Laserfiche WebLink
t ,~ ~ ~ ~~ ,,,- <br />c, ~ __ -, =carp' ~cproval 4Q <br />In order to resolve the issue, board Member Stewart suggested that a <br />date be imposed for the submittal of the civil penalty and that a time <br />frame be established for resolution of other issues. <br />With the approval of the Second, the Motion was amended to make to <br />civil penalty due and payable within 30 days. P.455ED UNANIMOUSLY <br />(Danielson, Cooley, Jouflas, Stewart and Cattany>. <br />Consideration of the second possible violation involving failure to use <br />the permitted water pumping and utilization scheme for mill operations <br />was initiated, and some discussion was given. However, in view of the <br />Board's action to continue this matter prior to adjourning the Meeting, <br />detailed discussion of the issue will be presented at the April 1992 <br />Board Meeting and, therefore, will not be provided at this time. <br />It was MOVED that the Board continue consideration of this matter, as <br />well as the other 2 possible violations to the April 1992 Board <br />Meeting. SECONDED AND PASSED 3 for (Jouflas, Stewart and Cattany); 1 <br />against (Cooley); Danielson not present for the vote. <br />Staff Presentation by Harry Posey: <br />21. FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING <br />CORTNER FEED LOT file No. M-66-159 <br />c/o MR. BUCK BARNHART <br />3 Sedum Court <br />Pueblo, CO 81001 <br />All persons wishing to give testimony were sworn. <br />NE1/4 Sec. 24, T21S, R64W, 6th P.M., Pueblo County, 9.9 acres; surface <br />sand and gravel. Consideration of a possible notice of violation, <br />cease and desist order, corrective actions and civil penalties for <br />mining outside the permit boundary. <br />Staff presented EXHIBIT A, a presentation form, and stated that a <br />correction needed to be made to reflect the operator's submittal of a <br />bond today. Therefore, the Board would not need to consider issuing a <br />cease and desist order, regarding this matter. <br />Staff said the Division received a conversion application for this site <br />in November of 1991. Staff referenced a map of the site, EXHIBIT B, <br />and discussed the permit area, including the areas of disturbance <br />inside and outside the permit area. Staff said the total area <br />disturbed outside the permit boundary is close to 3 acres. <br />Staff said the Division is not requesting that a civil penalty be <br />assessed, because the operator has reclaimed the disturbed area, <br />including grading and some topsoiling. In order to improve the <br />potential for reclamation success of the site the operator has also <br />hauled in over 900 cubic yards of topsoil ,_ c:~;er the site as <br />necessary. Staff showed slides, EXHIBIT C, and discuss?a the onsite <br />and offsite damages. Staff said the Coun- .,~: ~ -~...,~, .°„g gr~:a; <br />