ENFORCE29975 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JUSTIFICATION NOV C-94-007 Notice of Violation C-94-007 was issued for "Failure to conduct surface water and groundwater monitoring at the Somerset/Sanborn Creek mines, in accordance with Rule 4.05.13 and the requirements of the mine permit application". Steve Shuey issued the NOV to Somerset Mining Company (Somerset) from the office on April 14, 1994 based on a March 11, 1994 inspection. An assessment conference was held on June 8, 1994. Mr. Shuey explained that during his March inspection, he noticed that the January and February water monitoring records were incomplete. The permit requires several sites to be monitored, specifically the up and downstream sites on the North Fork of the Gunnison River and three lower elevation ground water sites. The explanation for the lack of surface water data was that the sites were snow covered and frozen. There was no ground water monitoring data or explanation. Mr. Shuey's recollection of January and February was that the weather was fairly mild. He returned to the office and reviewed the aerial photos which confirmed his thoughts. The North Fork of the Gunnison was flowing with some ice along the banks. There was very little snow where the surface water or the three required ground water sites are located. With a little effort, data could have been collected. Based on this information, Mr. Shuey issued the NOV from the office. Since the issuance of the NOV, the monitoring plan has been amended reducing the monitoring frequency to semi- annually for these sites. He added that the NPDES and weekly mine water monitoring was maintained and conducted as required during this period. Walter Wright, representing Somerset Mining Company, did not contest the fact of the violation. He had hired a consulting engineer to conduct the sampling. The consultant reported the adverse weather conditions saying the sites were frozen and dangerous. Part of the problem was that the consultant came at the end of the month and could not return the same month if adverse conditions existed on a particular day. This has since changed. Mr. Wright agreed that data probably could have been collected at the five sites. He stated that he should have supervised the consultant closer. Furthermore, no critical data was lost. Somerset had been discussing a reduction in the monitoring with the Division for some time. Since the issuance of the NOV the Division has approved a permit amendment reducing the monitoring frequency from monthly to semi-annually for these monitoring sites.