My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE35079
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE35079
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:44:46 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 2:28:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981039
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
5/29/1991
Doc Name
Memo on the Requests for Vacation on both NOVs
From
MLRD
To
DAVE BUCKNAM
Violation No.
CV1991002
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.
/
2
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
-~ <br />Memo - Dave Bucknam - 2 - May 29, 1991 <br />I would make the following comments: <br />- Rockcastle had ACZ Engineering perform engineering observations of the <br />impoundments on August 22, 1990, and September 11, 1990. The report <br />discussed structural weaknesses, erosion and sediment levels of the ponds <br />per Rule 4.05.6(131. It was not submitted as the semi-annual pond <br />inspection report, and was not retained with the records at the site. <br />It was an engineering response to paragraph III(21 of the Agreement. <br />- The Division acknowledges that the violation incorrectly referenced <br />Pond 1. <br />- Rockcastle's permit application discusses both NPDES sampling and <br />hydrologic monitoring plan sampling. The former requires sampling on <br />weekly or monthly intervals when water is discharging from the four ponds <br />at the site, with quarterly reporting. Rockcastle complied with their <br />reporting requirement, but it is in no way clear that they complied with <br />their sampling requirement. (However, Rockcastle's NPDES sampling is not <br />the subject of NOV C-91-0031. The hydrologic monitoring plan <br />requirements were imposed on the company through Technical Revision 2, <br />approved September 4, 1986. This plan requires a different frequency of <br />monitoring at six locations when operations are occurring at the site <br />than when the site is inactive. I believe that Rockcastle was operating <br />as an active mine when they started performing earthwork at the site, and <br />thus did not perform 10 field samples, 9 full suite samples, and a spring <br />and seep survey in 1990. <br />The following items are enclosed for your reference when reviewing this <br />request for vacation: <br />- Settlement Agreement, dated June 6, 1990; <br />- Ten Day Notice X-91-02-116-004-TV 3; <br />- NOVs C-91-002 and C-91-003; <br />- May 6, 1991 letter from Parcel, Mauro, Hultin and Spaanstra; <br />- May 20, 1991 vacation request from Parcel, Mauro, Hultin and <br />Spaanstra. <br />/ern <br />Attachments <br />cc: Steve Renner <br />5910E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.