Laserfiche WebLink
Fred Banta, David Shelton -2- January 16, 1985 <br /> II. Penalty Assessment <br /> A. History: Based on the fact that one violation was issued against <br /> Mid-Continent Coal Resources within the 12 months prior to this <br /> NOV, an assessment of $50.00 is recommended. <br /> B. Seriousness: Some actual damage did occur as a result of this <br /> violation. Topsoil downstream of the rock waste disposal pile was <br /> contaminated with the slurry material which washed away from the <br /> disposal pile. Also, a discharge of sediment-laden water occurred <br /> which was related in part to the failure by the operator to <br /> construct the upland water diversion ditch. The duration of the <br /> violation was relatively short, given the abatement response by the <br /> operator. The areal extent of the violation was minimal . Based <br /> upon the actual damage which did occur and the moderate duration of <br /> the violation, I recommend an assessment of $1250.00 for <br /> seriousness. <br /> C. Fault: This violation was avoidable with proper attention to <br /> permit requirements and regular maintenance work. Since the <br /> operator failed to attend to provisions of the mining and <br /> reclamation permit which applied to waste disposal and sediment <br /> control , I recommend a maximum assessment for negligence in the <br /> amount of $750.00. <br /> D. Good Faith: After the operator was issued this cessation order, <br /> the practice of end dumping was stopped immediately. A temporary <br /> sediment control pond was constructed by the next day to prevent <br /> untreated effluent from leaving the disturbed area. These <br /> practices were required in the abatement order. However, some <br /> evidence of good faith was shown in that the operator constructed a <br /> temporary catchment basin to mitigate the slurry migration problem <br /> prior to the inspection which led to the issuance of the cessation <br /> order. It is on this basis that I recommend an award of $125.00 <br /> for good faith. <br /> E. Violation Period: The proposed penalty by the inspector identified <br /> four days of violation by the operator. The period of violation <br /> related to the four days subsequent to May 22, during which the <br /> settlement pond for this area did not comply with effluent <br /> standards. However, compliance with effluent standards was not <br /> part of the original abatement order. Meanwhile, the operator <br /> complied with all of the provisions of the abatement order within <br /> one day. Therefore, assessment on the basis of one day of <br /> violation is recommended. <br /> F. Total Assessment: I recommend a total assessment for C-84-083 of <br /> $1925.00. <br /> /md <br /> Doc.No. 6820 <br />