1993-06-17_ENFORCEMENT - C1981017 (4)

Home Browse Search

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JUSTIFICATION NOV C-93-094 Notice of Violation C-93-094 was issued for "Failure to construct and maintain sediment ponds according to the design in the approved permit" . The NOV was issued to Mid-Continent Resources on June 17, 1993. Larry Routten, representing the Division of Minerals and Geology, stated that four areas were cited in the violation: 1) emergency spillways at 016 ponds and 001 ponds, 2) sediment accumulations in ponds 006, 010 and 009(a) , 3) pond inlet of pond 009(b) and 018 and 4) embankment of pond at lower storage pad of Mine 3 (023) . Diane Delaney and Greg Lewicki, representing Mid-Continent Resources, offered some additional information and slides. Each area is discussed in more detail below. The plans for the emergency spillway at pond 016 showed a 36" CMP. In actuality it is a trapezoidal open-channel spillway. The permit does have a generic open-channel spillway design. Although no one in attendance at the conference was able to locate a revision approving the open-channel design it is believed to have been approved, since the rules were amended several years ago. There was some debris observed in the channel. Debris was also noted in the emergency spillway for Pond 001. At Ponds 006 and 010 there was not adequate sediment storage. Sediment filled the majority of the pond capacity. Ms. Dulaney and Mr. Lewicki questioned whether the sediment in Pond 009 (a) was out of compliance, since it is part of a 2-pond system. They felt the capacity of the two ponds together was in compliance. There was no discharge from any of these ponds. Ms. Dulaney and Mr. Lewicki contested whether the inlets to the ponds were in violation. The cited Rule does not address pond inlets. Furthermore it is their belief, that all flow going into the pond is treated and inlet erosion is controlled by the sediment pond. Representatives from the Division did not have pictures or slides of the areas in question. Tony Waldron's field notes did state that there were "gullies leading into pond 009" . It is my belief that even if there is no specific regulation regarding inlet erosion, it should be minimized to reduce the amount of sediment going into the pond thus reducing pond cleaning and maintenance. The Act does require that disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance be minimized. Since there is no evidence supporting this part of the violation, however I will not uphold it in the NOV. The embankment of the pond at the lower storage pad of Mine 3 had a seep on the embankment with some evidence of sloughing. He also observed some cracking. Mr. Routten was concerned because this same embankment had problems before. The cause of the