Laserfiche WebLink
S. S. Shuey -2- February 23, 1994 <br />violation is not the result of the unwarranted (unjustified) <br />failure of Somerset to comply with the Rules. In fact, Somerset <br />was in the process of improving its ability to comply with the <br />rules when the violation was issued. <br />NOV C-92-034 ISSUED 10-30-92 <br />This violation was issued for failure to store non-coal waste in a <br />designated area. One part of this violation was simply a permit <br />defect. The permit did not have a section that addressed non-coal <br />waste. The Division did not assert that the non-coal waste was <br />being handled improperly. The second part of the violation was the <br />fact that Somerset had a skid mounted metal storage shed which <br />contained barrels of waste oil, etc., in an area that was not <br />within the sedimentation control system. Somerset believes that <br />storage of barrels in the metal building was good practice. The <br />floor of the building was constructed of solid steel plate. A <br />three inch wide flat bar was welded around the circumference of the <br />floor to provide spill containment. The roof over the barrels <br />minimized the potential for the barrels to rust and leak. The only <br />issue regarding this building was where it should be located. This <br />violation is not the result of the unwarranted (unjustified) <br />failure of Somerset to comply with the Rules. The permit defect is <br />a justifiable problem. Somerset's method of handling the barrels <br />would be commended by some agencies. <br />NOV C-93-007 ISSUED 02-23-93 <br />This violation was issued because the east yard coal stockpile <br />encroached upon an adjacent topsoil stockpile. This problem <br />occurred during the winter when there was snow on the ground and <br />it was difficult to determine the exact location of the topsoil <br />stockpile. Very little if any topsoil was lost as a result of this <br />problem. The topsoil pile was subsequently relocated to prevent <br />future problems. This violation is not the result of the <br />unwarranted (unjustified) failure of Somerset to comply with the <br />Rules. This was the first year the east yard coal stockpile was in <br />operation. The combination of the first year of operation of the <br />coal stockpile, snow on the ground and the close proximity of the <br />topsoil stockpile all contributed to this violation. <br />NOV C-93-032 ISSUED 04-06-93 <br />This violation was issued because the mine discharge water exceeded <br />total suspended solids limits. Somerset has put a considerable <br />amount of effort into avoiding this problem. The first action <br />Somerset took was to construct a small mine water treatment pond. <br />The purpose of this pond was to handle the water until a sump could <br />be constructed underground. Prior to the violation being issued <br />Somerset had taken the following steps to clarify the mine <br />discharge water: <br />