Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout790403.tiff EXCERPT FROM BOARD MEETING BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO DECEMBER 3 , 1979 • TIME: APPROXIMATELY 9 : 30 A.M. TAPE #79-150 CHAIRMAN CARLSON: Number two is decision regards to Certificate Designation Colorado Landfill, Erie site. Is there any discussion amongst the commissioners regards to this Certificate of Designation? Is anyone prepared to make a motion for on this decision? COMMISSIONER STEINMARK: I , I guess I ' d ask, first, just for clarification. It was my understanding from the record, might ask Mr. David that, the State Health Department represent- ative in his testimony and by the letter basically did not recommend disapproval and recommended two items, isn' t that correct as far as THOMAS D:9VID: Yes, I , I was attended of course the hearing held on Monday, November the we the 26th and uh, the letter was of course submitted and was part of the uh the evidentiary packet. It uh appeared to be a bit uhm vague as to exactly whether it was a letter of disapproval or approval, and uh the representative from the Health Department was here and I if you recall I did ask several questions as to whether or not uh this did in fact constitute a letter of disapproval. Uh, my recollection and in fact I 'm certain what he said was this and that was the letter would not be considered a letter of disapproval provided the Board of County Commissioner did two things, number one, recommended, made a recommendation to the FAA that the Erie Air Park be restricted to either non, to nonjet and non-turbojet aircraft, and secondly that the Board of County Commissioners recommended uh to the FAA that the pilot' s manual now I believe that' s what they call it, the, the manual that the aircraft pilots do do have uh be updated to show some potential possible hazard that might exist as a result of the landfill, or at least describe the fact the landfill was there and that uh to warn for any potential possible hazards such as birds or other hazards that 7 90 40 3 P104l5 might emit from a from the landfill site near an airport. Uh. My recollection is that based on on those two recommendations then the letter would not be considered a letter of disapproval under Section 30-20-103 . Now I might for the Board' s I might read that section in fact I ' d like to read that in before any decision' s made. Section 30-20-103 , now of course this is all part of the solid waste disposal sites and facilities act, reads that person desiring to operate a solid waste disposal site and facility within the unincorporated portion of any county shall make application to the Board of County Commissioners of the County for which such site and facility is or is proposed to be located for a Certificate of Designation. Such application shall be accompanied by a fee of twenty-five dollars which shall not be refundable and it shall set forth the location of the site and facility, the type of site and facility, the type of processing to be used, such as sanitary landfill, composting or incineration, the hours of operation, the method of supervision, the rates to be charged if any, and such other information as may be required by the Board of County Commissioners. The application shall also contain such engineering, geological, hydrological or operational data as may be required by the department by regulation. The application shall be referred to the department for review and for recommendation as to approval or disapproval which shall be based upon criteria established by the State Board of Health, the Water Quality Control Commission, and the Air Pollution Control Commission. Then further in the act, Section 30-20-105 , reads as follows; Certificate: If the Board of County Commissioners deems deems that a Certificate of Designation should be granted to the applicant, it shall issue the certificate and such certificate shall be displayed in a prominent place at the site and facility. The Board of County Commissioners shall not issue a Certificate of Designation if the department has recommended disapproval pursuant to Section 30-20-103 . Um. So it appears that the the Board would be restricted uh in the event that the State Department of Health did in fact recommend disapproval . Uh. The disapproval as pointed out on 30-20-103 must be a based upon criteria established by the State Board of Health, and of course there was considerable discussion at last Monday' s meeting between the representative of the State Board of Health and the Board and the County Attorney as to whether or not criteria had been adopted, whether or not. But the final word was that I , as I recall the record, and course the record is what the Board must base their decision upon, was that uh State Department of Health did not make any recommendation of disapproval. CHAIRMAN CARLSON: Is there any other discussion? COMMISSIONER KIRBY: I think Tom has pretty well cover the questions. TOM PIERCE: Is it appropriate to ask a question? COMMISSIONER ROE : Sure , Tom TOM PIERCE: Have you contacted the author of the letter from the state health? THOMAS DAVID: I made an attempt to Friday and was unable to do so. I was in Denver and then I made an attempt to contact the attorney general' s office. I did wait there for some time. I had another appointment at three and I, I uh was in the attorney general' s office and waited. There was apparently a meeting where one of, one of the two attorneys general ' s assistants who do natural resources work but they were gone. One came back and another I waited as long I could and uh but I wasn' t able to contact the author of the letter. TOM PIERCE: I did contact him very late. They were in that meeting and he said that was the letter of disapproval unless the airport could be restricted. Uh. Without any other inter- pretation. CHAIRMAN CARLSON: Well, that ' s basically (rest spoken over) THOMAS DAVID: Well , of course he wasn' t, the author of the letter wasn ' t here for the re, the problem that I had was the fact that the record has to support the decision of the Board and the Board has to be guided solely by the record and uh I don' t know why the author of the letter wasn' t at the hearing. -Z- But there was TOM PIERCE: It was unfortunate that he wasn' t. It was rather ambiguous in the way it' s written, but he does interpret that as a letter of disapproval unless that criteria is met, and the AIM publication is an impossibility (Not Audible) THOMAS DAVID: Well, the letter starts out uh indicating that the that there is an approval, you know that it is approved, that all the criteria or, I don' t think they use the word criteria, but that' s all the requirements of the department were met, then as I recall about the third paragraph down, or the third or fourth, the finally indicate however that we are not able however to recommend approval of this site until the, until air traffic restrictions imposed at the Erie Air Park. The Federal Aviation Agency guidelines state that no landfill should be located within ten thousand feet of an airport runway used by turbojet or jet aircraft because of apotential bird hazard, and I guess this is probably a general uh guide. The nearest runway at the Air, Erie Air Park is approximately fifty-three hundred feet southwest of the proposed landfill site. We have no basis to overrule this guideline which we understand is based on direct experience. Consequently, we must recommend disapproval of the facility as long a turbojet or jet aircraft use the airport. The site would, however, be acceptable in accordance with the FAA guidelines for piston type aircraft, minimum distance five thousand feet. Thus if a restriction is imposed which limits Erie Air Park operations to piston-type aircraft, then department will recommend approval of the site. This restriction should may, remain until it can be demonstrated by operation that no bird hazard exists in accordance with FAA guidelines . Now, if you recall the representative of the State Department of Health, when, when he was asked the specific question ' is this a requirement that this he accomplished or is this a requirement that a recommendation be made by the Board to the FAA concerning the restriction of the uh air of the air park to or of the airport to either turbo, non turbojet or non pure jet and further that uh the Board recommend that the the pilot ' s , aircraft pilot ' s -4- manual, be he called it, be amended, then I 'm sure I, my recollection of the record was he said yes, that the recommendation was what they TOM PIERCE : You've got some conjecture on that part, I ' d say after having followed this up. Those items in the letter are really impossibilities. The FAA will not publish for a nonexistent hazard and, in order to restrict the airport, it would have to be done (rest Not Audible due to background noises) WILLIAM CARLEY: I was a party to the conversation with Dr. Martin, Director of the State Department of Health. His comment was very simple and very specific. He said the letter speaks for itself. The letter is a statement of disapproval. That, uh, that was his comment and irregardless of what Mr. Lokey expressed as his opinion, I believe if you go back and read the transcript that was (his) true opinion. He stated several times, in my opinion, I believe this would be. Dr. Martin, who authored that letter, very specifically said in conversation Friday afternoon late, the letter speaks for itself and is intended that the letter is intended a letter of disapproval. THOMAS DAVID: Well, if the letter speaks for itself it kind of speaks to a kind of a maybe proposition. It' s pretty easy to say no and it' s easy to say yes. WILLIAM CARLEY: But it did not, it very specifically state that this however` we must disapprove because of this later later on in that same paragraph it says THOMAS DAVID: Well, CHAIRMAN CARLSON : Mr. David, I think we' re getting into a debate here and we did close testimony on this one week ago and I think this discussion is to be between the Commissioners and record. Uh, week, one week ago that was not a letter of disapproval and we ' ll have to go on that record because that was the meeting and testimony has been closed. Is there any other discussion amongst the commissioners? THOMAS DAVID : Now this was done (speaking over Chairman Carlson) -5- CHAIRMAN CARLSON: Is anyone prepared to make a motion in regards to this designation? COMMISSIONER KIRBY: Mr. Chairman, I would simply move, based on the testimony we heard during the formal hearing that the Certificate of Designation be approved for the Erie landfill. CHAIRMAN CARLSON: Do you want to put any stipulations into it to, Mr. Kirby? COMMISSIONER KIRBY: I am not sure from uh THOMAS DAVID: (interrupting) Well, the, the COMMISSIONER KIRBY: The attorney recommendations are THOMAS DAVID: (interrupting) The COMMISSIONER KIRBY: Exactly what power we have as far as the stipulations, and uh, I guess I would uh rather leave the motion stand this way and and then if some of the other, one of the other commissioners, would wish to amend or add to the motion CHAIRMAN CARLSON: Well, what I was getting at is to as, to ask FAA to publish into the airman' s magazine the stipulation THOMAS DAVID: The, the representative of the department of health, at the hearing, indicated that we could only consider that as a letter not of disapproval if you use the word in the negative provided that the Board of County Commissioners recommend to the FAA that the air, that the Erie Air Park, be restricted to non-jet or to non-turbojet aircraft, and further that the Board of County Commissioners recommend that the airman ' s manual be updated to show any potential possible hazards that might exist. CHAIRMAN CARLSON: I guess that' s what what I was asking for COMMISSIONER KIRBY: All right. Very well. I will add uh that to the motion, as stated by the county attorney. CHAIRMAN CARLSON : Is there a second to that motion? COMMISSIONER DUNBAR: I ' ll second that. CHAIRMAN CARLSON : Motion by Bill Kirby, seconded by Lydia Dunabr to approve the Certificate of Designation with the recommendation to FAA that they publish within the airman ' s manual the hazards , or possible hazards as regards to bird strikes at the Erie landfill . Uh, we didn' t put those in the same words -6- that the county attorney did, but hopefully the Clerk to the Board will correct that. Is there any discussion on the motion? All in favor say aye. COMMISSIONERS : Aye, aye, aye. • CHAIRMAN CARLSON: Opposed nay. So carried. _7_ _.. Hello