Laserfiche WebLink
sent out to allow interested parties sufficient time to comment on the amendment application. The <br />delay in notice did not preclude interested parties from fully participating in the application review <br />process, and the party that did submit comments, Zellitti properties, submitted comments within the <br />comment time period and did not incur harm by the delayed notice. <br />b.) The objection letter states that Zellitti Properties, as a landowner and adjacent landowner, <br />was not notified regarding a past permit action which resulted in a land exchange. <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety Responses <br />The question raised by the above comment is related to Rule 1.6.2(1)(e) of the Construction <br />Materials Rules and Regulations, which states, "Except for 111 Special Operation Permit <br />applications, the applicant shall mail or personally serve a copy of the notice in Rule 1.6.2(1)(d) <br />to (ii) the Owners of Record of all land surface within 200 feet of the boundary of the affected <br />lands". <br />This comment is not relevant to the current permit amendment application but discusses an action <br />taken by the Division nearly four years ago, however, the Division's response is provided. <br />An amendment to the permit and an acreage reduction request were approved on October 20, 2005, <br />whereby 1.683 acres of unaffected, permitted land, on the land jointly owned by Zellitti Properties, <br />was removed from the permit, and 1.683 acres of adjacent land owned by Alma Phillips was added <br />to the permit area. Based on documents in the file, it appears that Zellitti Properties was not notified <br />of these permit revisions and that the Division was unaware that Zellitti Properties was partial owner <br />of the land involved in the acreage reduction or partial owner of the land adjacent to the property <br />added to the permit through the amendment. Application materials submitted for these revisions <br />indicate Anthony and Marilyn Zellitti as sole owners of the property in question. The two revisions <br />to the permit were approved in 2005 and the appeal period for these revisions has long since <br />expired. <br />The Division has determined that this issue is not relevant to the pending application and would <br />appropriately be addressed separately from the current amendment application under consideration. <br />Further, the comment letter indicates that Zellitti Properties' concern related to lack of notice of <br />these permit actions relates specifically to its lack of opportunity "to negotiate for compensation for <br />the exclusion of its lands and replacement with non owned lands in the pit." <br />Division Comment <br />The Division has determined that if Zellitti Properties desires to pursue its grievance related to this <br />past permit action, it should be addressed as an issue separate from this amendment process. Zellitti <br />Properties may file the appropriate request or motion with the Mined Land Reclamation Board. <br />Additionally, the concern of Zellitti Properties that it did not have adequate opportunity to negotiate <br />for compensation related to the land exchange is not a jurisdictional issue for the Division or the <br />Board. <br />6