Laserfiche WebLink
rthat a~5 day reporting requirement was applicable. However, Colowyo did voluntary report the exceedence <br />conditions to CDMG prior to sending in the DMR reports to both WQCD and CDMG. Again, Colowyo's <br />reporting of the situation was to respectfully keep CDMG informed of the situation as Colowyo prefers to conduct <br />their business with open honest communications. <br />Due to the small volume of water released and the low concentrations of TSS and SS the environmental impact was <br />negligible and correspondingly, the administrative reporting of these issues are relative to the environmental <br />impacts. <br />The difference in enforcement action taken by WQCD versus CDMG is inconsistent and significantly different <br />from each other. In this incident there is overlapping review with each agency having the same notification <br />requirements, except that WQCD has primacy with regard to water discharge permits for the State. Even with <br />WQCD having primacy for water quality requirements, they have not chosen to utilize formal enforcement action <br />in this matter. (See attached letter from WQCD dated December 20, 2004). On the other hand CDMG has chosen <br />formal enforcement action on a relatively benign situation where environmental impacts were negligible and <br />administrative misdoings were inconsequential. It's not clear to Colowyo why CDMG feels the need to apply a <br />strong enforcement action in this case when sisterdivisions are not. <br />Lastly, the MOU between WQCD and CDMG also addresses how enforcement action will be handled between the <br />agencies. In that MOU it states that the CDMG will be responsible for enforcing the requirements for design and <br />maintenance of water quality protection structures and the requirements to minimize disturbance to the hydrologic <br />balance, while the WQCD will be responsible for enforcing CDPS permit conditions, including effluent limitations, <br />and provisions of the site specific storm water management plan. The notification requirement is clearly in both <br />regulations but is specific to CDPS requirements and permit conditions. Therefore it appears that WQCD has the <br />enforcement responsibility in these incidents. <br />Colowyo regrets not reporting the incident within the required timeframe, and has implemented awareness training <br />advising all individuals involved that any exceedences need to be reported within the 5 days to both CDMG, and <br />WQCD. By implementing the awareness training Colowyo will avoid this type of incident in the future. Colowyo <br />takes all Notices of Violations as a serious matter and realizes the implications of a pattern of violations. <br />Therefore this Notice of Violation has pointed out a weak link in our systems and administrative process that <br />needed fixing. We have fixed that system and are looking forward to improved compliance notification in the <br />future. We thank CDMG for bring this matter to our attention. <br />In conclusion, Colowyo respectfully requests that you consider vacating this NOV in order to reflect the <br />environmental and administrative impacts, consistency in enforcement levels between CDMG and WQCD, and <br />recognizing WQCD's authority in these situations as per the agreements within the MOU between CDMG and <br />WQCD. <br />Thank you very much for your time and consideration of this matter. <br />S~ ely~~iC~i~~~/j <br />C. Crellin Scott <br />Sr. Environmental Engineer <br />Encl. (1) <br />C: CF 1'7.6.5 <br />Bob Young <br />Kelly Sanders <br />Byron Walker <br />