My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE34106
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE34106
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:44:14 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 2:01:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1984065
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
7/26/1990
Doc Name
COAL RIDGE 1 MINE C-84-065 NOTICES OF VIOLATION C-90-016 & C-90-017
From
MLRD
To
NEW CASTLE ENERGY CORP
Violation No.
CV1990017
Media Type
D
Archive
No
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
Rationale for Settlement Agreement <br />NOV C-90-011 <br />New Castle Energy Corp. <br />Coal Ridge ,~1 tAine <br />NOV C-90-011 was written for "Failure to protect topsoil from wind and water <br />erosion, unnecessary compaction, and contamination." Two topsoil stockpiles <br />were the subject of this NOV, one which is addressed and one which is not <br />clearly addressed in the permit application. One pile was threatened by an <br />adjacent ranch road ana associated uses and activities on the road, while the <br />other pile was threatened by an irrigation ditch adjacent. <br />It did not appear that any damage to either pile had occurred and information <br />which came to light as a result of abatement indicates that the threat, in one <br />case, was less than initially perceived. The operator indicated that the <br />condition and location of the stockpiles was as it had been since 1985 and <br />that condition had never been the subject of concern by Division personnel <br />before. It is my opinion that protection measures for the stockpiles as <br />contemplated in the permit were inadequate. It is also my opinion that <br />Division inspectors do not function as environmental staff for operators and <br />may not identify every problem at a site. <br />The abatement deadline for the NOV was extended by request in order to allow <br />New Castle Energy Corp. and the Division to come to a mutual understanding of <br />necessary abatement activities. At the time that a mutual understanding was <br />reached abatement was completed in one day. <br />Based on these facts I believe that a violation existed. However, I believe <br />that a permitting defect also exists and should be addressed as well. The <br />topsoil stockpile adjacent to the Vulcan Ditch should be addressed in the <br />permit application and appropriate protection measures as implemented in the <br />field or otherwise deemed necessary for either pile should also be addressed <br />in the permit application. The civil penalty should be adjusted to reflect <br />the fact that no damage occurred, the potential for any was low, the <br />unprotected condition of the stockpiles was largely an oversight, and rapid <br />compliance was achieved. Therefore I propose the following penalty. <br />History = E150.00 <br />Seriousness = 250.00 <br />Fault = 250.00 <br />Good Faith = -250.00 <br />Total 5400.00 <br />/ern <br />9014E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.