My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1983-01-03_ENFORCEMENT - C1981025
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Coal
>
C1981025
>
1983-01-03_ENFORCEMENT - C1981025
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2020 9:50:56 AM
Creation date
2/26/2008 3:24:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981025
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
1/3/1983
Doc Name
Proposed Civil Penalty
From
MLRD
To
Snowmass Coal Company
Violation No.
CV1982089
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
Rationale For Proposed Civil Penalty <br /> N.O.V. No. 82-69 Snowmass Coal Co. <br /> On December 9, 1982 the Division issued Notice of Violation No. 82-69 to <br /> Snowmass Coal Co. for their North Thompson Creek Mine. The violation was <br /> issued for failure to minimize disturbance to the hydrologic balance. <br /> The operator failed to complete construction of the sediment pond below <br /> the Refuse Area by the September 29, 1982 compliance date. The following <br /> outlines the basis by which the proposed violation civil penalty was <br /> assessed. <br /> Procedures for assessing civil penalties are outlined in Rule 5.04.5 of <br /> the Regulations. The dollar amounts described below were arrived at with <br /> consideration of the following items A) Regulations set forth in Rule <br /> 5.04.5; B) A review of letters from Snowmass Coal Co. dated December 21, <br /> 1982 and November 19, 1982; C) Consultation with other MLRD staff <br /> inspectors and; D) A review of 4 other similar violations issued by the <br /> Division. <br /> Rule 5.04.5(2) (a) - History of Previous Violations: <br /> Rule 5.04.5 requires that $50.00 be assessed for each previous violation <br /> issued within the past 12 months. As no violations were issued in the <br /> past year, no penalty was assessed in this category. <br /> Rule 5.04.5(2) (b) - Seriousness of the Violation: <br /> This Rule requires that the assessment be based on the following 3 <br /> categories with a maximum penalty of $1 ,750.00. <br /> 1. Probability of Damage Occurring: Since the pond is not completed <br /> to capacity and no spillways are present, the pond can contain 1 .19 <br /> ac-f t of water. The 10 year - 24 hour rainfall volume is 1 .67 <br /> ac-ft. From calculations provided by Snowmass (and Ponderosa <br /> Engineers) the pond capacity might be exceeded by a 24 hour storm <br /> with just over an inch of rain, a combination of smaller rainfall <br /> events over several days, or equivalent snowmelt conditions. <br /> Since Snowmass has indicated that it is difficult to get equipment <br /> to the site during wet conditions, it may also be difficult to <br /> dewater the ponds by watertruck as the operator has suggested. <br /> If the pond storaye volume is exceeded, the discharge would downcut <br /> through the embankment since no spillways have been constructed. <br /> I judge the probability of damage occurring as high over the next 6 <br /> months but not imminent. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.