Laserfiche WebLink
JUSTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT FOR <br />Notice of Violation C-92-001 <br />(Page 2 of 3) <br />Civil Penalty Assessment <br />The proposed civil penalty was: <br />History $ 0.00 <br />Seriousness 1,000.00 <br />Fault 500.00 <br />Good Faith 0.00 <br />Total $1,500.00 <br />History <br />The history component was not disputed. <br />Seriousness <br />I concur with the original determination of significant <br />the potential long-term ramifications of deviating from <br />engineering design for a coal waste disposal facility. <br />analysis indicated that the structural integrity of the <br />significantly or irreparably compromised by plan deviat <br />of seriousness would have been indicated. <br />seriousness based on <br />an approved <br />Had the stability <br />disposal pile was <br />ions, a higher degree <br />Fault <br />I concur with the original assessment <br />on two counts. First, for failing to <br />familiar with all requirements of the <br />failing to initiate plan modifications <br />recommendations contained in quarterly <br />for fault. The operator was negligent <br />insure that field personnel were <br />approved design and, second, for <br />in a timely manner in response to <br />certification reports. <br />Good Faith <br />The operator requested consideration for good faith based on the rapid <br />submittal of the stability analysis. The analysis was submitted on <br />January 15, 1992, well in advance of the April 9, 1992 deadline. I indicated <br />during the conference that early submittal of the thorough analysis did appear <br />to warrant good faith consideration. However, after further review of the <br />file, applicable regulations and established Division policy, I conclude that <br />a good faith reduction is not warranted. The reasons for this conclusion <br />include the following: <br />