ENFORCE37146

• Permit No: C1981041
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Name: RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
• Violation No.: CV1999007
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Proposed Civil Penalty Assessment
Powderhorn Coal Company/ The Roadside Portals
NOV C-99-007
Materials reviewed in conjunction with the preparation of this proposed assessment were: DMG's 8116/99
inspection report, Grand Junction Laboratories' 8/20/99 analysis report, the Permittee's 8/24/99 letter, the
Permittee's CDPS permit (expires 12131/02), and 40 CFR 434.42 (rev. 7/1/98).
History [Rule 5.04.5(3)(a)]:
No NOVs have been issued to this permittee within the twelve months preceding [he issuance date
of this NOV (8/20/99). The History component is therefore proposed at $0.
Seriousness [Rule 5.04.5(3)(b)]:
The Seriousness component of a proposed civil penalty assessment may range from $0 to $1750.
The assessment shall depend upon whether [he violation was one of performance requirements or
administrative requirements. This NOV was written for a violation of performance requirements.
In the case of a violation of performance requirements, the amount to be azsessed Cor Seriousness
shall also be based on the degree of impact the violation had upon the public or environment.
This NOV was written for a water quality violation found at the outfall of Permittee's Pond #12
(CDPS Outfall #004). The Total Suspended Solids (TSS) daily maximum for this outfall is 70
mg/I, according to the federal regulations. This outfall does not have a set of Alternate Limitations
for precipitation events, according to the permittee's CPDS permit (Part I, page 3). The TSS value
of the discharge sample taken by DMG staff was reported by Grand Junction Laboratories as 164
mgll, indicating an exceedance of the federal water quality standard.
The Division's 8/16/99 inspection report indicated, however, that [he Colorado River, where this
discharge eventually flowed, was Flowing high and muddy at the time of the inspection due to
recent local rainfall evenu. As such, the impact that this dischazge had upon the environment
appears to have been minimal. [therefore believe that $500 is appropriate for the Seriousness
component.
Fault [Rule 5.04.5(3)(c)]:
The Fault component of a proposed civil penalty assessment may range from $0 to $1500.
Assessments for "unavoidable" violations may range from $0 to $250. Assessments for violations
that were the result of "negligence" may range from $250 to $750. Assessments for violations that
resulted from "intentional conduct" may range from $750 to $1500.
DMG staff noted in the 8/16/99 inspection report that the primary discharge valve for Pond #12
was not closed until the DMG inspection occutred. It therefore appears that had the permittee
been more diligent in self-inspecting its pond's discharge and in closing it's pond's primary
discharge valve immediately theresfter, this violation might not have occurted. I therefore believe
that this violation occurred az a result of the permittee's lack of diligence ("negligence"), and
believe that $500 is an appropriate amount for the Fault component.
Good Faith in Achieving Compliance [Rule 5.04.5(3)(d)]:
As this NOV has not yet been abated, no reduction of this assessment is proposed at this time.
The Total Proposed Civil Penalty Assessment for this NOV i5 therefore 51000.