My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE22200
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE22200
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:31:59 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:07:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
5/1/1987
Doc Name
GEC MINERALS 10 DAY NOTICES FN C-81-037
From
MLRD
To
OSM
Violation No.
CV0000000
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r <br />• <br />Mr. Robert Hagen <br />-3- <br />May 1, 1987 <br />Given this, the state has proceeded, under the advisement of the Attorney <br />General's Office, to continue to work with G. E. C, to develop a solution. The <br />other alternative is to forfeit the remaining bond, which is inadeouate to <br />cover the cost of reclamation, and seek additional funds through appropriate <br />legal actions, If G.E.C. does not have other assets available to the state, <br />then the state would be left in the very undesirable situation of having <br />inadeouate funds to do reclamation. Thus, at this point we find the potential <br />fora G.E.C. solution to be more satisfying than a forfeiture of the remaining <br />bond with potential results as just described. <br />At the April 23, 1987 Board meeting G.E,C, and EFC represented that the <br />agreement providing for an alternate reclamation plan was nearly completed. <br />The Board will review that plan when it is completed to determine if it is <br />acceptable. G.E.C. also represented that the problems that were subject to <br />the TDN are being corrected. <br />In direct response to the TDN, the preceding discussion demonstrates ". <br />good cause for ... failure ." to take an enforcement action (521(a)(1)). An <br />enforcement action may not be applicable in this case, but even if it is it <br />would be ineffective and undermine the Division's and Board's strategy for <br />achieving a solution. The Division and Board have pursued a reasonable <br />strategy to achieve the reclamation goal in light of an unusual set of <br />circumstance. <br />As I mentioned in our meeting of April 16, 1987 meeting, some of the matters <br />pertaining to G.E.C. are confidential attorney/client interaction. Any <br />further discussion about particular legal aspects of this case should be <br />handled in accordance with Rule 5.02.4(2). Further discussions will need to <br />be preceded by an agreement for procedures for handling investigative and <br />enforcement reports and related attorney work-product material. <br />If I can be of any further assistance in this matter, please call me. <br />Sincerely, <br />Program <br />FRB/sak <br />cc: Dave Shelton <br />Mike Long <br />Sandy Brown <br />9260E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.