My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1993-06-01_ENFORCEMENT - C1980001
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Coal
>
C1980001
>
1993-06-01_ENFORCEMENT - C1980001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2021 4:04:51 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:57:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980001
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
6/1/1993
Doc Name
Letter Signed Settlement Agreement Receipt
From
PITTSBURG & MIDWAY COAL MINING CO
To
DMG
Violation No.
CV1993027
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JUSTIFICATION <br /> NOV C-93-027 <br /> Assessment Conference Summary <br /> NOV C-93-027 was issued by Susan Morrison of the Division for <br /> " [F]ailure to construct and maintain runoff and sediment control <br /> measures and culverts as required by the approved permit <br /> application package". The NOV cited three specific items; a berm <br /> on the west side of the coal stockpile in the shop/warehouse yard, <br /> straw bale filters on the Goat Trail access road at ditch outlet <br /> locations, and Moffat haul road culvert E-12 . <br /> The Operator representatives contended that the berm cited in the <br /> NOV as being in need of maintenance was not the containment berm <br /> depicted on Exhibit 3 . 6-3, but was a safety berm not required for <br /> drainage control. After some consideration, the Division <br /> representatives concluded that this was the case and indicated that <br /> the NOV would be modified appropriately. The Operator <br /> representatives acknowledged that the straw bale sediment filters <br /> were not in place. They conceded that the referenced culvert was <br /> partially blocked, but stated that it was largely ice and snow, and <br /> pointed out that the culvert had functioned effectively as <br /> evidenced by sediment which had filled in the ditch below the <br /> culvert outlet (see NOV C-93-026) . Ms. Morrison contended that the <br /> culvert partial blockage was largely coaly sediment. <br /> Fact of Violation <br /> I conclude that a violation did occur with respect to the straw <br /> bale sediment checks which were not in place and Culvert E-12 , <br /> which was partially blocked. The consequences of these <br /> deficiencies would appear to be relatively minor, as discussions <br /> during the conference resulted in both Division and Operator <br /> representatives questioning the need for the culvert and the <br /> effectiveness of the straw bale sediment checks in the specified <br /> locations. A violation apparently did not occur with respect to <br /> the cited berm, and the NOV is being modified accordingly. <br /> Civil Penalty Assessment <br /> Proposed Penalty Assessment <br /> History $ 0. 00 <br /> Seriousness 1000. 00 <br /> Fault 500. 00 <br /> Good Faith 0. 00 <br /> Total $1500. 00 <br /> History <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.