ENFORCE26548 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-3- cleanup continued through the Division's inspection of August 10-12, 1994. The four locations cited in the Notice of Violation were areas which could not be repaired by the end of the inspection. All four areas were damaged as a direct result of the storm. c. At the fu•st location (the western-most coal stockpile), there was no evidence of offsite damage. There was evidence of water going through the road berm breach, but that water could have been drained off of the road. The berm and ditch that redirected runoff to the west may have been established by an equipment operator during the storm cleanup operations. This Flow path was blocked by the evening of that inspection day, to prevent offsite impacts. d. At the second location (beneath the conveyor belt), the wooden retaining wall had given way and allowed material to flow out. But straw bales between the retaining wall and the river captured the refuse. The refuse was, then, placed back onto the mine site. e. At the third location (the coal silo area), the ditch and culvert that are part of the sediment control system are designed for the 10-year, 24-hour event. That event was exceeded on August 3, 1994, causing the offsite damage. The bank in the road was taken out by workers who were cleaning up after the storm. Had there not been such a storm event, there would not have been any need to alter the road bank. f. At the fourth location (the west Reno mattress-lined ditch at the refuse disposal area), the damage was caused by a very intense storm period of 2.6 inches of rain in a four-hour period. The problem was identified immediately and remedial action was started immediately. The small emergency ditch and berm, that collected the overflow and directed it into Pond 8, was constructed during the storm. Some of the offsite flow may have been from the overflow and some may have been from runoff from the surrounding area. g. The damage caused by the August 3, 1994 storm event was not restricted to the mine site. The State Highway Department worked for two weeks to clean up storm-related debris off of Highway 12. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and pursuant to C.R.S. 34-33-124(1), the Board hereby concludes that: 1. The exceedance of the 10-year, 24-hour event and the intensity of the 2.6 inches of rain in four hours caused the damage described in Notice of Violation C-94-018.