ENFORCE36036 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

History The History component was not disputed. seriousness Based on photographs taken during the inspection, the Operator demonstrated that the water level in the pond was approximately 15 inches below the top of the primary spillway riser, and thus was at least 27 inches below the emergency spillway elevation. Given the fact that low temperatures in North Park in early April are typically well below freezing, the potential for a sustained period of heavy inflow would not appear to be high, and given the remaining storage capacity of the pond, the potential for a sudden increase in the water level, resulting in emergency spillway discharge would appear to be relatively low. High intensity rainstorms producing heavy, sudden runoff would not be expected during early spring. Due to the fact that discharge had not occurred, and that emergency spillway discharge and potential sedimentation of receiving streams does not appear to have been likely, I recommend a reduction in the assessment for Seriousness to $500.00. Fault I concur with the assessment of $250.00 for Fault, reflecting a low degree of negligence. The Operator was negligent in not maintaining the primary spillway upon initiation of the spring melt and pond inflow. However, it appears that the Operator had reason to believe that the situation would resolve itself (the ice blockage would melt) before there was any danger of an unapproved discharge. Good Faith I concur with the proposed assessment of $250.00 for Good Faith. A contractor was hired to clean out the spillway pipe using a steam truck promptly after the inspection. The work was actually completed two days prior to issuance of the NoV, and eleven days prior to the abatement deadline. Settlement Agreement Penalty Proposal.....$550.00