Laserfiche WebLink
14 December 2000 <br /> Page 6. <br /> by not only this Commission, the Corps, 91 and Water Quality back in <br /> 1993. In fact, this nourishment area enjoys a Federal permit up to 2007 <br /> and it was used in 1999. <br /> Ms Boretos advised. her understanding from Greg Penta is that they have <br /> not received an Army corps Permit. Mr. Hayes stated they have applied <br /> for a Category 2. Ms Boretos stated that has been issued by the Corps. <br /> Mr. Hayes stated that is correct but this nourishment area that has beer <br /> used in 1993, again in 1996 and most recently in 1999 is current <br /> through 2007 under Permit # 311. In 1996, they put up to 18,000 cubic <br /> yards on that beach and back in 1986, they put 2 1,0 o and most <br /> recently, 3500. They have a window of opportunity to get this done that <br /> closes on or about the 15th of March. <br /> Is Boretos asked why that would preclude thm allowing the <br /> Commission time to get feedback from CZM Mr. Hayes stated CZM is <br /> not necessary. Ms Boretos stated that decision is up to the Commission <br /> and staff. There is not a regulatory requirement for CZM to be involved; <br /> however, we have an opportunity to get feedback from the State coastal <br /> Geologist and their assistant. She had originally asked ed BSC. three weeks <br /> ago to send a Notice of Intent to' CZM; that did not happen.e . She asked a <br /> second-time when the Notice was not received in the CZM office until last <br /> Friday. They notified her Monday they could not make internal <br /> comments by today's deadline. She called Brad Holmes Monday and <br /> Tuesday and told him that. <br /> Mr. Hayes stated under the Army corps category Two Permit Process, <br /> this is a pre-application review procedure that takes into account all of <br /> the comments from the permitting agencies, CZM being one of those. <br /> Under the category Two Permit Protocol, no Federal consistency review, <br /> nor any MEPA review, is required. Therefore, no concurrence from CZM <br /> is necessary. Because of that, they feel that it would be remiss of this <br /> Board not to taro into consideration the information provided under a <br /> $75,000 study performed by Ir. Howes, and not to tape into account the <br /> knowledge of the Harbormaster and Shellfish Warden. He has prepared <br /> a document with copies of the study, which he distributed, to the <br /> Commission. <br /> Ms Boretos stated Mr. Hayes is spearing to a noon-issue- in this project. <br /> This project has to do with Barrier beach performance standards under <br /> the Wetlands Protection Act and the Town Hyla . It doesn't have to do <br /> with the nutrient problem or putrification problem at Popponesset Bay. <br /> Mr. Mayes disagreed. <br />