_ENFORCEMENT - C1981017 ‎(19)‎

• Permit No: C1981017
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Name: Bid Documents ‎(IMP)‎ CV-91-015
• Violation No.: C-91-015
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

JUSTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMLiu FOR
NOV C-91-015
NOV C-91-015 was written for "failure to construct or maintain
diversion/collection ditch to safely pass the runoff from a 100 year, 24 hour
storm event" . The NOV was issued by Dan Mathews , Reclamation Specialist, on
August 27, 1991 . As Dan stated in the NOV; "Specifically, flow in Sutey Pile
East Collection Ditch has undercut riprap and resulted in downcutting from 2
to 5 feet deep down a 500' segment above cross section F-F' location as
depicted on ' Stream Diversion and Runoff Collection Channels ' Exhibit" . The
situation was found to be in noncompliance with regulatory sections 4. 10.3(2) ,
4.09.2(7) and 4.05.4(2)(6) , the permit exhibit mentioned here before and
Technical Revision #13.
The penalty assessment proposed by the Division Assessment Officer was :
History $200.00
Seriousness $500.00
Fault $250.00
TOTAL PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY: $950.00
Ms . Diane Delaney, representative of Mid-Continent Resources , Inc. , recounted
the history of complications involving this Sutey pile ditch. An earlier NOV
had been issued regarding this ditch in October of 1990. The ditch had been
reconstructed as approved for abatement, but had failed again in the summer of
1991 . Mid-Continent has once again reconstructed the ditch with a thicker
riprap section. In addition, steel roof bolts have been driven through the
larger riprap and into the subsurface in an attempt to assist in retaining the
riprap. The ditch reconstruction was inspected by Joe Dudash of the Division
and the NOV was terminated on October 29, 1991 . Based upon the evidence
presented I found the proposed assessment for History, Seriousness and Fault
to be appropriate.
Regulation section 5.04.5(3)(d) allows the conference officer to assign a
penalty reduction to reflect "Good Faith" , if the permittee took
"extraordinary" efforts to abate the violation in the shortest possible time
before the abatement deadline.
Ms . Delaney requested consideration for a good faith adjustment. She
contended that Mid-Continent Resources had been expeditious in remedying the
situation and had taken significant efforts to import, screen and place riprap
within the ditch. While I appreciate the effort required to obtain
compliance, I was not persuaded that an "EXTRAORDINARY" effort had been
exhibited. Therefore, I declined to grant an adjustment for "good faith" in
regards to NOV C-91-015.
In conclusion, I propose to amend the penalty assessment for Notice of
Violation C-91-008, as follows:
History $200.00
Seriousness $500.00
Fault $250.00
Good Faith -0-
TOTAL PROPOSED CIVIL PENALTY: $950.00
Doc . No: 9237F