Laserfiche WebLink
~b~ y <br />MCC WILL BE ASKING THAT THE <br />VIOLATION BE VACATED, AND THE DIVISION <br />REQUESTS THAT THE BOARD UPHOLD THE VIOLATION <br />AS PROPER. <br />A PACKET OF INFORMATION FROM BOTH MCC AND <br />THE DIVISION REGARDING THIS VIOLATION WAS <br />INCLUDED IN YOUR MONTHLY MAILING. DOES <br />ANYONE NEED A PACKET?? T~~U~~~EGINS <br />WITH A LETTER DATED OCTOBER 8, 1993. *THE <br />PACKET ALSO DISCUSSES TWO OTHER VIOLATIONS C- <br />93-112 AND C-93-113 WHICH <br />VACATED. <br />FACTS OF THE VIOLATION <br />HAVE OR WILL BE <br />1. NOV C-93-114WAS ISSUED TO MCC FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT <br />PROPER~PERMITTING DOCUMENTS FOR LIGHT-USE ROADS AT <br />THE MIKE SITE <br />*NOV IS IN EXHIBIT C OF THE PACKET AND DISCUSSEgIN THE <br />DIVISION'S INSPECTION REPORTIN EXHIBIT D OFTHE PACKET <br /> <br />rr <br />S i~ <br />'r1 C ~ d ll~~ ati~~ r{,a, <br />2. WHERE?? *THE ROAD AT THE BASE OF THE REFUSE PILE was ' ~, r <br />*UPPER ROADS USED TO ACCESS UPPER nw~sbbo~'I <br />DIVERSION DITCHES AND SUBSIDENCE AND <br />HYDROLOGIC MONITORING SITES <br />~~~/1~l C~ ~I ~C ~'U G`.Q.~ l'ltil~ p ~ ,~N~l ~ ~- S ~i o v~ S V.C - ~ d ~ d ~ C ova-? <br />9 (~re~ ~~a~l S <br />3. ABATEMENT?? PROVIDE THE PROPER AND ADEQUATE <br />