Laserfiche WebLink
?e <br /> <br />recognition without permit boundaries being clearly identifiable. <br />In addition, the operator has submitted a letter informing the <br />Division that the NOV has been abated and his planning ahead <br />regarding ID sign preparation (see enclosed file). <br />Therefore, with all the above considerations, I would recommend <br />that the seriousness be determined low to insignificant. <br />Fault: As to the degree of fault, a lack of diligence on both the <br />part of the operator and the Division can be asserted. The <br />operator for failing to clearly maintain the perimeter with <br />identifiable markers and the Division for failure to proceed until <br />now with enforcement action, even though the problem was identified <br />in May, 1993. No mention of the perimeter markers being absent is <br />in the previous complete report. The area is covered with various <br />wooden, staked and fenced off areas so it is difficult to determine <br />where the permit boundary extends along the north, west and south <br />sides. Perhaps it was this inspector's first site visit that <br />increased the difficulty of finding these markers. The previous <br />inspector knew the site and had the advantage of familiarity of the <br />area. Therefore, the fault status of a lack of <br />diligence/negligence is recommended. <br />Good Faith: There is no visual indication that this abatement has <br />occurred although there has been a partial site inspection by the <br />vegetation sampling crew of the Division on July 8th and 9th, a <br />mere week since the violation was received in the mail by the <br />operator. Information gathered from Dan Mathews, Division <br />vegetation representative on the site July 8-9, 1993, indicates <br />that Mike Keegan (the resident agent for the operator) was <br />beginning to abate the violation with perimeter markers and mine ID <br />signs on site during the vegetation sampling. Furthermore, <br />conversation between Mike Keegan and Dan also indicates that the <br />issue of where and what boundary needed to be delineated occurred <br />on site. The operator began to stake the markers at the close of <br />the sampling procedure. However, it is not apparent at this time <br />that any extraordinary measures have been taken to abate this <br />violation. As such, I recommend that good faith credit not be <br />considered at this time. <br />Also please see letter enclosed in the file from the operator <br />notifying the Division of NOV abatement. <br />Thank you for your consideration on this matter. <br /> <br />