10/25/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�`° A BOOK 3 PONE 6641 Please note that only upon submittal of the above information will the Department reevaluate its commitment to requiring a mitigation plan. Also note that it is the practice of the Department to require mitigation prior to issuance of a MSSW permit. Communicate by correspondence your intentions regarding these matters to the Department no later than December 11, 1994. An omission of your response within this time frame will result in a recommendation for denial of the application. Sincerely, Richard S. Lott, P.G., P.E. Engineering Support Environmental Resource Program Director Pinto explained that at the lith hour in the permitting process for our West County Wastewater Treatment Plant the department which issues-stormwater management permits threw a red flag up. Director Pinto indicated on enlarged aerial photographs and maps the location of the treatment plant, the percolation ponds and the sod farm. We have irrigated the sod farm with effluent and will transform the sod farm into wetlands. He pointed out the existing wetlands which will be enhanced in the process of construction of the treatment plant. The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is demanding that we mitigate the existing wetlands, but we will not destroy the existing wetlands; in fact, we will enhance the existing wetlands and create 130 acres of wetlands. The wetlands exist because we irrigate it with effluent. The stormwater management people are delaying the permitting because they cannot find a rule that says the wetlands we create as part of our wastewater treatment facility can be used for mitigation. Therefore we must come up with a mitigation plan for the existing 24 acres. The wastewater treatment plant is under construction, so this delay will be expensive. It is absurd to demand that we mitigate the wetlands. They should applaud us because we will create 130 acres of pristine wetlands. Commissioner Bird felt that it also is absurd that we will not receive credit for that.130 acres as mitigation. He pointed out that we have talked about drawing the line with mandates from State and Federal agencies and we ought to draw the line on this issue. The other Commissioners agreed, and Commissioner Bird asked -what would be the most effective way to appeal that decision. Attorney Vitunac advised that the first thing to do is to advise the Director of DEP that we are going to appeal it under a Chapter 120 challenge. Their demand is so obviously absurd that there is a good possibility the Director would overrule his own October 25, 1994 M 96 M M I