Laserfiche WebLink
_ • <br />Minutes, Juiy 22-24, 1992 <br />D Rq~T <br />Subject To Board Approval <br />On June 4, 1992 the Division again inspected the site and fo~ind that no <br />signs and markers had been posted and the technical revision had not <br />been received. At that time, Stafr said it was noted that the site had <br />been inactive since the summer of 1991. Therefore, tre Division <br />informed the operator, via the inspection report, that a -eauest for <br />Temporary Cessation should be filed with the Division, if reclamation <br />was not to be commenced. <br />On June 5, 1992 the Division contacted the operator by telephone. At <br />that time, the operator agreed that corrective actions had not been <br />undertaken, agreed to commence the corrective actions and informed <br />Staff of the injury sustained in June. The operator had also stated <br />that surveying was almost complete and that a map would be forwarded to <br />the Division within a week, <br />During a conversation with Staff on June 15, 1992, the operator agreed <br />that the corrective actions would be completed by June 20, 1992. <br />However, the Division forwarded Reason to Believe Letters to the <br />operator on June 17, 1992, and has not received a response from the <br />operator regarding either of the problems cited. <br />Regarding the operator's failure to file a technical revision, Staff <br />recommended that the Board find the operator in violation, issue a <br />cease and desist order until corrective actions are completed, order <br />the operator to obtain an approved technical revision which accurately <br />locates the site as it appears on the ground including the access road <br />by 5:00 p.m., August 25, 1992. <br />Staff recommended that the Board assess a civil penalty in the amount <br />of $6,650 for 33 days of violation at a rate of $50 per day. Staff <br />said that if corrective actions are completed prior to August 25, 1992, <br />the operator may request civil penalty suspension or the Board may <br />direct that a certain amount be suspended or refunded. <br />In reference to the possible violation for not posting signs and <br />markers, Staff recommended that the Board find the {operator in <br />violation, issue a cease and desist order to remain in effect until <br />corrective actions are completed, order the operator to erect the <br />appropriate signs and markers and provide proof to the Divi<ion by 5:00 <br />p.m., August 25, 1992. Staff provided the Board wits the same <br />recommendation for assessing and/or suspending or refunding a civil <br />penalty, i.e., $6,650. <br />In response to a question from the Board, Staff explained that the <br />citizens' complaints came from local landowners who are con~:erned about <br />reclamation of the site, the lack of signs and markers and site <br />inactivity. Staff said the landowners are working with the Soil <br />Conservation Service and BLM regarding other concerns rel<~ted to this <br />site. Staff said there is an estimated 2 1/2 to 3 acres of <br />disturbance at the site and that the $5,000 bond in place would almost <br />cover the cost of reclamation. Staff answered questions from the Board. <br />