Laserfiche WebLink
SLW 05 '97 07~33RM DIVih1I(`ERRLS&GEOLOGY <br />DP.28 '00 00=48 ID=l1aNIEIifWC38D0 <br />Mz. itoutten <br />one 4., 1997 <br />T?age 2 <br />FRX: <br />P.3/4 <br />PfY(~ 2 <br />the professional certification_ if some guys °reaeouabie• <br />suggestion is going to be a guideline for permit review by a <br />person without professional certification, it should be <br />included in your regs. Whether I win or lose on this <br />question, i believe that this is a principle that should ba <br />looked at seriously. <br />9A. The llivieion asked for another copy of an Exhibit in our <br />permit applioation. I sent it in the same condition as the <br />original submission to the Division and it was not accepted. <br />To begin with certification of every non-written submission <br />in the permit application is a waste of time and effort. It <br />ie totally unnecessary. The regs should be changed to <br />include design items and leave out information items and <br />other non-critical items. In the case of this exhibit, I <br />did not do the original design and I did not change <br />anything; I do not believe that .I have to professionally <br />certify it_ This is also similaz to the issue that came up <br />with certifying roads. <br />/_ - <br />102.~.This has to do with diversion of a small area above a refuse <br />_ pile. What ie the expression about straining a gnat but <br />swallowing a camel? There are some limits to many of the <br />regulations and I believe that this ie one of them. Then to <br />my surprise, the suggestion was to install a diversion for <br />the small area by building it on refuse, which does sot meet <br />the guidelines. <br />-103. a. - This has to do with drainage design for roads. The <br />roads in question are small dirt roads which are seldom used <br />and are primarily existing xoada that we have acquired <br />permission to uBe. I do not believe that detailed drainage <br />design ie necessary. The roads in question are Light use <br />road 1 and Access road 3. These two roads have been a <br />problem as far as duty designation because the regs do riot <br />specifically allow leaving light duty roads and surfacing ie <br />required on access roads. They are someone elce~s roads <br />which need to be left in place and surfacing and major <br />drainage control are not feasible. i would consider <br /> <br />