My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE123380
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
300000
>
PERMFILE123380
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:21:09 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 11:28:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980006
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
LETTER OF 7/20/79 FROM KERR COAL CO RESPONDING TO VIOLATION 3
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT 18
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.
/
7
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 />Alleged violation number three reflects <br />Mr. Fritz's judgment that the existing sedimen- <br />tation ponds do not provide adequate sedimenta- <br />tion control. Specifically, the Clotice reflects <br />the fact that P(r. Fritz felt that sedimentation <br />ponds or other control structures should be in- <br />stalled at two specific locations in the area of <br />I:CC's surface mining operations. In this regard, <br />KCC had already scheduled the construction of a <br />sedimentation pond in the area beneath the double <br />topsoil storage area which was mentioned by Mr. <br />Fritz. In the second area, located upstream <br />from sedimentation pond number four, 1:CC has <br />scheduled the construction of a diversion ditch <br />to assure that all run off from the relevant <br />drainage passes through sedimentation pond num- <br />ber four. <br />History of Previous Violations. 30 C.F.R. ri723.12 <br />• Again, XCC notes that it has no previous <br />violations. <br />Seriousness, 30 C.F.R. 5723.12 (c) <br />Probability of Occurrence <br />-The area-below the double topsoil storage <br />site has only recently reached the operational . <br />posture in which it would receive drainage from <br />Y.CC's_-mining operations. Further, due to the <br />very arid climate of Jackson County, Colorado, <br />there have been no discharges cahich would re- <br />quire the existence of a sedimentation pond <br />since the time this area was placed in a posi- <br />tion-to receive discharge from a disturbed area. <br />Thus, the probability of-the occurrence of the <br />environmental harm which the performance stan- <br />dard was designed to prevent is virtually in- <br />significant. With respect.to the area upstream <br />from sedimentation pond number four, ICCC contends <br />that the number four pond provides more than ade- <br />quate sedimentation control for the relevant <br />drainage, thereby.rendering the probability of <br />occurrence insignificant. These same factors <br />demonstrate that the extent of potential or ac- <br />tual damage from failure to install the suggested <br />sedimentation control structures is de minimis. <br />. Extent of Potential or Actual Damages <br />Due to the absence of actual discharges as <br />consequence of the arid climate, the potential <br />-5- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.