1984-12-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Mi nutes December 11,1984 Page Seven Benke stated the PCA has told us they will be having another public hearing in a few months. By adopting a positive motion at this time with the negative motion in our back pocket we, in effect, give them a chance to put up and if they don't we can then take a negative action. Harcus inquired as to when the hearings would be on the state regulations. Ohman stated the new state regulations are more stringent than the federal ones. The rules, which were finalized as of July 16, 1984, are available at the Superintendent of Documents. Benke asked if the MPCA could provide the council with an analysis of the federal rules versus the state rules; MPCA will send us the information. Schmidt stated his reason for the motion of opposition was to draw attention to what we have incurred as a community and our deep concerns that pUblic responsibility of controlling the storage of these wastes to insure that we do regulate them. I believe that the debate the council had and the denial of that motion had good merit from the standpoint that there will be actual control and how to bring attention to the process. Benke did not disagree with the needs, but how we transmit the message. Motion by Benke, seconded by Janecek, to DIRECT STAFF TO PRE- PARE A LETTER TO PCA AND EPA FOR SIGNATURE BY THE MAYOR INDI- CATING OUR APPREHENSION TO THE MATTER OF GRANTING THIS PERMIT AND REQUESTING THAT THE STANDARDS BE STRENGTHENED WHEREVER POSSIBLE AND TO INDICATE THAT WE WILL ANTICIPATE COMMENTING AND REVIEWING THE SUBSEQUENT ACTION AT THE STATE LEVEL AND TO FURTHER DIRECT STAFF TO THE CORPORATIONS INVOLVED, COPYING OUR LETTER TO THE EPA, REQUESTING THAT THEY RESPOND WITH INDICA- TIONS OF THE POSSIBILITY OF REDUCING THE STORAGE AND THE RISKS RELATED THERETO. 5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried Ohman thanks the council for the opportunity to discuss the MPCA's reasons for issuing a permit.