My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE23197
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE23197
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:32:36 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:22:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
7/21/1995
Doc Name
NOV C-95-016 WEST ELK MINE PN C-80-007
From
DMG
To
MOUNTAIN COAL CO
Violation No.
CV1995016
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
u <br />July 21, 1995 <br />Page 2 <br />While it may be true that no sediment from the waste pile <br />reached the vegetative buffer area, the violation was written <br />for failure to construct and maintain appropriate and required <br />sediment control measures. The authority to write this <br />violation is given in Rule 4.05.5. <br />2. Drainage Collection Channels <br />This portion of the violation was written for failure to <br />maintain required ditches to convey runoff from the fill <br />surface. Rules 4.10.3 and 4.09.2(7) are clear with <br />respect to this requirement. MCC's own admission in the <br />letter to me (page 3, last paragraph), stating that <br />engineered ditches had not been constructed at this site, <br />further supports my staff's action. <br />In addition, page 2 of the SAE demonstration states that <br />circumvential ditches, DWP-E and DWP-W, are part of a number <br />of best management practices that will be employed at the <br />development waste pile to protect the pile from erosion. The <br />demonstration states that these ditches will be constructed <br />prior to any placement of waste on the pile. Prior to May 10, <br />1995, the Division was only able to inspect the site once <br />without any snow cover. It is my understanding that Ms. <br />Johnston observed a portion of DWP-E being installed during <br />the second day of her June 8th inspection and DWP-W had been <br />installed on the morning of the first day of her June 7th <br />inspection. It appears that the drainage control was not <br />acceptable until further work had been completed by MCC, as <br />required by the abatement for the NOV. It was also noted <br />during my inspection on July 12, 1995, that ditch DWP-W was <br />not in compliance with the approved plan (constructed as <br />designed). <br />It is also my understanding that the violation issued to MCC <br />could have been modified to include the upper diversion ditch <br />for the development waste pile as it was not installed prior <br />to construction of the pile. MCC committed to the <br />construction (including seeding) of the diversion ditch prior <br />to any placement of development waste on the pile (page 2 of <br />the SAE demonstration). <br />3. Topsoil <br />Based on the photographs taken during Mr. Waldron's inspection <br />and his inspection report, it appears that the waste material <br />was mishandled during placement, thereby allowing a small <br />amount of waste to be placed on an adjacent undisturbed area <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.