Laserfiche WebLink
<br />JUSTiFIC~TiON OF SETTLE~IE;VT AGREEMENT FOR <br />NOV C-92-021 <br />NOV C-92-021 was ~,vritten for "failure to maintain the principal spill~.vays of <br />permanent impoundments 15-P1, 15-P2, 15-P.0 and 15-P17". NO'J C-92-021 was <br />subsequently modified to include permanent impoundment 15-P8. The primary <br />dewatering device of each pond was clogged, allowing no water to drain from <br />the pond. NOV C-92-021 was issued by Joseph Dudash, Reclamation Specialist, <br />on July 28, 1992. The situation was found to be in noncompliance with <br />regulatory section 4.05.9(1)(e). <br />The penalty assessment proposed by the Division Assessment Officer .vas: <br />History -0- <br />Seriousness 5750.00 <br />Fault 5500.00 <br />TOTAL PROPOSED CIVI! PENALTY: 51,250.00 <br />Mr. Greg Lewic:<i, P.E., representative for Trinidad Basin Mines (TBM), stated <br />TBM's opinion that it would have been appropriate to allow the operator to <br />unclog the outlet structures without the issuance of a notice of violation. <br />In this instance an operator's representative had not accompanied Mr. Dudash <br />during his inspection. However, Mr. Le~,vicki did not refute the fact of the <br />violation. I was not persuaeed by Mr. Le':~icki's comments, and found the <br />notice of violation to have been aoprooriateiy issued to T6M. Based upon the <br />evidence presented I found the proposed assessment fcr History to be <br />appropriate. I .vas persuaded, however, chat the proposed assessments for both <br />Seriousness and Fault 'sere inappropriately high. The emeraencv spillways were <br />functional and none of the impoundments ~.vere in danger of structural <br />compromise. Further, Mr. Le'.vicki provide data to demonstrate that the summer <br />cf 1992 has been characterized by abnormally high precipitation in the <br />Trinidad area. Thor=fore, I am proposing to decrease the asse r ment fcr tie <br />Seriousness component from 5750 tc 5:00, ar,d the asst r meat fcr the Fault <br />component from 5500 to 5250. <br />Regulation section S.Oa.S(3)(d> allows the conference officer to assign a <br />penalty reduction to reflect "Good Faith", if the permittee took <br />"extraordinary" effort; to abate the violation in the shortest po r ible time <br />before the abatement deadline. I did not find an adustment for "good faith'' <br />to apply in this cast. <br />In conclusion, I propose to amend the penalty dsS25iBlent fcr Notice of <br />Violation C-92-OZ1, as foltew<_: <br />History -0 <br />Seriousness 500.00 <br />Fault 5250.00 <br />Good Faith -~- <br />?RCPCSED .aCJUSTED C~'/IL ?c'1?LT'f: 5750.00 <br />DOC. NO: 9ZalF <br />