Laserfiche WebLink
4. The Division holds a financial warranty in the amount of $2,500.00 for <br />the site. <br />5. The Division mailed the report of the August 6, 2014 investigation to <br />Operator on November 28, 2014. The report of investigation stated that the cost of <br />reclamation at that time was $3,460.79, $960.79 more than the existing financial <br />warranty held by the Division. The report of investigation identified inadequate <br />financial warranty as a problem and required Operator to provide the additional <br />$960.79 in financial warranty within sixty days of the surety increase notice letter, <br />by January 27, 2015. <br />6. Operator failed to post the additional financial warranty by January <br />27, 2015 or at any time since. <br />7. On September 10, 2015, the Division conducted a follow-up inspection <br />and financial warranty evaluation of the site. The report of the September 10, 2015 <br />inspection noted, among other things, that the Division reviewed the cost of <br />reclamation and estimated the cost of reclamation to be $5,936.00. The report of <br />investigation identified the inadequate financial warranty as a problem and <br />required Operator to provide the additional financial warranty within sixty days of <br />the surety increase notice letter, by December 4, 2015. <br />8. On October 6, 2015, the Division sent a Financial `'Warranty Increase <br />letter (notice of adjustment, SI -01) to Operator. The notice of adjustment stated <br />that the Division calculated the cost to reclaim the proposed affected disturbance to <br />be $5,936.00. The Division's stated that increased financial warranty was due to be <br />submitted within sixty days, by December 4, 2015. <br />9. On November 2, 2015, Operator contacted the Division by telephone, <br />stating that he had not received the previous inspection report or notice of <br />adjustment due to a change of address. Operator provided a new address to the <br />Division. <br />10. On November 3, 2015, the Division sent Operator, via certified mail <br />return receipt requested to the new address Operator provided, the September 10, <br />2015 inspection report, notice of adjustment, and calculations. <br />11. On November 13, 2015, Operator notified the Division by telephone <br />that he wished to object to the surety increase. On the same date, the Division <br />mailed Operator a letter outlining the requirements to object to the surety increase. <br />12. On November 16, 2015, the Division received the return receipt for the <br />November 3, 2015 letter, the September 10, 2015 inspection report, notice of <br />adjustment, and calculations. <br />Wilbur F. Benham <br />Toltec No. 2/M-1984-039 <br />MV -2016-008 <br />2 <br />