My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1993-09-20_ENFORCEMENT - C1981019
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Coal
>
C1981019
>
1993-09-20_ENFORCEMENT - C1981019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2021 4:43:25 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 12:05:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
9/20/1993
Doc Name
PERMIT C-81-019 COLOWYO COAL CO NOVS C-93-072 C-93-073 C-93-077 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS
From
COLOWYO COAL CO
To
DMG
Violation No.
CV1993073
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
999 <br /> Q ° 5731 State Highway 13 <br /> COAL Meeker, Colorado 81641 <br /> COMPANY (303) 824-4451 <br /> f0j(f.��OD�CHCR4 <br /> September 15, 1993 <br /> Ms. Sandra L. Brown <br /> Conference Officer <br /> Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology Sep <br /> 215 Centennial Building Q 79 <br /> 1313 Sherman Street 9� <br /> Denver, Colorado 80203 <br /> RE: Permit C-81-019 <br /> Colowyo Coal Company <br /> NOV's C-93-072, C-93-073, C-93-077 <br /> Settlement Agreements <br /> Dear Ms. Brown: <br /> Attached, please find a check in the amount of $1, 150. 00 <br /> as payment of the Civil Penalties assessed for the cited NOV's. <br /> Please note that the check includes an additional $50. 00 per NOV to <br /> correct a minor mathematical error contained in each assessment. <br /> Colowyo would also like to take this opportunity to <br /> provide further comment with respect to the Division's discussion <br /> pertaining to NOV C-93-077 . <br /> The Division states under "Seriousness" that "I believe <br /> the ditch, and the way it was designed, (specifically the length of <br /> the ditch, steep segments in natural drainages and sharp turns) <br /> concentrated the flow and compounded the erosional problems beyond <br /> what occurred in a natural drainage. " <br /> Colowyo respectfully disagrees with this statement and <br /> believes it is misleading. The breaches in the ditch had nothing <br /> to do with the ditch length, steep segments and sharp turns and <br /> everything to do with the severe magnitude of the May 16, 1993 <br /> cloudburst. <br /> Had any of these particular ditch features failed during <br /> a theoretical 10 yr. /24 hr. storm event for which the ditch was <br /> designed, then the Division would have a valid point. <br /> We have shown that the ditch was constructed to provide, <br /> at a minimum, a 300% margin of safety to carry the design storm <br /> event. offsite damage was in no way a reflection on the ditch <br /> design or construction. <br /> s4. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.