Laserfiche WebLink
additional acreage under Construction Materials Rule 1.1(6) and 1.10. The Division <br />testified that there is a significant difference in application fees between a technical <br />revision and an amendment. hi addition, an amendment requires an applicant to comply <br />with public notice procedures whereas no additional public notice is required for a <br />technical revision. The Division noted that there were other landowners within 200 feet of <br />the approved permit boundaries and within 200 feet of the proposed 5.60-acre addition to <br />the permit boundaries. These landowners would be subject to the notice requirements for <br />an amendment, but not for a technical revision. <br />The Operator argued that because the proposed additional acreage, 5.60 acres, was exactly <br />the same as the proposed reduced acreage, 5.60 acres, there was no net increase in the <br />acreage of affected land. Therefore, the proposed transfer did not qualify for an <br />amendment but for a technical revision because it had no more than a minor effect upon <br />the approved reclamation plan. <br />8. On balance, the evidence suggests that a permit amendment is required. The evidence <br />presented showed that neazby landowners who would normally be entitled to notice <br />through the amendment process would not receive such notice through the technical <br />revision process. <br />Mesa Sandstone Appeal <br />M-2006-009 <br />