1992-05-27_REVISION - M1988112 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes, May 21-28, 1992 D RAFT Subject To Board Approval Presentation by Frank Johnson: 14. DISCUSSION ITEM Discussion of Draft Cease and Desist Orders. In providing background informai:ion, the Director said that cease and desist orders relate to situtrtions involving illegal operations, i.e., mining outside permit boundary, etc. Under they current process, when an operator is found in violation by the Board for illegal mining activity, a cease and desist order is issued. However, he clarified that the cease and desist orcer is not actually served until the Board Order has been signed, and this enables an operator to continue operating for a period of time. The Director said the policy would allow the Chairman of the Board to sign and present operators with an "interim cessation order" at the time the cease and desist order is issued. This would be followed up by a permanent Board Order in which the cease and desist order is addressed. Mr. Frank Johnson, Assistant Attorney General, referenced ATTACHMENT I, an April 13, 1992 memo to the Board, including draft forms covering cease and desist orders for interim cease and desists, mining without a permit and prospecting without a notice of intent. In response to an inquiry from the Board, Staff said that a category could be inserted which would allow the Board to issue a cease and desist order for activities trey want to prohibit at permitted sites; this would include listing appropriate statutory citings. The Board suggested that the Division complete these forms prior to the matter being presented during a hearing, so the Board could sign the Order if approved. Mr. Johnson discussed the 3 draft forms/orders with the Board. He explained that for the final cease and desist orders to be issued by the Board, language had been included specifying the amount of a civil penalty, the due date and consideration of suspension. Mr. Johnson said cease and desist orders 'for mining without a permit also include provisions for submission of appropriate financial warranties. The consensus of the Board was that they do not want to these orders to reflect a guarantee of an amount for civil penalty suspensions for completing corrective actions. The Board decided to delete language from the forms relating to civil penalty suspension. It was noted that civil penalty assessment can be appealed to the Board through the reconsideration process. The Board also suggested language be added to the forms that would delineate civil penalty assessment from required corrective actions. Mr. Johnson said he would edit the forms and incorporate the changes made by the Board.