PERMFILE64218 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ ~ DRAFT Subject To Board Approval Minutes, July 25, 1990 PAGE 13 Mr. Tom Young, attorney for the company, addressed the Board and stated that the operator does not wish to re-schedule the date for the Formal Public Hearing. He answered question from the Board. In response to an inquiry from the Board, Mr. O'Connor addressed the status of the application. He related that initial deficiencies contained in the application have been addressed to a point where, with the exception of the issue of possible radioactivity in the soils, only minor issues remain un-resolved. The State Geologic Survey will inspect the soils for radioactivity, with their findings being available a few days prior to the August Board Meeting. The Board will have a recommendation from the Division by August 10, 1990. Mr. Frank Johnson, from the Attorney General's Office, addressed the issue of deadlines for approval of this application. He read the letter written during the June Board Meeting confirming the waiver agreed upon by the operator, in regard to the Board's approval of the application by the 120th day of its submission. The Director briefly stated that the Division had met with Jefferson County Planners on July 23, 1990. The County has asked to be assured that the Board and Division would not approve permits which included standards that could be downgraded at a later time, without the County's involvement. It was also noted that a representative from Jefferson County attended the status conference. They were informed that they could participate in the August Hearing. In comments provided during further discussion of this issue, the Board stated that they do not want to be in a position giving the MLRO Board and Counties dual jurisdiction over permits. Mr. Young agreed, with regard to the issue of the waiver, that the applicant would comply with the decision of the Board. It was MOVED that the Board deny the objectors' request to continue the Hearing~~he September Board Meeting. SECONDED AND VOTE TIED 3 for (Cooley, Jouflas and Entz); 3 against (Kraeger-Rovey, O'Connor and Daniel son). It was MOVED that the Board grant the objectors' request to continue the Hearing to the September Board Meeting. SECONDED AND VOTE TIED 3 for (Kraeger-Rovey, O'Connor and Danielson); 3 against (Cooley, Jouflas and Entz). It was noted that the Hearing regarding this application would be held at the August Board Meeting as previously scheduled.