Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Surface Mining Permit No. 70-012163 Operating Permit No. 12163 - SEP Determinations - 7/22/1981
�I MS STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BERT L. COLE, Commissioner of Public Lands Olympia, Washington 98504 (PR041G;-D-/FINAL) DECLARATION OF (S+G44;�-A44C-E/NON-SIGNIFICANCE) Description of Proposal Surface Mining Permit Application No. 12163 Proponent Associated Sand & Gravel Company , Inc. Location of Proposal Sec. 27 , T. 24 North, R. 3 West , Mason County _ Lead Agency Department of Natural Resources This proposal has been determined to (have/not have) a significant adverse im act p p nder RCW 43.21C.030(2)�c). This e ui ea u An EIS is is not) r q upon the environment. ( / list b tFee Tead agency of a completed environmental check ' ion was made after review y 9 Y decision and other information on file with the lead agency. Responsible Official Vau hn E. Livingston, Jr. Position/Title State Geologist _._- �2 �2 Date duly 22, 1981 Signatu F RES 30-1802(REV) (5-76) 1 . '/✓ SIAIL UI• WAJP1111U1u1" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES / BERT L . COLE, Commissioner of Public Lands ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Application No. 1,/6 3 Project Tit1eCA�r�� Area District :::�� Subdivisiona— sec. R. >�1, .� W.M. I . BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent S u ----f---- 2. Address and Pone Nu�erZ_o� �Proponent: � 3. Date Checklist Submitted Z- 4. Agency Requiring Checklist v` S. P, 4 of Proposee applic b c: G. Nature and Bra— escription of the Proposal including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature) . (0 o 0\ 7. Lo�tionoroposal discreblandeapeasaffectedical tby any enviin\j of the pronpental as well as the extent, of th impacts , including any other information needed to give an accurate and rstanding of the envirDninental setting of the proposal ) : © It-- \ O V,( II. Estim ted Date for comp ete of the Pro' po T� \ � 1 9. List of all Permit) Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the Proposal (feder 1 , state and local -- including rezones) : fi 10. Do you have any plans for future a ditions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: tiv O 11 . Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your roposal? If yes, explain: \ O 12. Attach any other app ication form that has been comp eted regardin�l the proposal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date. describe th nature such application form: RES 30-1802(REV)(5-76) 1 • II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) Yes Maybe No ( 1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? (b) Disruptions , displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? (d) The destruction, covering or modification ✓ of any unique geologic or physical features? (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands , or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Explanation Q-'I p�— ©� (2) Air. Will the proposal result; in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient / air quality? V (b) The creation of objectionable odors? (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? _e� E planation: �� iA-D y�—v`tZ1O �, 'NT✓ZyL % (3) Water. Will the �proposal 'result in: (a) Changes in currents , or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? (b) Changes in absorption "rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? (c) Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including / but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? RES 30-1802(REV)(5-76) 2• r • Yes Maybe No (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- / drawals, or through interceptions of an c/ aquifer by cuts or excavations?. (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phos- phates, detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? (i ) Reduction in the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? Explanation: --- (4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass , crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal LIZ replenishment of existing species? (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Explanation: (5) Fauna, Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles , fish and shell- fish, benthic organisms, insects or micro- fauna)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wild- life habitat? Explanation: (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Exp 1 a n t i o n: - (La S wr'fR- I Z 14-1►� Pr S\ ..A s v-- RES 30-1802(Rev)(5-76) 3. - i y Yes Maybe No (7) Light and Glare• lilt the proposal produce new Explanation: (II) Land Use. Will the he alteration proposal onothe present or t orplanned land use of an area? -� Explanation: (9) Natural Resources . Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? Explanation: lip - \\-kC.�t-Tz-`Pr SFLL'� ( 10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances(including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event f an accident or upset set conditions?p Explanation: ( 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? Explanation. (12) Housing . Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Explanation: (13) Transportation/Circulation., Will the proposal result in: (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or / demand for new parking? r/ (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? ✓ (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor' RES 30-1802(REV)(5-76) 4. Yes Maybe No vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Ex 1 anation:�X' QP�1 Pr'( k 0�1� Y\-r p.� ���-t =0- �cz (la) Public Services . Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? ✓ (a) Fire protection? (b) Police protection? (c) Schools? (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? ✓ (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (f) Other governmental services? Explanation: (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Explanation: —7-0 (Is-k►-k �1-W{ la- (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities . (a) Power or natural gas? (b) Communications systems? (c) Water? (d) Sewer or septic tanks? (e) Storm water drainage? (f) Solid waste and disposal? Explanation: (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mEntal health)? Explanation. RES 30-1802(REV)(5-76) 5. f E Yes Maybe No ( 18) Aesthetics . Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the ' proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Explanation: fir-^ oz c4QArP (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing , recreational opportunities? Explanation: (20) pro Archeological/Historical . Will the osal result p in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? Explanation: 1II . SIGNATURE ' I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Completed y: Approved � ,' , V- Area Manager RES 30-1802(REV)(5-76) 6. 03/15/00 le: 10 DEPT OF ECOLOGY, PERSONNEL 002 lrU Law Search J.t.esult Page 1 oJ'6 i li a AGO 1974 No. 23 MINING SURFACE -- CITES AND TOWNS -- LICENSES -- REGULATION OF SURFACE MINING IN SHORELINE AREAS. If a surface mining operation for which a state permit has been issued under chapter 64, Taws of 1970, constitutes a "development" as defined in § 3 of the shoreline management act Of 1971 (RCW 90.58.030) and is inconsistent with the properly formulated master, prograrn ,Cur the use of shorelines within the city in which it is occurring, as developed in accordance with RCW 90-59.080, sur;l, surface mining operation will be prohibited by RCW 90.58. 140 :if undertaken on those shorelines. November. 13, 1974 llonorab-le A, N. "Bud" .9hi,npoch State Representoti.ve, llth Distr..iot 361 Maple Avenue N.E. Renton, .Washington 90655 Cite as: AGO 1974 No. 2.3 Dear Sir: By letter previously acknowledged ,you have requested our opinion on a question which we paraphrase as follows: Assuming that a surface mining uperation for which a state por.mit has been issued under chapter 64, Laws of 1970, constitutes a "developmop t" as defined in § 3 of the shoreline management act of 1971 (RCW 90.58.030) and is inconsistent with the properly formulated master program for the use of shorelines within the city in which it is occurring, as developed in accordance with RCW 90,58.080, will thi. i surface mining operation be prohibited by kCW 90.58.140 if undertaken on those shorelines? We answer this question in the affix"Native for the reasons set forth in Our analysis. ANALYSIS In AGO 1970 No. 23 ( (to William A, Gis-sberg, State Senator. on October 27, 1970) ] , copy enclosed, this office answered H Orig. Op, rage 2) ) two questions regarding the then newly enacted provisions of chapter 64, Laws of 1970, which provides for the regulation of surface mining throughout the state. We advised, first, that on and after the effe(�t_ive date of that act (January 1, 1971) it would not be legal to engag4 l.n surface mining, as deflned in § 4 (1) of the, aat. (now RCW 78. 44 .010 (l.) ) solely on the basis of a license or permit issued by a county, city or town w:,thuut also obtaining a permit from the state board of ndtural resources. Secondly, based upon the legislative history of the act during ite littp://d.../fastweb,exe?getdoc+viewlO,i-ago-+•3697+0++minin %20AND%2090,58%20°0 °6 8 /20/02 3/1,5/UO 03/15/00 18:11 DEPT OF ECOLOGY, PERSONNEL 003 t;t)Law Search Result Page 2 cat'6 processing by the 39'70 legislature, we further concluded that a county, city or town may not prohibit an operator- to whore a state permit has thus been issued front engaging in surface intniag within its Jurisdiction in accordance with that permit. In explaining this latter conrluslon, we noted that two alternative versions of a sc ct.i_(rn expressly designed to permit continuing local governmental reyul.at-ion of surface Mining had been before the legi:;l,ature during its uonaideration of the measure and that both of these scncti,ons had been rejeuLr~d. We therefore reasoned, on page 6 of our opinion, as follows: "Had the legislature intended to allow continwi.;ry uuutity or city regulation of surface mining, it could easily ha-e manifested this intent by rotrairring either of the two sections - 9 22 of this senate bill or § 23. of the house bill - which were obviously d�'erfted and designed to do just that; however, it did not do so. Thevefore, we feel constrained to answer the sec:und question raised by your inquiry, as wall, in the negative. . After January 1, 1971, an operator may not engage in surface mining without a state permit. But if he obtains such a permi.t, no county or city may prohibit him from engaging in surface mining i,n accordance thevewith. " While this 1970 act itself has not since been altered by the 1Ggi-alature, anothoa' law, chapter 366, Laws of 1971, 1st Ex, Sess, , has been anacted which now )x:az-s upon the guestion of local governmental regulation of surface mining. That act, denominated the .shoreline management act of 1971, and now codified in chapter. 90.58 RCW, fforig. op. Page 311 established a comprehensive land and water use planning and regulation program for most of the bodies of water of tlr4 aLoLe and their underlying beds, including all major lakou and streams and all. Pacific ocean waters situated within the state. In addition, the act applies to a strip of lands of not less than 200 feet in width wlrl.,uh are adjacent to those water bodies and are known as "wetlands. " See, KCW 90. 58.030 (2) (f) , The combined wate]: and land areas thus covered by the act are callo(I "shorelines" in a(;c;ur:daance with RCW 90.58.030 (2) (d) , A basic substantive provision of this act is RCW 90.58. 140 which provides, in pertinent, part, ttrat: " (1) No doval.opment shall be undortaken on the shorelines of the state except those which are consistejit with the policy of 1-his chapter and, after- adoption or approval, a3 appropriate, the applicable guidelirrc-s, i:c�yul,aLiorrs or master program. " (2) No substantial development shail. 'be undertaken on shorelines of the state wi.t,hout• first obtaining a p-ermit from the government entity having radrninistrative jur.if3di.r:tAnn unde...'r this chapter. "A permit shall be granted; " (a) from June l., 3.973. until such time as al-I applicable master program has become effer;t=i.vra, only when the development proposed is conuiat-ent with: (i.) The policy of RCW 90.58.020; and 0A.) after their adoption, the guidelines and regulations of the department; and (i,i.i) so far as can be ascar-tained, the master pr;og am being developed for the area. In the i-ivw_nt the department is http://d.../fastweb,exe?getdoc+viewl0+ago-4-3697+0++mining%20AND%2090.58%2U%20%2 3/15/00 03/15/00 18:11 DEPT OF ECOLOGY, PERSONNEL 004 e.;li i,aw aearch Result Page 3 of 6 of the opinion that any pee--atit yr:-anted under this subsection i.s inconsistent with the policy declared .in RCW 90.58.020 (.jr: is otherwise not authorized by this section, the department may appeal Uje issuarice of such permit within thirty days, to the hearings board upon, written notice to the .local government aria the permittee; ( [Ori-g, Op, Page 411 " (b) After adoption or approval, as appropriate, by Lhr: department of an applicable master p.c-uyraui, only when the development proposed i.s consistent with the applicable master program and thrz puliuy of RCW 90.58.020. " n In order to place in focus the precise thro&t of this regulatory provision it is necessary to look to certain other exprosal.y defined terms in the shoreline management act. First, RCW 90.58.030 (3) (d) defines the term "development" to mean: IT a uoc consisting of the consti:ucti.on or exterior alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, grµvel or mines,-ells; bulkheading; driving of piling; pl-aeirig of obsttuctions; or ariy project of a permanent or temporary riaLui•e whiu)r interfere: with the normal pvtjli,c: use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to this chapter at any state of water lavel.; " A "substantial development, " in turn, is de;fil)ed by RCW 90.58.030 (3) (e) to mean (with certain listed exceptions) : " . . any development of which the total cost or fair market value. exceeds one thousand dollars, or any development which .materially interferes wiuj the normal Public ur-0 of the water or shor.-e].i,nes of the state; rr And lantl.y (insofar as is here relevant) r the term 'hnasL4r' program" is defztied by RCW 90.58.030 (3) (b) as; ". the comprehensive use plan for a described area, and the use regulations together with maps, da.ayz-arn5, charts or other descriptive matrsz-i.al and text, a statement- of desired goals and standards developed in accordance with the pol.ic:.i35 enunciated, in RCW 90,58.020; " ffOrig. Op. Page 53 ) See, also, :�trb»ection (2) of RCW 90-50. 1.00 which sets forth the following list of seven "elements" which are to be included in a master program "when appropriate": (1) economic development, (2) public access, (3) recreational, (4) cir(;ulati,un, (5) "A use clamant which considers Lbe. proposed general distribution and general looati.on and extent of the, use on shorelines and adjacent land areas for housing, business, industry, transportation, agriculture, natural resources, recreation, eduoaLJ,un, public: buildings and grounds, and other: categories of public and private uses of the land; " (6) conservation, and (7) hititoric, cultural, scientific and educational.. The statutory link between this "master program" and the substar'rtive pruviaion8 of RCW 90.50, 140, supra, is to be found in RCW 90.58.080. This statute, 'codifying 9 0 of the shoreline h1.(p://d.../fastweb,exe?getdoc+view]O+ago+3697-+•0+-1-mining%20AND%2090.58%20%20%2 3/15/00 03/15/00 18:12 DEPT OF ECOLOGY, PERSONNEL 005 UD Law Search Result Page 4 oF6 management act, requires all "local units of government"1/ to develop such programs for the regulation of uSGa of Lh(t! sh ore I.J.iit,a within their boundari-es in a manner consistent with the guidelines adopted by the state department of ecology under RCW 90.58.060. If they do not, RCW 90.58, 070 provides that: ". . . the department shall carry out the requirements of RCW 90.58.080 and adopt a master program for the ahoroli.nes of the state within the jurisdiction of the local government . " Finally to be noted before turning to the i.asue raised by your qu06tion is RCW 90.58,360, codifying 5 36 of the shoreline management act, which provides that: "Nothing in this chapter shall obviate any xe-juirernerrl. to obtain any permit, certificate, license, or approval from any state agency or: a.ocal government. " By virtue of this last quoted provision, it is qu:i.Li, v].ear that the first portion of AGO 1970 No. 23, supz-a, remains [ [Orig. Op. Page 6J ] operative, even in the case of surfa(:e mining operations occurring within shoreline areas of the states; J_.e. , su much thereof as concluded that it is not loyal, in view of the provisions of chapter- 64, Laws of 1970, to encyage in sur.faue mining i,n this state solely on the basis of a license or permit ].ssuE:(i by a county, city or town without also obtaining a permit from the :Mate board of natural resources. The issue which .We unduis4ra„d Lu be rainod by your request, however, is whether the second part of this prior opinion, dealing wiLh (:aunty or city regulation of state licensed surface mining activities, must bu trakeri to mean that even though a given surface mining operation a "development" within the meaning of the shoreline manacjerrtent act and is in conflict with the properly forrnulatvd master program of the city in which it is situoted, that operation may, neverthel4ss, Sti.]..) proceed on the basis of such a st.ati: pez-ttii,t if undertaken within the shorelines of that city. In thus phrasing then issue, it will be noted, we are assurning the propriety, fz'om the standpoint of the objocti.ves and standards stet forth in the shoreline management act itself, of the particular restriction upon surface mining which Lhe ma5t(tr program involved contains; i.e. , that it is reasonably related to th4 *(r)lJevernerat. of: a physical condition ascribed for the shoreline area covered - which physical condition is consistent with the policies of thin d'c:L as set forth, particularly, in RCW 90.58. 020. The question 'with which your request appears to be concerned is simply that of whether the: inclusion of such a restrictions at, all is bdt-;;-ed by t.ha reasoning or result of our prior opinion; and our answer is that it is not. Most certainly, there is nothing contained within the fuuz- corners of the ghorelino management act itself that purports to exempt from its regulatory provisions those surface mining operations which have been granted permits by the state board of natural resources under the earlier, 1970, surface mining act - chaNter 64, Laws of 1970. Yet it is equally clear that the framers of the later:, 1971, act knew how to provide for exratrtpti-orts when they were intended. See, for example, RCW 90.58.140(8) which states that the holder of a certification from the governor pua-suartt to chapter 80.50 RCW, relating to thermal power plants, to . , shall not be required to obtain a [ (Orig. Op. Page 7] ] [substantial development] permit bttp://d.../fastweb.exe?getdoc+viewI0+ago-+-3697+01-1-Inining%20AND%2090.58%20%20%2 3/15/00 03/15/00 1e:13 DEPT OF ECOLOGY, PERSONNEL 006 CD Law Search Result Page 5 oi'6 under this section, " Likewise, sub;scrvtion (9) of RCW 90,58. 1.40 provides that under certain specified conditions no such permit I shall be required for any development on shorelines of the state included within a preliminary or final plat approved by tho appl.i.ctable. state agency or local governmet prior to April 1, 1971, " Similarly, as we have oar.liez noted, the definition of "substantial development" in RCW 90.58.030 (e) itself contains express exclusions of certain projcctc+, but this listing of excluded projects does not refer in any re ,apeut to surface mining. Secondly, the overall regulat.ozy system provided for in the shoreline management act of 1971 does not me_:coly irrvo],ve arr ' optional grant of authority to local governments to adopt certain land use regulations - as in the case of such fox- local planning and zoning as rave contained in chapter 35. 63 RCW for cities and towns, arid chapter 36.70 RCW for. oountl.es. Instead, its now regulatory system esLa)�lishes, in the words of RCW 90,58,050; a cooncrati-ve program of shorelines management between .Local government. and the state. " Consiatent therewith, the act not merely authorizes but directs every county, city or town having shorelina areas wiLhin its boundario. to develop a master progi:•dam .for: the regulation of uses of those shorelines (RCW 90.58.080, supra) - or, if it does not, to have such uses regulated, instead, L-y .a master program adopted by the state department: of euvlogy under RCW 90.58.070. Moreover, even in the case of t_17oaeJ mosLez- pruyrama which are developed by local governments, their effectiven ;ss i.s dependeait upon approval by the department of ecology under RC41 90.58.090. Likewise, although the permit system for, substantial developments which is provided for in RCW 90,56, 140(2) , supra, i8 adrni.nistered locally, the underlying permit [ [Orig. Op. Page 811 requirement is a state requiremen+ - une provided for in a state statute not merely one imposed by the legislative daULhor-J,Ly of the county, city or town in the exercise of its discretion. Thirdly, it must be recallerd that our conclusion in AGO 1970 No. 23, supra, respecting local governmental regulation of 3l,atc9 licen3e aur£ace mining, was not based upon anything expressly contained in chaster 64, Laws of 3.970. Instead, as above indicated, it was merely based upon a failure on the part of: the legislat:uro to have adopted one or the other of two alternative provisions in the original 1970 bills from which that act emanated that would, if adopted, have di3Cl.ai.l:ied dairy intellt on the part of the legislature to preclude concurrent local regulation or sul.•fn(.:t. mining. And finally, there is the fact that the later . (1971) shoreline management act is, without question, properly to be categorized as a comprehensive law providing for the regulation of all developments within the shorelines of the state.2/ See, in addition to the various provisions of the act whic;h we have discussed above, the broadly stated legislative findings and declarations of state policy enunciated in § 2, now RCW 90.58.020. He*vi.ng been adopted later in Li.mw_ than the 1970 surface mining act (chapter 64, Lmw:a of 1970) , it may, therefore, be deemed to have amended that earlier act by implivot.i,vrr to the extent that there hitp://d.../fastweb,exe?getdoc+view l 0+ago+369"7+01-+iiiixulig%20AND%2090.5 8%20%20%2 :3/15/00 03/15/00 19: 13 DEPT OF ECOLOGY, PERSONNEL 007 CD Law Scorch Rcsult Page 6 of 6 might be any ii7reconcilable conflict between the two. Accord, Mahler v. Tremper, 40 Wn.20 405, 243 P.2d 627 (1952) , and numerous cases citad therein. When all of these ,factors are added toget.hoy.., the cor,c].usavn seems to us inescapablee, that any surface mining activltJ.es which con;titute "development" witlxi.rr the shorelines of this state are now subject to the regulatory [ [Oriy. Op. Page 9) ) provisions of a' shoreline management act even though they are covered 1>y a pe-'m1t issued by the boar..d of natural resouroe;s pursuant to the provisions of chapter 64, Laws of 3.970, which were considered by this office in AGO 1970 No. 23, supra. If the legislature had intended otherwise, it could easily have said so in 1.17e'a later Taut - as it did in the other instances above noted. We thus answer your question, as above paraphrased, in thug affirmative, and trust that the foregoing will. be of assistance to you. Very truly yours, SLADE GORTON Attorney General PHILIP H. AUSTIN Deputy Attorney General CHARLES D. ROE, JR. Assistant Attorney General *A.* FOOTNOTES *** I/Def.inF.d by R.Cw 90,58.030 (1) (c) as: any county, incorporated city, or town wl-ricl-r contain:3 within its boundaries any landa ox. waters 3ubject to this chapter; " 2/The above noted express exemptions, such Us that for thermal power plants uncior. ACW 90.58. 140 (8) , do not exempt those projects from the act, per sa, but only from the peirnil_ syst_uut which the: act establi:she:;i for "substantial developments, " as defined in RCW 90.58.030(3) (e) , supra. bttp;//d.../fa.stweb.exe?geidoc+viewl0-l-ago+3697+0++mining%20AND`/*2090.58%20%20%2 3/15/00 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF �L Natural Resources v JENNIFER M.(3ELC11ER Commissioner of Public Lands KALEEN COTfINGHAM January 7, 1994 Supervisor David Robbins Hama Hama Company N 35959 Highway 101 Lilliwaup, WA 98555 RE: Surface Mine Reclamation Permit No. 79-012163, Reclamation Plans Dear Mr. Robbins: I have reviewed your proposal for the reclamation of the site and have the following comments: Area "A" main face - Face will be reclaimed as you have indicated. If the plantings done in March 1994 are unsuccessful , they will need to be replanted annually until satisfactory revegetation is accomplished. Area "B" - Acceptable to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) . Area "C" - Acceptable to the DNR. Area "D" - Time frame for removal of the stockpile is reasonable and acceptable to the DNR. Revegetation of the area needs to be more aggressive than "encouraged. " The area needs to be harrowed or disced to break up the compacted soil and followed up with planting of conifer seedlings. As you know, the best time to plant seedlings is from March to May, depending on the weather. Satisfactory and timely reclamation is the goal of the DNR. The above conditions are the expectations for the site. I will conduct periodic inspections of the site to monitor the progress of the reclamation. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have questions, I can be reached through the South Puget Sound Region Office at (206) 825-1631, Sincerely, Bonnie B. Bunning Region Manager David S. Pierce Surface Mine Field Inspector DSP/bh JAN94.26 be; e �� ��� i �� ��� EN�F✓1CLAW,WA 98022 OOoB Region �, e Fi es u tt i AionEmployer ,Qcyciecipo„", �� /d7IE77 V > 5-4- Ai 9-P 1O-f U SOUTH PI IGEt SOUND REGION HAMA HAMA COMPANY u E C > 1993 N. 35959 Highway 101 E 0 G� � Lilliwaup, Washington 98555 V David Pierce 11 -2-9-79 3 DNR f Reclamation Plan for the Hamm Hama Gravel Pit: Area A (main face) (see map) We will try to shrink this to about one acre by revegetating the South edge as shown in photo. We will plant alder and fir in Mar. 1994 . Area B We will harrow this and then seed to grass and clover, by Spring of 94 . Area C No change. Area D Remove the last of the stockpile over the next 2-3 years, and encourage the invasion of alder and clover, already well begun on the Northern third of this area. These efforts could require 1 -4 years t..) take hold. Sincerely, sawaar as �a wsata��■■■r ss�a� aa<a�� � t v �i CWAMKI WANK F%iceAt j a'o a_ Psok vi !�MRS"I I�IWAW t�ass� Z■i'�s i�—+�w�'i�r - �s r�=amriasrn�w� imm0ae st �: .� ssrar2"atasioaanma: taa� �a Wm all �U"sv aamsm �asa�s�aasss�tu���s.:.r sa R�� ���i��.a _ grin■ ss sH;sass"�a&e MLKffzasa mr w �i V Lin WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources January 11, 1993 South Puget Sound Region 28329 SE 448th St. P.O. Box 68 Dave Robbins, President Enumclaw, WA 98022 Hama Hama Company (206)825-1631 N 35959 Hwy. 101 Lilliwaup, WA 98555 RE: Revised Surface Mining Permit No. 70-012163 Dear Mr. Robbins: Enclosed is Revised Surface Mining Permit No. 70-012163 confirming the permit transfer from the Associated Sand and Gravel Company, Inc. , to the Hama Hama Company authorizing continued surface mining within a portion of Section 27, Township 24 North, Range 3 West, W.M. , Mason County. Please refer to the above permit number when submitting inquiries or reports. Also enclosed are additional conditions of the revised permit (EXHIBIT "A") . Compliance with all conditions of the permit, the law (RCW 78.44) and rules and regulations (WAC 332. 18) is mandatory. RCW 78.44 requires that reclamation of each segment of the permitted area shall be completed within two years of cessation of mining in that segment. We strongly recommend, however, that reclamation of each segment occur concurrent with removal of the minerals. - -- ------- We hereby acknowledge approval of Savings Account Assignment No. 91-440-677 issued by Centennial Bank in the amount of $5,000. An executed copy of the Savings Account Assignment is enclosed. This Savings Account Assignment is conditioned upon compliance with RCW 78.44. A Permit Invoice and Operating/Reclamation Report (SM-7) will be mailed to the above address annually and must be completed and returned to this office with the $250 annual fee, prior to the permit anniversary date. Sincerely, 66�44�41- Bonnie B. Bunning 9 Regional Manager(,2(J7 � BBB/bh JAN93.37 Enclosure bc: Geology & Earth Resources #70-012163 Region File #70-012163 David Pierce Ben Cleveland REVSMPER.FRM Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Surface Mine Permit No. 70-012163 EXHIBIT "A" ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT (1) This Surface Mine Permit applies to the following property: A one acre portion in part of, Section 27, Township 24 North, Range 3 West, W. M. , Mason County, Washington. (2) Natural screens are to be maintained within the setback. No stockpiling will be allowed around the base of trees forming screens. (3) In no event shall stagnant water be allowed to collect or remain on the surface excavation area. Suitable drainage systems shall be constructed or installed to avoid such conditions if natural drainage is not possible. (4) Reclamation activities shall , to the extent feasible, be conducted simultaneously with the surface mining and in any case shall be initiated at the earliest possible time after completion of mining. (5) Permanent field reference markings of permitted area property lines, set back, etc. , are to be installed to enable operator, permittee, and the Department-of Natural Resources--to monitor the progress of mining and reclamation. (6) Compliance with this permit does not ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act, other federal , state or local laws. (7) The reclamation plan sheets 1-4 by Gerald R. Crane, P.E. , referenced in letter dated July 10, 1981, is approved for this permit. Backfilling has not been approved for this site, therefore, the horizontal and vertical limits illustrated on the reclamation plan are the limits to which the site may be mined. Any modification or revision requires written approval from the Department of Natural Resources. -- - - 1� Bonnie B. Bunning Date Regional Manager South Puget Sound Regional Office EXHIBITA.FRM JAN93.38 SURFACE MINING PERMIT STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OLYMPIA, WA 98504 Operator, Hama Hama Company Address: N 35959 Hwy, 101 Litliwaup, WA 98555 Pursuant to RCW 78." (Chapter 64, Laws of 1970) an OPERATING permit is hereby granted to the above-named operator to engage in surface mining on the property described in the application and material on file under this permit. The total area to be disturbed by surface mining, including the deposition of surface mining refuse, shall be in accordance with the reclamation plan filed with and approved by the Department of Natural Resources under this permit, and in accordance with conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. TERM This permit shall be in effect from the date of issuance and shall remain in effect so long thereafter as the operator pays the annual basic fee of $250.00 per site and the additional acreage fee if applicable, complies with the Surface-Mined Land Reclamation Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, complies with the reclamation plan, and maintains a performance bond as required by the Act. CHANGE OR MODIFICATION OF RECLAMATION PLAIT The operator shall obtain written approval from the Department prior to any change or departure from the approved reclamation plan. The reclamation plan may be modified as provided in RCW 78.44.100 at any time during the term of the permit after timely notice and opportunity for hearing. TRANSFER OF PERMITS The transfer of this permit to another operator through sale, assignment, lease or otherwise shall not be made unless approved in writing by the Department. A transfer shall not be approved unless the successor operator assumes all duties of the former operator to complete the reclamation on the land and the Department approves the successor operator's bond. BONDS A performance bond in the amount of five thousand ($5,000.00) Dollars shall be submitted to and approved by the Department prior to commencement of surface mining. The operator may submit a cash deposit or an assignment of a savings account in the amount specified in lieu of a performance bond. The amount of the bond shall be subject to adjustment annually, based on the number of acres to be surface mined and the number of acres to be reclaimed. PENALTIES This permit may be suspended, cancelled, or revoked if the operator violates any of the applicable requirements set forth in the Act or the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, or if the operator fails to conduct his operations as specified in the approved reclamation plan. The operator shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor for conducting surface mining without a valid operating permit. Each day of operation without a valid operating permit constitutes a separate offense. Issued this 1st _--day of July 1981. - - Revised this 11th day of January 1993. One Acre Permit Transfer Sec. 27 T. 24 N. R. 3 West BRIAN J. BOYLE, Commissioner of Public Lands Department of Natural Resources BY aN/�vLC 11 s/al Uwc� Permit No. 70-012163 South Puget Sound Regional Manager SMPERMIT.FRM 6/91 JAN93\39 • STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF SURFACE MINE PERMIT order to transfer surface mine permit No. je.: tG31;o you from 19ssocr�`f� .� S .J �Grb►u�G �+.�n c, complete the following: Subsequent land use mN1�r'%,., 4 r This subsequent lan use is is not L a change from current permit. Note: change in subsequent land use requires submittal of a completed form SM-6 (county/municipality form) . Approval of all landowners with possessory interest in permitted property. Landowner Name (Type) Signature Date Landowner signatures required only if new land use proposed. Current Permit Holder's Statement: I hereby relinquish all ' tere t u ace mine permit No. 12163 Manager, Property Gerald R. Cran�- & E n inuring ex g�o-G z2 Name (Type) natu Tit e ( YP ) Date New Permit Holder's Statement: I hereby affirm that I will abide by All obligations and conditions of_ the current approved reclamation and operating plan for surface mining permit No. 12_ 163 as well as all requirements of RCW 78.44 and Section 332.18 WAC. pa1nA. (o i� �'� Gj corer , 10 —Zf- 9 Z Name (Type) Signature Title Date — IV 3 5_ff IYZ /a L /I,"' (J Address �Lo ` 977 5_990 Telephone Number A new reclamation plan for this permit is attached for approval by the Department of-Natural Resources. Yes No For Department Use Only Date Accepted by Department Accepted by: �G ���r� t Copies to: Operator, Oly-Geology, Region File trnorder.sm ti STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSIONFA BRIAN J. BOYLE OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON pEpT. OF WATUaAL G--5011RCES 9as04 SOUTH PUGET SOUND AREA July 22 , 1981 JUL 27 1981 t1tAssociated Sand & Gravel Company, Inc. P. 0. Box 2037 Everett , WA 98203 Gentlemen: RE: Surface Mining Operating Permit No. 12163 HARBOR AREA Enclosed is your Operating Permit No. 12163, permitting surface mining on a portion of sec. 27 , T. 24 North, R. 3 West, Mason County. This permit .is issued in accordance with the provisions of RCW 78.44 , and in accordance with the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. The issuance of this permit requires the filing of a surety bond in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1 ,000.00). We have received Bond No. 4369366 in this amount issued by Safeco Insurance Company of America. The bond has been approved by the State Insurance Commissioner and accepted by the Department of Natural Resources. A copy is enclosed for your file. The law requires that reclamation activities on the lands covered by your permit shall be completed not more than two (2) years after completion F or abandonment of surface mining. The Department of Natural Resources must be notified within thirty (30) days after completion or cessation of surface mining or realization of reclamation. Forms are available J� from our South Puget Sound Area Office , Department of Natural Resources, 11329 S.E. 446 Street , Enumclaw, Washington 980229 for reporting the completion or discontinuation of surface mining , fulfillment of reclamation requirements , or accomplishment of seeding or planting. r An annual billing for -the permit fee and copies of the form for the annual report of reclamation activities will be mailed to you approximately JL thirty (30) days prior to the anniversary date of the permit. Please refer to the above permit number when submitting inquiries or reports. Very truly yours , Donald M. Ford Assistant State Geologist Division of Geology and Earth Resources DMF:amb enclosure cc: South Puget Sound AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER f ' STATE OF WASHINGTON SURFACE MINING PERMIT BOARD of NATURAL RESOURCES Olympia, Wa. 98504 Operator: Associated Sand & Gravel Company, Inc. P. 0. Box 2037 Address: Everett , WA 98203 OPERATING permit is hereby Pursuant to RCW 78.44 (Chapter 64, Laws of 1970) an granted to the above-named operator to engage in surface mining on the property described in the application and material on file under this permit. The total area to be disturbed by surface mining, including the deposition of surface mining refuse, shall be in accordance with the IN ACC RDANCE anon plop filed the conditions and approved by the Board of Natural Resources under this permits ANDset forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Term This permit shall be in effect from the date of issuance and shall remain in effect so long thereafter as the operator pays the annual basic fee of $25 per site and the additional acreage fee if applicable, and the es ccomlies with the omplies with the reclamation eplan,1dandcmaation intainsAatperforman elbondnasrrequirednbypromulgated [hereunder, t P Change or Modification of Reclamation Plan The operator shall obtain written approval from the Board prior to any change or departure from the approved reclamation plan. The reclamation plan may be modified as provided in RCW 78.44.100 at any time during the term of the permit after timely notice and opportunity for hearing. Transfer of Permits The transfer of this permit to another operator through sale, assignment, lease, or otherwise shall not be made unless approved in writing by the Board. A transfer shall not be approved unless the successor operator assumes all duties of the former operator to complete the reclamation of the land and the Board approves the successor operator's bond. Bonds A perf ante bond in the amount of ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($ 1 ,00.00 . ) Dollars shall be submitted to and approved by the Board prior to commencement of surface mining. The operator may submit a cash deposit or an assignment of a savings account in the amount specified in lieu of a performance bond. The amount of the bond-shall be subject to adjustment annually, based on the number of acres to be surface mined and the number of acres to be reclaimed. Penalties This permit may be suspended, cancelled, or revoked if the operator violates any of the applicable requirements set forth in the Act or the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, or if the operator fails to conduct his operations as specified in the approved reclamation plan. The operator shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor for conducting surface mining without a valid operating permit. Each day of operation without a valid operating permit constitutes a separate offense. Issued this 1st day of July 19 81 27 Sec. BRIAN J. BOYLE, secretary Board of Natural Resources T. 24 N. R. 03 West BY Donald M. Ford , Assistant State Geologist PoRM RES 35-1501 (7-75) Permit No. 12 163 r EXHIBIT "A" . Associated Sand & Gravel Company, Inc. P. 0. Banc 2037 Everett , WA 98203 Surface Mining Operating Permit No. 12163 July 22 , 1981 The following conditions areihereby made a part of Permit No. 12163: 1. This permit applies to the following described property. . . NE quar.ter,SE quarter Sec. 27, T. 24 North, Range 3 West, Mason county. Apprcximately 1 acre of W.S.H.D. pit site X-13 being the existing Canal Premix pit site located at Southwest quadrant of intersection of SR 101 and Hamma Hamma River. 2. Operations shall comply with the Maximum Environmental Noise Levels as set forth- in RCW 70.107 and WAC 173-6 0. ' f f �V .I �'JU17U 111(tfl r • ,i JUL 1C 1991 - �J ASSOCIATED SAND & GRAVEL R E C E I V E D �& ►� COMPANY, INC. 11 L BOX 2037 6300 GLENWOOD AVE. EVERETT, WASHINGTON 98203 \1 } G� July 10, 1981 state of Washington Department of Natural Resources Olympia, Washington 98504 Attention: Mr. Donald M. Ford Dear Mr. Ford: Transmitted herewith are the existing and proposed excavated contours for the Hamma Hamma pit site per your letter of July 2, 1981. The required surety bond in the amount of $1000.00 will be coming shortly. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Very tru y yours, era R. Cra e, P. . Property/Engineering Manager o -� ( . 114 piellK �o d GRC:ct t J c�3 206 355-2111 SEATTLE 206 624.0301 EVERETT � ) ( ) CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION #223.01-AS-SO-CS-G37250 \ -r i kv ofoo E,4 E V. \ p \ o -� �� • y (� cn o� p 0 0 4 Q � LEGEND Ilb - _ --- -- - EXCAVi9TED CONTOUJF' • I I 4 _77i�'oa� — OOf c 1 • P/T S/TE .. , v Q 20 • ¢o \ \ -oo � .o T,r l_-S T/.t/ 0 0 o o b dodd Nl � a \ o: • - O a • r ; STATES; OF �WAS'r;- GTON �� t' ri APPLICATIC>'3�i � �i r F i5rty n``` BOARD 1�� 'FOFC 13�11 ; 'of o°i `NAl'URAL` RESOURCES 1 OPERATIIVG4� ` PERMIT O1ympia',,W6 98504 f: F SURFACE ;MINING, (SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW) NAME OF APPLICANT(TYPE OR PRINT) SIZE AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION Approx. l acre of W.S.H.D. pit site X-13 ASSOCIATED SAND & GRAVEL COMPANY, INC. being the existing Canal Premix pit .site PERMANENT ADDRESS(INCLUDE-ZIP') located at Southwest quadrant of inter- P. 0. Box 2037 section of SR 101 and Hamma Hamma River. Everett, WA 98203 SEC T RANGEOE COUNTY TELEPHONE NO. 355-2111 27 24 N 3 I:jw wM Mason TEMPORARY ADDRESS(INCLUDE'ZIP') DISTANCE DIRECTION FROM NEAREST COMMUNITY 6 Mi . North Lilliwau Same TYPE OF OVERBURDEN APPROX.MAX. DEPTH OF OVERBURDEN None - MATERIAL TO BE MINED OR REMOVED QUANTITY(TONS OR YARDS)' OVERBURDEN : MINERAL TELEPHONE NO OWNERSH}pc Surf a land ro be surface mined(show names and addresses). 25 0�0 = 1"` ` N 5 Sand & Gravel None C.Y. Hams' Hama Co. N.3 S g S y o l � ESTIMATED TOTAL ACRE$TO BE ESTIMATED NUMBER CC�yyACRES TO P. • SURFACE MINED BE MINED IN FIRST YFtSR' L tJJJ 4Up; WA 98555 v`3 METHOD OF MINING EST=„MAX, DEPTH TO BE SURFACE >�.s .. MINED` - Front End Loader Exist. .Pit Floor:.' PURPOSE FOR WHICH THIS LAND IS TO BE USED AFTER MINING OWNERSHIP Mineral rights(s64nnnnhorpesian l.addre ) xm +{ Reforestation�r oa Y Y Pe , Pa p. corporation associated with, Yes No a Do you or an person rtnersh or corF �ti s + _ you now hold, or have ever held, an operating permit? X ; 4 ' If,the answer to the above is yes, please list. fi YReclamation• r Active Complete Or--', Permit No OPerotion- :Current > e 1' Ae^f LQ 16 s No s t i y �CYE ARiING DATE OF ESTIMATID TERMINATION DATE f�2 4 X X 4�4 `'r ter •,�� StaRrACNING OF SURFACE MINING 3 •�>.:; T+ tir: a¢.'..: Yes No i . 1~farCh 4 1981 A ri 1 8, '.1981 Have you had an operating permit or bond revoked or forfeited?, .f X INSTRUCTIONS z; If yes, give permit number and location of site. 1. This application must be accompanied by the fee, a reclamation plan, a plan of surface mining, and also a completed County or Municipality Recommendations Form SM-6 showing that the sed'sub uent use ( ) 9 PoPo �9 i..., will be legal under current zoning regulations 2. Maps must be submitted with each application to the following scales. rn Contour intervals shall not be more than 5 feet Variations are permitted subject to approval. 001-'. ti Area of Site Not Less ThorDESIGNATE NUMBER OF A BASIC FEE OF$25SITE$COVERED BY THIS ITE IS HEREWITH0-5 Acres 1'=50' PPLICATION:i 1 ATTACHED5-10Acres 1'=100' SIGN EDATE Over 10 Acres 1'=200' FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY 2/27/81 ' DATE ACCEPTED BY DEPARTMENT: ACCEPTED BY: h# �// LL - TITLE IT NO.. a jy t Manager, Property & Engineers g /a163 - RES 10.2001(7.75)SW2 Copy Distribution: White-Olympia, Yellow-District, Pink-Applicant i ' COUNT.Y R ` MUNICIPALI .l` ESTATE OF :WASHINGTON ti: ' r �,• .a ,BOARD RECOMMENDATION$ t r s5 i bi ,.• �k i .-..Of ' i rt r'f �. ` ir,� �li 1w�Cii C - - � tx �'♦-t"y" � + ;NATURAL.:RESOURCES '..a •'+� Olympia, Wa98504 ' SURFACE MINING TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT APPLICANT(TYPE OR PRINT) " DESCRIPTION OF SITE W.S.H.D. pit site -X-13i ASSOCIATED _SAND & GRAVEL 'COMPANY.,:.:INC.. existing Canal Pre Mix pit and plant site . located at Southwest quadrant ,of ;.inter- section of SR 101 and Za a Hairi River ADDRESS P. 0.` Box- 2037 f_ Everet i—WA-�8 3 ..._.:�, , SEC T RGE' COUNTY". OE 27 24 N 3 0 W 'Ma son DISTANCE DIRECTION FROM NEAREST COMMUNITY''". TELEPHONE NO.:' : 355-2-111 �~ 6 Mi . North Lil l iwaup 's INDICATE PROPOSED SUBSEQUENT USE OF SITE UPON COMPLETION OF RECLAMATION 'Thi S. is an existing -excavat.lon,...; which -volume.-of o€ prior use did not .require a excavation .permit:• Upon -completion of the paving project; the site will revert to the present use. =} . SIGNATURE(APPLICANT'S) n. l I 0 (TITLE DATE - •"• t •ti Manager, Property `& .Engineering February:27; ..-1981 TO . BE COMPLETED BY APPROPRIATE COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY BOARD OF NATURAL.RESOURCES" " a SUBJECT:' RECOMMENDATIONS ON SURFACE MINING PERMIT APPLICATION FOR A NEW OPERATOR COMMENCING OPERATIONS 7.�"f a• - _. ;. ;, ,fir 3 'y��Yes::Y'r a No t 4!s 1e ?`GIs tfle roposed subagquentltse 1 al under current local zoning regulations? ? �'� 1 c R rt4S p 2° r. aelrTe+9A t S w rl s ys In", `1� Y 2":'Does locai[egulation p mining at the designated site?. b 3' Ha the applicant obtained appropriate permits as may be required by local regulation?(Please attach a copy of the �� s permtt'w}ritten order or resolution) i T'f:v L�� 'Y•„}+J"j�,�SSA e� x1+1S;,,t"+ ' .:r :. .,- i. - r.•.._ � s..+C` N .Z'. 1Ti•�f ���ti. 2 tSet "ort>i ar3y suggested'recommenditions Z M ,. '\ tl is ADDRESS SIGNATURE(PLANNING DIRECTOR OR ADM I ISTRATIVE0FFICIAL) ;�il`"j �+ -� �•r—� :-; M A Sc�t�► 1�EC�I0'#-I fs►\ -cam r--� C.ot:�.:� S —' ♦ TELEPHONE NO.: DATE: NOTE: Chapter 64, Laws of 1970, 1st Ex. Sass., requires evidence that the proposed subsequent use would not be illegal under PERMIT NO.. local inning regulations.. •�, ''f iT. _ kY �?`� RES 1P2002 (5-76) SM 6 Cony Distribution:White-Olympia,Yellow- District, Pink-Opereror, Blue-County or Municipality