_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (144)

Home Browse Search

January 23, 1985 MEMORANDUM Mid-Continent NOV's Page Two Finally, it was concluded from the Wright Water Engineers report that antecedent soil moisture conditions in Coal Basin were extremely high during the time of the inspecton. Two of the citations in the NOV related to observations that, at some time in the recent past, water had bypassed ditches or culverts. Since ditches and culverts are designed to safely pass discharges less than or equal to the amount expected from a 10-year 24-hour storm event, it seemed likely that these breaches and excursions took place as a result of the large runoff events of the preceeding week. The third citation related to a sediment pond which was observed to be filled with sediment beyond the design capacity. Given the extremely wet conditions, this sediment pond was completely inaccessible prior to and during the time of the inspection; therefore it was not possible for the operator to have carried out the required maintenance work. This pond was cleaned prior to the onset of winter in October, 1983. The other 10 citations contained within NOV 84-085 seem to be justified based on oral testimony and slides and photographs presented during the hearing. I recommend that the violation, as modified, be upheld. II . PENALTY ASSESSMENT A. History: Based on the fact that one violation was issued against Mid-Continent Coal Resources within the twelve months prior to this NOV, an assessment of $50.00 is recommended. B. Seriousness: Despite the modification of the citations contained within this NOV, the seriousness of the violation remains significant. I recommend no change in the rationale or in the proposed assessment presented by the Division for seriousness. An assessment of $1 ,325.00 for seriousness was proposed. C. Fault: This violation was avoidable with reasonable anticipation of hydrologic problems which would likely result from such heavy snowfall accumulations. The operator had commenced maintenance activities at several of the sediment control systems prior to the arrival of the inspectors. The violations occurred because of too little maintenance too late. Nevertheless, given the fact that abatement operations were underway at the time of the inspection, an assessment for fault somewhat below the maximum for negligence seems to be warranted. I recommend an assessment of $700.00 for negligence.