Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes, August 23-24, 1989 <br />PAGE 15 <br />During recess, the Chairman of the Board received a written request <br />from the operator, ATTACHMENT S, which was read into the record. The <br />operator requested a~Fie~oard consider a request for a 30-day <br />extension, because of the unavailability of his counsel to be in <br />attendance at this Meeting. <br />Staff related that, according to the operator, other than reclamation, <br />there are currently no operations being conducted at the site. <br />Regarding serious environmental or health hazards at the site, Staff <br />related that these were not irrminent. Staff stated that two problems <br />of concern at this time include the driveway and non-compliance with <br />regulations, regarding setback footage. <br />The Board convened a Formal Public Hearing, regarding this matter, and <br />all individuals wishing to give testimony were sworn. <br />Staff presented brief history information regarding this matter. This <br />situation was brought to the attention of the Division in March of <br />1989. Staff presented ATTACHMENT T - an August 21, 1989, letter from <br />the Jefferson County Boar o omnrssioners in which they consider <br />taking legal action against this operation for borrowing without a <br />permit. That correspondence included the reclamation plan that the <br />operator provided to the County--the Division did not receive any <br />correspondence from the operator, regarding reclamation. Staff related <br />that the operator's plan called for reclamation being completed by <br />mid-June. Also, Staff discovered that High Country Trucking was doing <br />work for the operator, taking material off-site and utilizing it <br />commercially. The operator had told Staff that he did not feel he <br />needed a permit for this operation. Staff further related that the <br />Division last received correspondence from Mr. Clark on the morning of <br />August 23, 1989; a telephone call in which Mr. Clark requested that the <br />Board postpone consideration of this issue until the September Board <br />Meeting. <br />The reasons for which Staff believe this operation constitutes mining <br />relate to the regulations (Rule 1.13) which states that reclamation <br />must be assured by project requirements and/or the mined material is <br />used on your own property. In this case, the material was not being <br />used on the owner's property and the operator was not complying with <br />the reclamation plan submitted to Jefferson County. Slides from a July <br />16, 1989, inspection of the site were shown and discussed. <br />Ms. Teresa Phillips, an adjacent landowner, relayed concerns to the <br />Board, regarding the impact this operation has had on her and nearby <br />property. <br />