Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8-24-06 City-County Board of Health MinutesDescription Date 08/24/2006 Location Board of Health Time Speaker -F-Note 6:59:57 AM Board Members Present. Dennis Alexander, Kaaren Jacobson, Brian Leland, Marc Mattix, Paul Sturman, Buck Taylor, Barbara Vaughn, John Vincent Excused Members : Tim Ford Staff: Tim Roark; Stephanie Nelson, Toni Frost, Toni Lucker, Tom Moore, Denise Moldroski Deputy County Attorney: Kate Dinwiddie Gallatin County Floodplain Administrator: Sean O'Callaghan Montana DEQ : Dave Klemp Public: Merlin Nelson, Nicole Prokop, Peter Rothing, Corinne Selby, Jennifer Swearingen, Mark A. VanOrden, Ginger VanOrden, Allen VanOrden, 7:07:24 AM Meeting Called to Order 7:07:29 AM F Public Comment - none 7:07:58 AM Consent Agenda :08:42 AM Barbara made a motion to accept the consent agenda as outlined. 7:08:47 AM Brian seconded the motion 7:08:54 AM The motion passed unanimously. Roll Call : Dennis Alexander - yes Kaaren Jacobson - yes Vote Brian Leland - yes Marc Mattix - yes Paul Sturman - yes Buck Taylor - yes Barbara Vaughn - yes John Vincent - yes 7:08.57 AM _, Regular Agenda The Chair announced a deviation from the order of topics and moved the Election of Officers to the end of the meeting. 7:09:05 AM VanOrden Request for Health Officer Approval for Sanitation in Subdivision Act - #2006-005 7:09:28 AM [Stephanie, Notary Public, swore in the commenters. :09:54 AM Staff Report Tim R. noted the VanOrden's property is subject to the Montana P',Admini�trwttt�c.RUII'FTR MiMItcs�Word \ersion Board ofHcaIth--OS-24-2006-[3ricf htn-1 Page 1 of Sanitation in Subdivisions Act and needs the local Health Officer's approval to allow for a decrease in the offset from the 100-year floodplain. MDEQ has a regulation that allows a waiver for the setback requirement while the local septic regulations do not have such a waiver. The VanOrdens have gone through the planning department process and have received approval for the family transfer from the Commission and have obtained permission to use the family transfer exemption under the Montana Platting Act. This is the final step to obtain approval for splitting off one acre from a 10-acre tract. The County Floodplain Administrator agrees with the floodplain depiction on the maps provided to the Board of Health. 7:14:27 AM Comments by Petitioner and Questions by the Board 7:14:34 AM Merlin Nelson, PE with Merlin presented a PowerPoint show depicting the situation. Gateway Engineering 7:22:05 AM Written Comments - none received The Department received comments from a neighbor about the close proximity of the proposed well to her well. 7:23:14 AM Public Comment Mr. Nelson offered a copy of the PowerPoint presentation for the record. 7:23:34 AM Staff s Comments The variance was noticed in the Bozeman Chronicle on August 13th & 23rd. Tim R. added that staff recommends approval and the Planning Department is in agreement with this proposal. 7:24:18 AM Petitioner's Rebuttal Comments and Questions by the Board 7:24:27 AM 3408 Linney Road. He stated that this project was started 9 months ago Mark VanOrden and he has $100,000 tied up into this project already. His intention was to help his son have affordable housing and stay in Bozeman. He added he would not have attempted this if he thought there was a safety issue that would cause harm to his neighbors or any persons. 7:25:11 AM Mr. VanOrden purchased the property 17 years ago and did not know of the floodplain delineation at the time. 7:25:43 AM Brian asked Mr. Nelson for the rational behind the 100-foot setback from the 100-year base flood elevation? Mr. Nelson feels it is benefical to have a buffer for the imperfect hydraulic calculations. In the VanOrden's case, the setback is not as significant due to the abrupt break between the old alluvial terrace and the lower levels. 7:29:10 AM Sean O'Callahan, Sean had an opportunity to review the staff write-up and recommendations. He added that if the variance was not approved, the Gallatin applicant could then request a floodplain permit application to place fill 0 0 0 F.\Administrative',BOH\FTR Minutes\Word Version`Bclard ot'Hcalth.l)S-24-2006-Brief5.htnt Page 2 of 9 County in the floodway to meet the horizontal setback and the Planning Floodplain Department may have a limited ability to deny such an application in this Administrator' instance. The applicant could place fill in the floodway, which is generally perceived as a hands -off zone, which could compromise the intent of the regulations. He feels the information submitted by Mr. Nelson represents an accurate floodplain delineation. There is no county zoning in this area. 7.33:25 AM Financial information was not submitted to the department. 7:34:14 AM F Close Factual Record and Board Deliberation and Decision 7:34:27 AM Motion John made a motion to grant the VanOrden Request for Health Officer Approval for Sanitation in Subdivision Act - #2006-005 7:34:40 AM Second Marc seconded the motion. 7:34:50 AM John added that the Board finds that the property owner met all 7 variance criteria. He noted the staff recommendation is for approval of this variance and the proposed system would be superior to many of the others closer to the river. The Board finds that: 1) pursuant to Section D (1)(a), the system that would be allowed by the variance is unlikely to cause pollution of state waters; 2) pursuant to Section D (1)(b)(i), granting the variance will protect the quality and potability of water for public water supplies and domestic uses, and will protect the quality of water for other beneficial uses, including those uses specified in 76-4-101, MCA; 3) pursuant to Section D(1)(b)(ii), granting the variance will not adversely affect public health, safety and welfare; 4) pursuant to Section D (1)(c), granting the variance will not conflict with the requirements of ARM 17.36.913; 5) pursuant to Section D (2)(a)(i), the property owner did prove that special circumstances exist where strict compliance with GCCHD regulations would result in unnecessary hardship that is peculiar to the property owner's property or situation; 6) pursuant to Section D (2)(a)(ii), the property owner did prove that special circumstances exist where strict compliance with GCCHD regulations would result in unnecessary hardship that is not caused by the property owner's action or inaction; and 7) pursuant to Section (2)(b), the property owner did prove that the variance does not conflict with the purpose of GCCHD regulations. 7:36:05 AM Kate noted this is a variance from the Montana Sanitation in Subdivision Discussion Act. Our local regulations do not have a waiver request so applicants must come before the Board and ask for a variance. Therefore, the Board must follow the same variance criteria. .37:21 AM Vote The motion passed. F:\Administrative\B0H\FTR Minutes\Word Version\Board of Health 08-24-20O(i_Briel 5.htm Page 3 of 9 Roll Call Dennis Alexander - yes Kaaren Jacobson - yes Brian Leland - no Marc Mattix - yes Paul Sturman - yes Buck Taylor - yes Barbara Vaughn - yes John Vincent - yes 7:37:30 AM John added the VanOrdens came before the County Commission for a family transfer and commended them on their integrity and conduct during this lengthy process. 7:38:24 AM ! DEQ Presentation on the Holcim Permitting Process 7:38:44 AM Stephanie noted that the draft EIS has been recently released. She introduced Dave Klemp, Supervisor of the Air Quality Permitting Division at DEQ and asked him to present information to the Board concerning the status of the permitting process and the timeline. The Board may want to make a recommendation to DEQ to extend the public comment period because of the complexity and the extent of information provided by DEQ in the EIS. She noted an e-mail from Jennifer Swearingen, Montanans Against Toxic Burning, in support of the extension request. Nicole Prokop from Holcim is also present. Two permitting processes are involved - air quality permit and the solid waste license. 7:41:57 AM Dave presented some historical information on the permitting process. The solid waste license application was received by DEQ in 2000, the air quality permit application was received in October 2001, and was determined complete in February 2003. DEQ issued a draft air quality permit (preliminary determination) in March 2003. Attached to the preliminary determination was the initial attempt at compliance with the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). This is where the Dave Klemp' environmental impacts are reviewed and a determination is made on Air whether an EIS is required. In August 2003, DEQ made a determination Permitting that this project had the potential to cause significant impacts and that Program an EIS was required. For the last 2 years, DEQ has been working on the Manager, EIS. The draft EIS was issued on July 28, 2006 and that date triggers DEQ the comment period. DEQ is required to put the EIS out for public comment for 30 days. There is an opportunity for an extension up to 60-days to be granted. DEQ planned to put the EIS out for the maximum 60-day comment period. The rules do not allow DEQ to go beyond the 60-days. September 28 is the end of the comment period. A hearing to take comments from citizens has not yet been officialy scheduled but it looks like September 21st. The official time and place will be announced as J 0 F:\AdministrativcU30H\F'TR Nlinutes\Word Version'Board of Health_08-24-2006_Bricr5.htnt Page 4 of 9 i soon as possible. 7:47:16 AM 1 Public hearings are very formal and uncomfortable because there is no exchange of information. DEQ representatives just listen to public comments and then prepare responses to those comments. DEQ will provide information before the meeting in order for substantive and meaningful comments to be had. At the end of the comment period, it will take time to respond to comments and prepare the final EIS. Within 2 weeks of the final EIS issuance, DEQ issues its Record of Decision and the licensing issue comes to play: 1) solid waste license. If Holcim can comply with the solid waste requirements, then the Solid Waste Program will issue its license and it is sent to the Health Officer for signature. 2) The air quality permit decision will be issued 30-days after the solid waste license is granted. There is a 15-day period in which an appeal can be filed before the Montana Board of Environmental Review, then the permit is granted, unless a stay is approved. 7:52:02 AM The Board asked Dave for clarification about the timeline - can an Board extension be requested for beyond the September 28th public comment Discussion deadline for an additional 60-days or just 30-days for a total of 60-days? Dave noted a total of 60 days and the 60-day comment period ends September 28th. 7:57:56 AM Brian wanted to know what is the criteria that the Health Officer must review? Stephanie noted the criteria involves proper storage of the tires to prevent vector and fire, a process in place that ensures protection of the tires as they are moved from the storage site to the kiln, a fire plan and a financial plan in the event Holcim needs to get rid of tires. 8:01:22 AM Kaaren commented about when does the clock begin ticking? She feels that if the public does not have information for a full 60-days. Dave noted that the information has been available to the public since 1994. 8:03:33 AM Brian asked if Holcim could extend the comment period?Dave noted Holcim could try however the rules regulate what DEQ can do. 8:07:08 AM Jennifer noted MATB is an all -volunteer group and she urged the Board Jennifer to ask the Director of DEQ and Governor Schweitzer to extend the Swearingen, comment period. She went to Helena to copy the supporting documents Montanans for the draft EIS. She feels it is impossible to determine how conclusions Against Toxic were made without the supporting documentation. Therefore, she feels Burning it is important for the comment period to begin at the point at which the appropriate documents are in hand. 8:08:22 AM Consideration of a Board Request to MDEQ to Extend the Public Comment Period of Holcim EIS Already discussed. Marc understands the difficulty of gathering the information. 8:12:09 AM Jennifer Swearingen noted that MATB has a toxicologist and a chemical engineer review the analysis in the first EA and they continue to be on- board. For the past 9 months, DEQ says draft EIS and draft permit were about to come out. The toxicologist, who teaches at Boston University F.\Administrative\HOH\F'1'IZ NlinuuCS\Vdord Vcrsion'"Board o1'Hcalth_05-24-2006 _Bricf5.htnt Page 5 of 9 School of Public Health, would be away for 3-1/2 weeks and has a major grant proposal due October 1. This is a difficult time for him to review. Also, stacks of documents are being sent to the chemical engineer to wade through. She feels it is important that this draft EIS is not transparent. Last year, MATB specifically asked to see documents related to the tire burning permit, but those documents were not made available. Only after an attorney drafted a letter to the DEQ was access finally made last week. She feels the issue is complex and as volunteers are wading through this document trying to make sense of it. 8:14:30 AM Brian wants to put together a letter to ask Holcim to extend the comment period given the inability of MATB to plan for the response. The more we look at it the better the solution. Appeal to civic and good neighbor policy of Holcim. 8:17:11 AM Dennis noted this process has been ongoing for S years and feels that another 30 days would not hurt. The role of the Board of Health is to advocate for public health in Gallatin County. With so many questions on such a contentious and potential public health hazard, he feels it is better to error on the side of caution and give the Gallatin County citizens an opportunity to review the information. Marc noted to properly put in perspective who the players are because it is not big corporate versus concerned citizens. He feels DEQ is the watchdog with the resources, the time and the expertise. Public comment is essential. 8:20:01 AM Barbara feels that 30-days is not a large request to allow experts on both sides to thoroughly review the documents and it is important to th citizens. Lack of time, review and staffing on DEQ's part could lead to mistakes. She asked Kate about the legality of the Board writing a letter of recommendation against the ARM? 8:21:41 AM Kate advised there is no problem in sending a request letter and she shared a situation where the 60-day rule, an administrative rule, a procedural rule and not substantive, was extended by agencies in other states, although not Montana. Paul agreed with Marc's comments and is not pointing fingers at DEQ as being incompetent. However, he does not see the harm in requesting another 30-days to review decisions made and feels we owe the reviewers time since the issue is so contentious and the volume of data is so large. John favors writing a letter to that effect and shared his thoughts. He agrees DEQ is the watchdog but only to the extent that the legislature lets them - and the legislature in the '90s weakened what DEQ previously could do. He noted rule making and politics that go into implementing state statute. He believes the letter should be written to the Governor and copy DEQ, as the Governor will make the ultimate decision. 8:25:25 AM Motion [Brian made a motion to write a letter to the Governor asking DEQ to J 0 0 F:\Aciniinistrative'.BOH\FTR %1IIIUIe AWord Version\Board of Health_ 08-24-2006 Brid'5,htnI Page 6 of 9 extend the comment period on the Holcim Environmental Impact Statement an additional 30-days from the September 28 deadline. la-25.53 AM ISecond Dennis seconded the motion. EL :26:05 AM Discussion John added that the letter should be written to the Governor and copied to the DEQ director. 8:26:12 AM The motion passed. Roll Call : Dennis Alexander - yes Kaaren Jacobson - yes Vote Brian Leland - yes Marc Mattix - no Paul Sturman - yes Buck Taylor - yes Barbara Vaughn - yes John Vincent - yes 8:26:18 AM lJohn will edit the initial draft of a letter. 8:26:53 AM In closing, Stephanie commented that her intent is to get the solid waste documents and with permission from the Board the consulting engineer will review the documents. She will make the regulations available to the Board. She feels there is time to bring information back to the Board. Board discussion continued. John added that there are additional issues involved outside of the air quality and solid waste permitting. There are not enough tires in Montana to feed this operation and to do so, 1,000's of tires will be transported, using today's energy costs, through Gallatin County. He wonders if these factors fall under the parameters of what the Health Officer. 8:29:18 AM Stephanie feels by the next Board meeting a better sense of the status of the solid waste permit will be available. She added a representative from the solid waste department could attend and answer questions. Stephanie noted that she spoke with DPHHS, Dr. Helgerson and Dr. Kami Johnson, State Epidemiologist, on this issue. They reviewed the EIS and provided some general comments about the evidence and that declarative statements cannot be made. One consideration with the EIS, is the three general goals/activities of public health - 1) surveillance - tracking of the public's and the environment's health, 2) communication to the public of risks to public health, 3) containment. Stephanie questions what are the safeguards in the monitoring of this project, shorn and long-term surveillance in communities? What monitoring assurances are in place? F:\Admini�tre1ive\B011\FTR Minutes'Mord Version\Board offealth 08-24-2006_Brief 5.htm Page 7 of 9 $:33:19 AM A discussion on air quality monitoring followed. 8:39:44 AM 'How is this reported back to DEQ and to the Board and community thereby creating accountability? John noted that if this project is approved, DEQ will not ask for a monitoring system and the legislature will not fund it. We will have to do it on our own. The Commission is working on a growth policy and projecting that by 2035, 100,000 more people will be living in the valley and 37,000 new homes. 8:42:00 AM Kaaren added that enforcement is important regarding monitoring systems. The enforcement and the penalties associated must be severe enough, i.e., shutting down the operation when violations occur, rather than just paying the fines. 8:43:34 AM Jennifer Swearingen added that controls and monitoring information are in the draft permit. The draft permit is the same as the EA issued 3 years ago, a concern for MATE. She feels an Air Quality Board, like Missoula's, is needed in Gallatin County. 8:45:07 AM Continue Board Discussion on a Recommendation for Annexation 8:45:20 AM Buck referred to the two letters in the Board packet. 8:49:20 AM Brian made a motion to send the letter provided in the Board packet on Motion page 103 and 104 with modifications to include towns and to send to the respective jurisdictions. 8:49:53 AM Seconded Paul seconded the motion. 8:50:00 AM Vote and the motion passed unanimously. Roll Call Dennis Alexander - yes Kaaren Jacobson - yes Vote Brian Leland - yes Marc Mattix - yes Paul Sturman - yes Buck Taylor - yes Barbara Vaughn - yes John Vincent - yes 8:50:09 AM ! Election of Officers 8:50:15 AM Buck is interested in stepping down as Chair to give others a new challenge. Marc Mattix nominated Paul Sturman as Chair. 8:51:27 AM John nominated Barbara Vaughn as Vice Chair 8:52:15 AM Voting proceeded on paper and Stephanie tallied the votes: Paul Sturman as Chairman Barbara Vaughn as Vice Chair 8:55:14 AM FFtYephanie reported that the Martel Building will be the new location for 0 0 F:\Administrative\ROII"FI'R wlinutes\Word Version`,Board of Health_05-24-2006_Brie1'5.htiii Page 8 of 4 EHS and HS. An RFP for an architect is on her desk. She is planning a presentation to update the County and City Commissions on emergency preparedness activities the Department has been working on. Chronic disease will be the topic of discussion at the strategic planning meeting. 8:59:15 AM Meeting Adjourned Secre ary Chaff • • ram o�, Date 9 vie 06 Date F:\ildministrativc,BOH'I�TR Minutcs\Word VersiomBoard of Health_05-24-2006Brief 5.htm Page 9 of 9 No Text