Laserfiche WebLink
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JUSTIFICATION <br /> NOV C-93-098 <br /> Notice of Violation C-93-098 was issued for "Failure to design <br /> sediment control and diversion structures prior to construction". <br /> Larry Routten issued the NOV to Mid-Continent Resources (MCR) at <br /> the Coal Basin Mine on June 17, 1993 . Three areas were cited: <br /> 1)two culverts at No. 5 mine pad, 2) pre-law BAT impoundments at <br /> toes of outslopes of upper mine portals, and 3) fresh water ponds <br /> at yard area. Each is discussed below. <br /> The two culverts at the No. 5 Mine pad were in place, but there <br /> were no designs or map, for them. (The culverts were conveying <br /> water from the upper bench under the pad. This is a partial <br /> subject of NOV C-93-095. ) <br /> The Best Technology Available Ponds (BTA) were catching sediment <br /> from pre-law outslopes. They were built in 1985. They are <br /> approved in the permit but, there are no designs for them. <br /> The fresh water pond is used for the prep plant. There are no <br /> impoundment designs in the permit. <br /> Diane Delaney and Greg Lewicki, representing Mid-Continent <br /> resources, contested the violation. With respect to the culverts <br /> at the No. 5 mine pad, they felt this issue is addressed by NOV <br /> C-93-095. The BTA ponds were voluntary structures, their purpose <br /> is to provide sediment control below pre-law outslopes. They <br /> were approved in the permit as such and nobody has ever required <br /> additional information for them. Ms. Delaney feels it is <br /> inappropriate to notify MCR of additional design requirements <br /> through a NOV. She believes if there is a change in policy <br /> regarding pond designs an operator should be notified, and be <br /> allowed to make the appropriate revisions to the permit and <br /> structures. The fresh water pond is a similar situation. It is <br /> a pre-law structure. It was approved in the permit without <br /> specific designs. <br /> I conclude a violation did occur. The culverts at the No. 5 Mine <br /> pad were illegal. They were not approved in the permit. I do <br /> not believe this NOV overlaps with NOV C-93-095, because this NOV <br /> addresses design requirements only. I believe the designs for <br /> the other structures are permit defects and the operator should <br /> be notified by letter or during a mid-term review or permit <br /> renewal if design standards change. <br /> The proposed civil penalty was: <br /> History $50.00 <br /> Seriousness $500.00 <br /> Fault $500.00 <br /> Good Faith $0.00 <br /> Total $1050.00 <br />