, for "failure to pass all disturbed area drainage through a sediment pond or approved small area exemption system". The situation which led to issuance of the NOV involved a small area (approximately .2 acres) which was a portion of a topsoil storage area from which the stockpile had been removed for reclamation use. Drainage from the larger reclaimed area which included most of the stockpile site was routed through an approved small area exemption sediment control system (a series of hay bale check dams) but drainage from the .2 acre area was not routed through the hay bale checks. The June 4, 1991 inspection report noted that recent rains at the site hatl resulted in some pooling of water in small depressions, but that no erosion had occurred since topsoil had been respread on graded areas earlier in the spring, despite above normal precipitation at the site. Both David Berry representing the Division and Greg Lewicki representing American Shield Coal concurred with this representation of the facts. Mr. Lewicki indicated that he felt the circumstances did not warrant a violation, and he pointed out that the portion of the topsoil stockpile area in question had never been routed through any type of sediment control system and the Division had never expressed a concern with that fact. Both Mr. Berry and Mr. Lewicki indicated that in their opinion, the potential for hydrologic damage was insignificant. The proposed civil penalty was: History: 550 .00 Seriousness: 5250 .00 Fault 5250 .00 Good Faith S 0 .00 Total 5550.00 Fact of Violation I find that a violation did area was not routed through Rule 4.05.2(1), nor was the pond or treatment facility that the area in question w identified as operator from History a concern or the occur. Drainage from a portion of the disturbed a sediment pond or treatment facility pursuant to drainage specifically exempted from the sediment requirements pursuant to Rule 4.05.2(3). The fact as small or that it had not been previously a violation by the Division does not relieve the requirements of the Regulations. Records confirm one violation during the previous year.