Laserfiche WebLink
performance standards, and if we are to follow the law, we have to deny it. Bob again <br /> recommended a denial so that the applicants can get on with the appeals process and <br /> eget redress with the DEP Commissioner. <br /> Elliot said he has checked both state and llahpee regulations and could not find any <br /> authority on us to waive the conditions. <br /> Jack said if that's the case, hove did we approve the dyed In s in 2002 and February <br /> 2003. Elliot said on an emergency basis. Michael said it was very clearly stated that <br /> the first time was on a one-time basis, vire expected a alternatives analysis, and they <br /> were to core back and file and show homer they would meet the performance standards. <br /> Jack said the fact remains that while the later says vine can't do that, we in fact did it even <br /> though we said it was one-time only, and no one has called him to require justice_ on it. <br /> He said sooner or later we have to resolve this issue so this channel can be dredged. <br /> There's too much of a public interest, we have approved maybe 100 docks within <br /> op onesset creek and a neighboring creek with the implication that these people <br /> have to get out to Nantucket Sound. We will turn Popponesset creek into a cess pool <br /> if we block it. Hundreds of millions of dollars of investment have gone into this area <br /> and sooner or later we have to come to grips F rith this issue legally so that the channel { <br /> is dredged and good for navigation. <br /> Mr. Hayes said it's true that there was a one-time order of conditions, and that one- <br /> time opportunity was mirrored by the previous Army Corps of Engineer authorization. <br /> They have spent 18 months in evaluating the proposed alternative to address the <br /> northern channel. That was done and the Corps issued the current permit. He said <br /> Mark Marabelli said in front of.dim Tanks, Mr. Harrington and himself that the oniy <br /> practical alternative to maintaining Popponesset Creek was to allow it to be dredged. <br /> So instead of giving them a one-tire permit, the Corps gave one basically through <br /> 2006 with another year grace period to continue maintenance dredging. That permit <br /> _ <br /> was mirrored by Chapter 91 authorization in the same time frame and a Water Quality <br /> i <br /> ' certificate which said they could go to 9,000 cubic yards. <br /> Elliot said IIIb. Mayes should point out the other side of his statement above -y- i.e., o <br /> January � , � �� we issued a final Order of conditions, we pointed out that this was a <br /> one-time emergency,, and that any further action would be subject to a variance. <br /> Mr. Hayes said he doesn't think that is what's said. He thinks it says they could do <br /> three things} one of which was that they could file a Notice of Intent, from which <br /> this Board could make a decision — either approve or deny and issue another Order of <br /> Conditions. <br /> Jack said it was his opinion in February that they were pursuing a course of action <br /> which we hackrop oed to the corps of Engineers, that they had given all the <br />