Laserfiche WebLink
1RW: Ok we've heard the arguments, is there any further response <br /> 2 from Nottingham on this? [Silence. ] Ok, well this gets a <br /> 3 little bit . . . yeah . . . . <br /> 4MC: What I 'd like to point out to the Board is I guess without <br /> 5 addressing each one of these points which Mr. Goldstein has <br /> 6 raised, just to take for example, the NPDES permit, the Co. <br /> 7 Dept. of Health has been consulted and as I understand, <br /> 8 correct me if I 'm wrong Mark, they have in fact informed you <br /> 9 there is no requirement for an NPDES. <br /> JOG: Can we clarify that, has . . . has the Colorado State Board <br /> 11 been consulted with in giving you directly any . . . <br /> 12MH: They haven' t to me, but there' s no proposal for any discharge <br /> 13 in the operation, so there is no need for it, for an NPDES <br /> 14 permit. Many sand and gravel operations are operating in <br /> 15 this way, there is no discharge. <br /> 16MC: I guess what I just would like to get back to, is Mark 's <br /> 17 point that the staff has in fact reviewed the application and <br /> 18 as I understand it that his recommendation, they feel the <br /> 19 reclamation plan is in fact adequate in that it is strong and <br /> 20 based upon the recommendation of the staff, who have had an <br /> 21 adequate opportunity to review the plan, that the permit can <br /> 22 be approved. And there are fundamental questions on fairness <br /> 23 here in the sense that these objections are being raised <br /> 24 literally at the eleventh hour where there' s overwhelming <br /> 25 evidence that actual notice was in fact provided to an attor- <br /> 26 ney representing the Eagle River Trust and in fact that <br /> 27 attorney did make the objection which made it possible for <br /> 28 Mr. Goldstein to even appear here and make any statements in <br /> 29 this regard at all. I think based on that actual notice and <br /> -26- <br />