GENERAL54539 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3. The petitioner filed its petition for review under 43 CFR 4.1150 et.s_~c., which provides: Any person charged with a civil penalty may file a petition for review of a pro- posed assessment of that penalty with the Hearings Division, 4. The petitioner is not charged with a civil penalty and there is no proposed assessment of a penalty that can be reviewed. The subject of this proceeding, i.e., the propriety of the civil pen- alty that was assessed, does not exist. 5. while the fact of violation can be challenged in a civil penalty proceeding, it can be contested only from the standpoint of showing that the pen- alty assessed is inappropriate because there was no violation. If no penalty has been assessed, there is no reason to consider the fact of viola- _ tion in a penalty review proceeding. The petitioner has responded has presented three arguments that the petition for review petitioners arguments are: to the order to show cause and in support of its position should not be dismissed. The 1. The proceeding was commenced under the authority of 30 CFR 845.19(a) and not under 43 CFR 4.1150 et sec. Section 845.19(a) of 30 CFR pro- vides that: The person charged with the violation may contest the proposed penalty or the fact of the violation by submitting a petition and an amount equal to the proposed penalty * * * to the Office of Hearings and Appeals * * *. The fact of the violation may not be contested if it has been decided in a review proceeding commenced under 30 CFR 843.16. (Emphasis supplied). Ay the use of the permissive term, "may," and the disjunctive term, "or," this regulation grants the "person charged with the violation" the right to challenge either the proposed penalty or the Eact of the violation, or both, as the "person charged" may choose. It does not say that the proposed penalty must he contested, with a challenge to the 2