Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Enforcement, No. CH. 94-6-R (ALJ Torbett, July 28, 1994). <br />OSM's own policy directive INE 26 mandates that OSM give <br />substantial deference to the state regulatory authority in making <br />AOC determinations, That OSM may disagree with a determination <br />should not undermine the state's determination if that determina- <br />tion is reasonable. In this case, DMG's determination concerning <br />AOC was reasonable and should stand. OSM's issuance of the NOV <br />was improper. <br />For the reasons and authorities stated herein and in DMG's <br />Post-Hearing Brief, DMG respectfully requests that the proposed <br />Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law submitted by Kerr be <br />adopted. <br />GALE A. NORTON <br />Attorney General <br />STEPHEN K. ERKENBRACK <br />Chief Deputy Attorney General <br />TIMOTHY M. TYMICOVICH <br />Solicitor General <br />PATRICIA S. BANGERT <br />Deputy Attorney General <br />JERRY W. GOAD <br />First Assistant Attorney General <br />C RY A. LINDE , 14185* <br />Assistant Attorney General <br />Natural Resources Unit <br />-4- <br />