The state Division of Highways has agreed to pay more than $125,000 in fines for repeated environmental violations on the construction of the new U.S. 35 in Putnam County.
The state Division of Highways has agreed to pay more than $125,000 in fines for repeated environmental violations on the construction of the new U.S. 35 in Putnam County.
DOH officials have reached three deals with the state Department of Environmental Protection over water pollution violations cited by DEP inspectors last year.
The settlements are the latest in a long line of problems the DOH has had complying with water pollution permit requirements and stormwater prevention standards.
DOH officials say they try to comply with the law, but officials said agency employees and contractors often are in such a rush to complete road projects that they forget about environmental regulations.
"No, it's not acceptable," said Laura Rinehart, a DOH staff engineer in charge of regulatory matters. "Our goal is to get our projects done and have clean water."
But during inspections last year, DEP officials found waterways near the U.S. 35 project anything but clean.
DOH contractors had not installed sediment trapping structures, diversion ditches and a major sediment basin, according to DEP records.
Silt fences along streams were improperly installed or had not been maintained. Stormwater flows were not being diverted away from streams. DEP inspectors found "distinctly visible" plumes of solids in streams near the project.
The DEP negotiated privately with the DOH and reached three separate settlements, each related to work by a different highway contractor.
The DOH plans to subtract those fines from payments to the contractors: $27,530 from Kokosing, $38,250 from Kanawha Stone, and $69,780 from Mountaineer Grading.
But in the past, the DOH has not always been able to pass the cost of environmental fines along to its contractors.
In September 2000, the DOH itself agreed to pay a $1.17 million fine to the DEP for building a causeway in the New River without first getting a permit. Contractors had piled rock and earth three-quarters of the way across the river, parallel to the Bellepoint New River Bridge in Hinton. They were working to repair concrete bridge piers. After the DOH agreed to the fine, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers gave the agency an "after-the-fact" permit for the work, seven months after it began.
Rinehart said the DOH doesn't try to pass its environmental fines on to contractors when the violations occur because the agency pushes companies to begin work before they obtain a permit.
"On any construction site, where we have an aggressively active construction site, it's very tough to keep up with erosion and sediment control," Rinehart said. "The contractor is very goal-oriented and he tends to forget about the features that need to be included."
Such things have happened repeatedly in the past.
The state Division of Highways has agreed to pay more than $125,000 in fines for repeated environmental violations on the construction of the new U.S. 35 in Putnam County.
DOH officials have reached three deals with the state Department of Environmental Protection over water pollution violations cited by DEP inspectors last year.
The settlements are the latest in a long line of problems the DOH has had complying with water pollution permit requirements and stormwater prevention standards.
DOH officials say they try to comply with the law, but officials said agency employees and contractors often are in such a rush to complete road projects that they forget about environmental regulations.
"No, it's not acceptable," said Laura Rinehart, a DOH staff engineer in charge of regulatory matters. "Our goal is to get our projects done and have clean water."
But during inspections last year, DEP officials found waterways near the U.S. 35 project anything but clean.
DOH contractors had not installed sediment trapping structures, diversion ditches and a major sediment basin, according to DEP records.
Silt fences along streams were improperly installed or had not been maintained. Stormwater flows were not being diverted away from streams. DEP inspectors found "distinctly visible" plumes of solids in streams near the project.
The DEP negotiated privately with the DOH and reached three separate settlements, each related to work by a different highway contractor.
The DOH plans to subtract those fines from payments to the contractors: $27,530 from Kokosing, $38,250 from Kanawha Stone, and $69,780 from Mountaineer Grading.
But in the past, the DOH has not always been able to pass the cost of environmental fines along to its contractors.
In September 2000, the DOH itself agreed to pay a $1.17 million fine to the DEP for building a causeway in the New River without first getting a permit. Contractors had piled rock and earth three-quarters of the way across the river, parallel to the Bellepoint New River Bridge in Hinton. They were working to repair concrete bridge piers. After the DOH agreed to the fine, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers gave the agency an "after-the-fact" permit for the work, seven months after it began.
Rinehart said the DOH doesn't try to pass its environmental fines on to contractors when the violations occur because the agency pushes companies to begin work before they obtain a permit.
"On any construction site, where we have an aggressively active construction site, it's very tough to keep up with erosion and sediment control," Rinehart said. "The contractor is very goal-oriented and he tends to forget about the features that need to be included."
Such things have happened repeatedly in the past.
In April 1999, the EPA cited highways officials when they filled in part of the North Fork of the South Branch of the Potomac River while replacing a washed-out bridge. This work involved the "realignment" of 755 feet of the river. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fined the DOH $16,500.
In September 2003, the DOH agreed to pay the EPA $13,500 in fines for similar Clean Water Act violations in Boone, Marion and Raleigh counties between 2000 and 2002.
Environmental groups have tried to take action to curb the DOH's violations.
In February 2002, the DOH settled a lawsuit filed over water pollution problems associated with construction of Corridor H, the $1 billion highway from Elkins to the Virginia line.
The West Virginia Rivers Coalition had alleged the DOH and its contractors did not comply with water pollution control permits when they designed sediment control ponds on the Corridor H segment from Baker to Wardensville. The ponds were half the size required by law, the suit alleged.
As part of the settlement, the DOH agreed to advise all bidders and all contractors in writing that they must comply with stormwater runoff control requirements. The DOH said it would revise its construction handbooks to comply with those requirements.
But since then, environmental problems on DOH jobs have continued.
Along with the U.S. 35 settlements, the DEP has in the last year reached deals with highways officials over violations on two other projects.
In Tucker County, the DOH agreed to a $1,500 fine after allowing a contractor to leave for a long weekend without repairing a silt fence as part of the replacement of the Davis Bridge.
In Randolph County, the agency agreed to a nearly $9,000 fine for not including sediment controls on a County Route 14 project near Elkins.
Mike Zeto, chief environmental enforcement inspector at the DEP, said highways officials have gotten better over the years in their compliance with water pollution rules.
"All in all, to be very frank, we're actually seeing highways improve over the years," Zeto said last week. "But they've got a lot going on, and they get ahead of things from time to time.
"We're seeing improvement, but we have had a rash of highways matters come up," he said.
To contact staff writer Ken Ward Jr., use e-mail or call 348-1702.
