1984-05-22_REPORT - M1978352 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Mr. Robert C. Shelton , Director May 22, 1984 Page two mandatory cut-off date for receipt of protests and hearing petitions . As such , the request and petition are improper , untimely and should not be considered by the Board and Division. We understand that Mr. Stemwedel has attempted to excuse or obscure his clients' neglect in filing a timely objection by observing that the first public notice occurred fifteen days, rather than ten, following the date of the Division' s completeness letter . As you are aware, however , Mrs . Courtney Petre, on behalf of NS&G, requested and received from Ms. Carol Russell an extension , not to exceed fifteen days , of the period for commencing publication, pursuant to the terms of Rule 1 . 1 ( 10 ) . This extension of time was necessitated by vir- tue of delays in mailing time, the fact that the local news- paper is published only on a weekly basis and because the newspaper requires that all public notices be received six days in advance of its next publication . The resolution of this notice question is reflected in my letter to Carol of May 15 , 1984 , a copy of which is enclosed for your reference . We further note that Mr. Stemwedel ' s attempt to assert a no- tice deficiency to excuse a delay in filing appears peculiar indeed in view of the fact that such delay only operated to provide him with additional time to submit any protest or hearing petition. The delay of Mr. Stemwedel ' s clients in attempting to file their protests and petitions for hearing is made even more difficult to understand by the fact that all of the enti- ties represented by Mr. Goldman received individual copies of the public notice by certified mail on March 13, 1984. Copies of the return receipts for the certified mailings have been enclosed for your reference. The request for issuance of a Notice of Violation to NS&G and the scheduling of a related public hearing demonstrates the lack of good faith with which Mr. Stemwedel 's clients attempt to come before the Board . One of the primary purposes of the Permit Amendment Application is to bring all affected area within the boundaries of the Eagle Permit . NS&G came forward promptly and voluntarily to file the pending Permit Amendment Application as soon as the need for expansion of the permit boundaries was discovered. The pending Amendment Application thus obviates and renders inappropriate any enforcement action. We also take particular exception to Mr. Stemwedel ' s apparent request that he be permitted to participate as a