ENFORCE36509

• Permit No: C1980005
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 6/17/1993
• Doc Name: Letter & Settlement Agreement
• From: DMG
• To: PEABODY WESTERN COAL CO
• Violation No.: CV1993057
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Department o(Nalural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
Justification of Settlement Agreement
for
Notice of Violation Number C-93-057
Peabody Western Coal Company
Seneca II Mine
OF ~~
„c j
ti~~
>~ ~
/B !6 ~
Roy Romer
Governor
Michael B. Long
Division Director
An Assessment Conference was convened to consider NOV No. C-93-057
on Thursday, June 10, 1993 at 1:30 PM at 1313 Sherman Street, Room
615, Denver, Colorado. In attendance at this conference were Mr.
Gary W. Wendt of Peabody Western Coal Company, Ms. Susan L.
Morrison of the Division of Minerals and Geology, and Mr. James B.
McArdle of the Division of Minerals and Geology, Active and
Inactive Mine Program and presiding Assessment Conference Officer.
Notice of Violation Number C-93-057 was written by Ms. Susan
Morrison on April 16, 1993 during the inspection of April 13-16,
1993. This Notice of Violation was issued for failure to salvage
topsoil before disturbance and for failure to limit disturbance to
designated, approved disturbance areas. The NOV noted that topsoil
had slid down the east hillside into the draw located between
topsoil stockpile LL and pond 008. This slide resulted in the
mixing of topsoil with subsoil materials. Head scarps from the
slide were 25 feet beyond the posted disturbance boundary. Peabody
Western was required to Salvage the remaining topsoil, stabilize
the slope and submit a minor revision to the permit to revise the
disturbance boundary, and increase the performance bond liability.
Ms. Susan Morrison provided a slide presentation of the problems
noted in the NOV. Mr. Gary Wendt stated that the slump has been
occurring over a period of 5 years, however the extent of the
disturbance was most affected this spring. The slump initiated due
to the construction of a blade line at the toe of the slope.
After some discussion, I, James B. McArdle, concluded that the
Notice of Violation was serious in that the operator had exceeded
the permitted area of disturbance which is a basis for the level of
bond required of the permittee. The exact level of seriousness was
considered low due to the extent of the slide and the level of
surface disturbance which was placed at 12,500 square feet, much of
which occurred this spring. Also, the topsoil was not lost and is
available for salvage as weather permits. The civil penalty was
therefore adjusted to $250.00 to reflect the low level of
seriousness.
The level of fault was maintained at the negligence civil penalty
level of $250.00. The slope failure in this instance was not