My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE31998
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE31998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:43:15 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 1:10:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980001
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
9/22/1993
Doc Name
Draft MINUTES to Sept Board MEETING
Violation No.
CV1993026
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DRAFT <br />Minutes, September 22-23, 1993 <br />Subject To Board Approval 37 <br />Mr. Dave Beverlin, referenced the site and facilities map for <br />the operation and discussed the operator's consideration of <br />the area in question as a road. He said that when the light- <br />use road was permitted, the operator's intent was to place the <br />pump and stand in the Trout Creek alluvium which would have <br />required a Corps of Engineers permit. <br />Mr. Beverlin said the Corps of fingineera inspected the site at <br />the time and recommended that as long as no cut and fill <br />activities were conducted on the alluvial valley floor, no <br />permit would be required. He said that the Corps also <br />recommended that no permit would be required, in order to <br />place the filling stand in its current location. Mr. Beverlin <br />stated that the operator had placed the pump on the Creek with <br />no disturbance and piped the water up to the stand at the end <br />of the "road". He said the stand contains rubber tires and <br />that the pump is a mobile piece of equipment that is situated <br />on a trailer mount. <br />Mr. Beverlin said that the operator does not use the water <br />pumping facilities during the winter. He said the area became <br />muddy after snowmelt and that the operator was not able to <br />regrade the road prior to the inspection. Mr. Beverlin stated <br />that the pad had not be used since the previous fall. He said <br />that the road had been graded prior to the winter of 1992. <br />In response to a request from Mr. Paul, Mr. Crowner described <br />the composition of the pad. Mr. Crowner said the area is not <br />used during the winter. <br />Regarding a concern that sediment left the site, Mr. Beverlin <br />stated that a sage brush community and grasses are located <br />below the area and that these provide a fairly dense <br />vegetative cover. He presented some photographs of the site, <br />which he said were taken on May 15, 1993, and discussed the <br />issue further. Mr. Beverlin said that the cover in the area <br />prevented the water from flowing or draining down to the <br />Creek. <br />Mr. Paul asked Wayne Erickson to discuss the significance of <br />a road versus a disturbed area, in reference to the <br />regulations. Mr.-Erickson referenced Rule-4.05.2 and noted <br />that the violation was written under Rule 4.05.1. He said <br />that Rule 4.05.1(4) states that "for the purposes of Rule <br />4.05.2 'disturbed area' shall not include those areas in which <br />only diversion ditches, sediment ponds or roads are installed <br />in accordance with the performance standard requirements of <br />this Rule." <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.