Laserfiche WebLink
T ~ <br />Mr. Mike Long <br />October 21, 1994 <br />Page 2 <br />3. There has been a precedent set over the past 8 years that the Division understands that this is an <br />unrealistic deadline and has not enforced this requirement in the past. In fact, there are quarterly <br />inspection of the records by the Division and annual oversight inspections by OSM which have not <br />identified late submittals as a violation. Specifically, during an OSM oversight inspection of February 1, <br />1994, the issue of late report submittals was discussed and "It was decided that these items did not <br />constitute a violation but the timeliness of the Rill and Gully Report would be brought to the attention <br />of the Permittee' (see attached OSM inspection report). <br />In summary, Slurco feels that submittal of the past two annual hydrology reports past an unrealistic deadline <br />does not constitute a violation since there were 6 other previous reports submitted in a similar manner and <br />OSM ruled in February that late report submittals did not constitute a violation. We also feel that a more <br />appropriate procedure to handle this issue would be to identify a permit defect and request Slurco submit a <br />Technical Revision to modify the requirement, rather than write a violation which was abated on the same day. <br />Should you have questions or if you need additional information concerning this request for vacation, please <br />do not hesitate to let me know. <br />Sincerely, <br />Jerry H. Koblitz <br />Permit Coordinator <br />Attachments <br />ce Lawrence Corte, Legal Council - Slurco Corp. <br />