Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. John Whitley <br />Mr. Neal Starkebaum <br />Page 3 of S <br />July 27, 2007 <br />operation. Mr. Whitley believes that only was good for ten years, and that no permits are now in <br />place. Mr. Starkebaum said that is not the case, the gravel permit is valid. I also called Russ <br />Means, the inspector for gravel pits for the Division of Mineral and Geology. He verified that <br />the site is properly permitted fora 10-acre gravel operation with the State, and was last inspected <br />on October 20, 2006. No violations were issued. Russ explained that his permit only covers the <br />ten-acre gravel mining operation. Other activities on the property are not under his purview. <br />The piles that are in question and the equipment that is stored on the site are located away from <br />the gravel operation. The site is only permitted fora 10-acre gravel operation by DMG. Use as <br />a constnuction yard for the areas outside the gravel permit does not appear to have been rectified <br />since the Order was issued by the County in 2003. This is further discussed under item 3. <br />2). Allegation: Sewer effluent was dumped on the property some years ago. <br />Accounts differ on this allegation. Six or seven years ago it was claimed that treated effluent <br />from the Crested Butte South Sanitation Works was dumped at the property. Mr. Schmalz has <br />been a septic hauler in the past. One County inspector thought he smelled sewage, but did not <br />collect samples. According to Mr. Starkebaum, sand trap waste was dumped at the site, and the <br />owner was told to discontinue that practice, since that is not in accordance with regulation. Mr. <br />Whitley claims that County Commissioners intervened to prevent further inspections. That <br />allegation was not pursued due to time limitations. Without sample data from that time, it is not <br />possible to conclude whether or not sewage was dumped at the site. Disposal of sand trap waste <br />has been discontinued. <br />3). Allegation: Petroleum asphalt refuse was dumped on the property <br />Mr. Starkebaum indicated that Mr. Schmalz was accepting asphalt for recycling from an airport <br />runway project that was not a permitted activity for the site. Mr. Schmalz was issued a cease and <br />desist Order in 2003 and directed that he "...must immediately cease and desist from the further <br />importation of materials and/or the crushing and reprocessing of previously utilized asphalt <br />materials; and the use of the land as a construction storage area for miscellaneous material <br />including but not limited to san-o-lets, concrete sewer pipe, modular buildings, tractor-trailers <br />and equipment related to the asphalt reprocessing operation." <br />The Order states that the violation may be corrected by: <br />"Removal of all the materials and equipment modular buildings, san-o-lets, sewer pipe, tractor <br />trailers, and equipment related to the asphalt crushing and reprocessing activities and removal of <br />the previously utilized asphalt and reprocessed asphalt materials from the property." In addition, <br />"Application of and approval of a Land Use-Change Permit for the use of the property as a <br />construction storage yard and for the asphalt reprocessing operations." <br />According to all parties, the site has been cleaned up considerably since 2003. The asphalt <br />recycling equipment has been removed from the site, but it is not clear if the remaining <br />