DOCSLIB.ORG

State of Vermont Superior Court Secretary, Vermont

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
State of Vermont Superior Court Secretary, Vermont STATE OF VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION Docket No. SECRETARY, VERMONT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Plaintiff v. BRIAN BLAKEMAN AND KYLE BLAKEMAN d/b/a BLAKEMAN'S TOWING AND RECOVERY, Respondents ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER Having found that Brian Blakeman and Kyle Blakeman d/b/a Blakeman's Towing and Recovery (Respondents) have committed violations as defined in 10 V.S.A. §8002(9), the Secretary (Secretary) of the Agency of Natural Resources (Agency), pursuant to the authority set forth in 10 V.S.A. §8008, hereby issues the following Administrative Order: VIOLATIONS 1. 24 V.S.A. §2242(a)(2): Operation of a salvage yard without a Certificate of Registration (COR). 2. 24 V.S.A. §2257(a): Failure to screen salvage yard from public view. 3. Land Use Permit (LUP) #3R0897, Condition 1: Failure to maintain a gate on the vertical board fence as required. 4. Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (HWMR) §7-3ll(a)(l): Failure to store lead-acid batteries under cover on an impervious surface. 5. LUP #3R0897, Condition 2 and Natural Resources Board (NRB) Rule 34(A): Failure to obtain a Land Use Permit Amendment prior to a material change to the pe1mitted project. 6. 10 V.S.A. §6616, HWMR §7-302(c) and §7-803(i): Release of hazardous material into surface or groundwater, or onto the land of the state. 1 STATEMENT OF FACTS 1. Respondents own property located at 143 Vermont Route 110 in Tunbridge, Vermont with SPAN #65720710242 (the Tunbridge property). 2. Respondents operate an automobile towing and recovery service, known as Blakeman's Towing and Recovery on the Tunbridge property. TUNBRIDGE PROPERTY 3. On October 8, 2003, the District 3 Environmental Commission issued LUP #3R0897 to John & Pamela Doyle d/b/a JD Gas to install two 30,000-gallon propane storage tanks behind JD Gas shop, in addition to a previously installed 500-gallon fill tank, on the Tunbridge property. 4. On October 8, 2013, personnel with the NRB received an anonymous complaint regarding the operation of a towing business and junkyard on the Tunbridge property. The complainant indicated that oil was being dumped on the property as well. 5. On November 6, 2013, NRB personnel made contact with the Respondents and scheduled a site inspection of the Tunbridge property for that afternoon. 6. Upon arrival at the Tunbridge property, NRB and Agency personnel performed a joint inspection and observed approximately forty (40) junk motor vehicles, as well as multiple trailers, boats, used appliances and other junk located outdoors. 7. Pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §2242(a)(2), a person must hold a Certificate of Registration (COR) issued by the Secretary to operate, establish, or maintain a salvage yard. A COR may only be issued to a salvage yard that holds a Certificate of Approved Location (COAL) issued by the legislative body of the municipality in which the salvage yard is located. 8. Respondents' operation at the Tunbridge property meets the definition of a salvage yard pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §2241(7) and (15). 9. Respondents did not have a COAL from the municipality or a COR from the Secretary to operate a salvage yard on the Tunbridge property. By operating a salvage yard on the Tunbridge property without a COR, the Respondents have violated 24 V.S.A. §2242(a)(2). 10. Pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §2257(a), a salvage yard is required to be screened by a fence or vegetation which effectively screens it from public view, and is required to have a gate which shall be closed after business hours. 2 11. During the inspection, Agency personnel observed that the Respondents had failed to install a gate and effectively screen the salvage yard from public view with a fence or vegetation. By failing to have a gate, fence or vegetation to effectively screen the Tunbridge property salvage yard from public view, the Respondents have violated 24 V.S.A. §2257(a). 12. Condition 1 of LUP #3R0897 states: "1. The project shall be completed, operated and maintained in accordance with: (a) the plans and exhibits on file with the District Environmental Commission and (b) the conditions of this permit." 13. Exhibit #20 (Site Plan) ofLUP #3R0897 depicts a gate on a 10-foot high vertical board fence to the north of the existing building on the Tunbridge Property. 14. During the inspection, NRB personnel observed that the Respondents had failed to maintain a gate on the vertical board fence. By failing to maintain a gate on the vertical board fence as required on the Site Plan, the Respondents have violated LUP #3R0897, Condition 1. 15. Pursuant to HWMR §7-311(a), generators must accumulate and store hazardous waste upon an impervious surface within a structure that sheds rain and snow. 16. During the inspection, Agency personnel observed dozens of used car batteries stored outside on a non,impervious surface without cover. By storing used car batteries on a non-impervious surface without cover, the Respondents have violated HWMR §7-31 l(a). 17. Condition 2 ofLUP #3R0897states: "2. No changes shall be made in the design or use of this project without the written approval of the District Coordinator or the District Environmental Commission, whichever is appropriate under the Environmental Board Rules." 18. NRB personnel interviewed the Respondents, who confirmed that a towing and auto salvage business was being operated on the Tunbridge property. 19. Respondents operation of a towing and auto salvage business on the Tunbridge property is a material change to a permitted development requiring a permit amendment under NRB Rule 34(A). 20. By failing to obtain an amendment to the existing LUP prior to a material change to the permitted project, the Respondents have violated LUP #3R0897, Condition 2 and NRB Rule 34(A). 3 21. On November 21, 2013, the Agency sent Respondents a Notice of Alleged Violation (NOAV) detailing the violations observed at the Tunbridge property and providing instructions to come into compliance with LUP #3R0897 and applicable salvage yard, hazardous waste and solid waste laws. 22. On February 13, 2014, Agency personnel and Respondents agreed to a junk vehicle removal schedule for the Tunbridge property of three (3) per week with documentation of proper disposal. 23. On April 8, 2014, Agency personnel conducted a follow-up site inspection at the Tunbridge . property and requested the disposal documentation for the vehicles that had been removed from the property in accordance with the February removal schedule. Respondents did not provide anY documentation. 24. During the inspection, Agency personnel observed no discernable reduction in the number of unregistered vehicles on the Tunbridge property and approximately forty ( 40) automobile batteries stored on the bare ground, a non-impervious surface, without cover. Agency personnel also observed a wrecked vehicle leaking oil onto the ground. 25. Pursuant to 10 V.S.A. §6616, HWMR §7-302(c) and §7-803(i), the release of hazardous material, including used oil, into the surface or groundwater, or onto the land of the state is prohibited. By releasing hazardous materials onto the land of the state, the Respondents have violated 10 V.S.A. §6616, HWMR §7-302(c) and §7-803(i). 26. On May 9, 2014, Agency personnel conducted a follow-up site inspection at the Tunbridge property and observed the property to be in substantially the same condition as observed during the April inspection. 27. To date, Respondents have not obtained a COR from the Secretary for the Tunbridge property. SHARON PROPERTY 28. Respondents own property located at 354 Moore Road in Sharon, Vermont with SPAN #57618110053 (the Sharon property). 29. On December 16, 2013, Agency personnel received information that junk vehicles were being moved from the Tunbridge property to the Sharon property. 4 30. On January 14, 2014, Agency personnel performed a site inspection of the Sharon property and observed approximately twenty-eight (28) unregistered vehicles, as well as numerous piles of discarded white goods and scrap metal. 31. Respondents' operation at the Sharon property meets the definition of a salvage yard pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §2241(7) and (15). 32. Respondents did not have a COAL from the municipality or a COR from the Secretary to operate a salvage yard on the Sharon property. By operating a salvage yard on the Sharon property without a COR, the Respondents have violated 24 V.S.A. §2242(a)(2). 33. During the inspection, Agency personnel observed that the Respondents had failed to install a gate and effectively screen the salvage yard from public view with a fence or vegetation. By failing to have a gate, fence or vegetation to effectively screen the Sharon property salvage yard from public view, Respondents have violated 24 V.S.A. §2257(a). 34. On January 16, 2014, Agency personnel sent Respondents a NOAV detailing the violations observed at the Sharon property and providing instructions to come into compliance with applicable salvage yard law. 35. To date, Respondents have not obtained a COR from the Secretary for the Sharon property. ORDER Upon receipt of this Administrative Order, the Respondents shall: A. For the violations described above, Respondents shall pay a total penalty of $75,100.00. Payment shall be by check made payable to the "Treasurer, State of Vermont" and forwarded to: Administrative Assistant Agency of Natural Resources Environmental Compliance Division 1 National Life Drive, Davis 2 Montpelier, VT 05620-3803 Payment shall be received no later than thirty (30) consecutive calendar days following the date . this Assurance is entered as an Order by signature of the Environmental Court ( effective date). 5 B. Pursuant to 10 V.S.A.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tunbridge Hazard Mitigation Plan
    TUNBRIDGE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Adopted by Selectboard: February 19, 2015 Formally Approved by FEMA: __________________ TUNBRIDGE, VERMONT 2014-19 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Tunbridge Planning Commission Tunbridge Selectboard Dan Ruddell Nancy Chapman Ingrid Van Steamburg Sue Clark Sarah Ballou Gary Mullen Gary Mullen Ingrid Van Steamburg Bob Dunkle Liz York Ben Wolfe Erin Gooch Ted Hoyt Brenda Field Planning Consultants Peg Elmer, AICP Community-Resilience.org Sharon Murray, AICP Front Porch Community Planning & Design Technical Support Euclid Farnham TunbridgeTown Moderator, Historian Daniel Ruddell Red Start Consulting, Tunbridge Lister John Durkee, Chief Tunbridge Volunteer Fire Department Ben Wolfe Tunbridge Lister Helen O’Donnell Tunbridge Lister Adam Smith Tunbridge Lister Rodney Hoyt Tunbridge Road Foreman Brian Hamlin Two-Rivers Ottauquechee Regional Commission Peter Fellows CFM Two-Rivers Ottauquechee Regional Commission Kevin Geiger AICP, CFM Two-Rivers Ottauquechee Regional Commission Ned Swanberg CFM Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Floodplain Management Funding Support This plan and its development was funded by a Federal Emergency Management Agency Hazard Mitigation Planning Grant administered by Vermont Emergency Management Cover Art ii | Page TUNBRIDGE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN "Tunbridge, VT 1941" by David Wright http://www.nostalgia-usa.com/ Used with permission of the artist. TUNBRIDGE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Page | iii TUNBRIDGE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2014 -19 TABLE OF CONTENTS IMPACT AND EXTENT OF LIKELY HAZARDS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 COMMUNITY ASSETS AND VULNERABILITIES FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT 2. COMMUNITY PROFILE 4 6. MITIGATION STRATEGIES 31 3. PLANNING PROCESS 12 GOALS AND POLICIES PUBLIC PROCESS EXISTING PROGRAMS DATA AND INFORMATION RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES INTEGRATION INTO TOWN DECISION-MAKING 7. MITIGATION PROGRAM: THE PLAN FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS!N 36 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Vermont Victim Services Resource Directory
    R E 2 V IS 0 E U.S. Department of Justice D 1 E D 5 United States Attorney’s Office IT IO N Vermont Victim Services Resource Directory “Advocacy with Heart” DISTRIBUTED BY: United States Department of Justice United States Attorney’s Office District of Vermont United States Courthouse and Federal Building 11 Elmwood Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 (802) 951-6725 © Copyright 2015 by United States Attorney’s Office *Revised Edition U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney’s Office Vermont Victim Services Resource Directory 2015 ii iii T­ able­of­Contents Toll-Free­Resources­and­Information­Lines ................................................................1 Vermont­County­Listings: Addison County ......................................................................................................15 Bennington County ................................................................................................21 Caledonia County ..................................................................................................27 Chittenden County ................................................................................................33 Essex County ..........................................................................................................47 Franklin County ......................................................................................................51 Grand Isle County ..................................................................................................57 Lamoille County ....................................................................................................63
    [Show full text]
  • Town of Washington, VT Hazard Mitigation Plan September, 2011
    Town of Washington, VT Hazard Mitigation Plan September, 2011 Prepared by the Town of Washington and CVRPC TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Purpose ................................................................................................................................................ 2 3. Community Profile .............................................................................................................................. 2 4. Planning Process and Maintenance ................................................................................................... 3 4.1 Planning Process ............................................................................................................................... 3 4.2 Plan Maintenance .............................................................................................................................. 5 5. Risk Assessment .................................................................................................................................. 5 5.1 Hazard Identification and Analysis .................................................................................................. 5 Dam Failure ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Flooding/Flash Flooding .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (Draft) Tunbridge Hazard Mitigation Plan
    (DRAFT) TUNBRIDGE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Adopted by Selectboard:___________________ Formally Approved by FEMA: __________________ TUNBRIDGE, VERMONT 2020-25 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Tunbridge Planning Commission Laura Ginsburg, Chair Nancy Chapman Brenda Field Gary Mullen, Ex Officio Izzy Provoncha Daniel Ruddell Janet Wells Shane Young Tunbridge Selectboard Gary Mullen, Chair Mike McPhetres, Vice Chair John O’Brien, Clerk Planning Support Jessica Richter Two Rivers-Ottauquechee Regional Commission Technical Support Daniel Ruddell Tunbridge Lister, Floodplain Administrator Simon Bradford, Chief Tunbridge Volunteer Fire Department Rodney Hoyt Tunbridge Road Foreman Cover Art "Tunbridge, VT 1941" by David Wright http://www.nostalgia-usa.com/ Used with permission of the artist. ii | Page TUNBRIDGE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN CERTIFICATE OF PLAN ADOPTION Town of Tunbridge Selectboard Formal Resolution Adopting the 2020-2025 Tunbridge Hazard Mitigation Plan WHEREAS, the Town of Tunbridge has worked with local officials, residents and regional partners to identify hazards, analyze past and potential future losses due to natural and manmade-caused disasters, to identify strategies for mitigating future losses, and to prepare an updated hazard mitigation plan for the town; and WHEREAS, a duly-noticed public meeting was held by the Tunbridge Selectboard on Month X, 2020 to present and receive public comment on the draft 2020-2025 Tunbridge Hazard Mitigation Plan; and WHEREAS, the updated 2020-2025 Tunbridge Hazard Mitigation Plan was submitted to the Vermont Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security and received for review at the Federal Emergency Management Agency on Month, X, 2020; and WHEREAS, after several requested revisions, FEMA approved the updated 2020-2025 Tunbridge Hazard Mitigation Plan on ___________________, pending adoption by the Tunbridge Selectboard; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Tunbridge Selectboard hereby adopts this 2020-2025 Tunbridge Hazard Mitigation Plan for municipal use and implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • Town of Washington, VT Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Created August 2013 – Adopted April 2014 Prepared by the Town of Washington and CVPRC
    Town Of Washington, VT Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Created August 2013 – Adopted April 2014 Prepared by the Town of Washington and CVPRC 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Purpose ................................................................................................................................................. 2 3. Community Profile ................................................................................................................................ 2 4. Planning Process and Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 4 4.1 Planning Process ................................................................................................................................. 4 4.2 Plan Maintenance ............................................................................................................................... 5 5. Community Vulnerability by Hazard ..................................................................................................... 6 5.1 Hazard Identification ........................................................................................................................... 6 5.2 Worst Threat Hazards ......................................................................................................................... 8 Dam Failure ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Derby-West Charleston Transmission Lines
    HISTORIC RESOURCE REVIEW AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, HANDS MILL DAM (VT STATE ID #225.01) REMOVAL PROJECT WASHINGTON, ORANGE COUNTY, VERMONT Detail of a postcard entitled “Washington Vt. from George Bohonon’s.” Courtesy of the Vermont Historical Society, Leahy Library, Barre, Vermont Kate Kenny and Catherine A. Quinn University of Vermont Consulting Archaeology Program 111 Delehanty Hall 180 Colchester Avenue Burlington, VT 05405 UVM Report No. 1303 December 16, 2020 HISTORIC RESOURCE REVIEW AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, HANDS MILL DAM (VT STATE ID #225.01) REMOVAL PROJECT WASHINGTON, ORANGE COUNTY, VERMONT Submitted to: Gianna Petito, District Manager Winooski Natural Resources Conservation District 617 Comstock Road, Suite 1 Berlin, Vermont 05602 Submitted by: Kate Kenny and Catherine A. Quinn University of Vermont Consulting Archaeology Program 111 Delehanty Hall 180 Colchester Avenue Burlington, VT 05405 UVM Report No. 1303 December 16, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ ii PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................. 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING .................................................................................................... 6 HISTORIC BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 7 Saw Mill .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Benefit-Cost Analysis Report DRAFT
    December 4, 2020 To: Gianna Petito, District Manager, Winooski Natural Resources Conservation District From: Meghan Arpino, Gabe Bolin, PE, Stone MEMO Environmental, Inc. Stone Project No. 20-007 Subject: Hands Mill Dam Removal – BCA Analysis Memo Stone Environmental, Inc. (Stone) has completed a Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) as part of the Hands Mill Dam Removal 30% design effort. This memo provides a summary of the analysis, along with a BCA report and supporting documentation, that can be used as part of a larger grant application submission by the Winooski Natural Resources Conservation District (District) to the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for funding to support future project phases. The BCA is a method developed by FEMA that compares risk reduction benefits of a hazard mitigation project to its costs. The result is a Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR), where a project is considered cost-effective when the BCR is at or greater than 1.0. To establish cost-effectiveness of a project, those that are applying to FEMA for project funding are required to use FEMA methodologies and tools. Stone used the FEMA BCA Toolkit, Version 6.0 (https://www.fema.gov/grants/guidance-tools/benefit-cost-analysis) for this analysis. The following sections provide an explanation of details and assumptions of the analysis. Relevant supporting documents are provided as attachments to this memo. 1. Analysis Methodology and Assumptions The overall analysis includes two mitigation actions, 1) mitigation at the dam property itself, including dam removal and 2) mitigation of impacts to the residential property at 16 Woodchuck Hollow Road, which is located at the intersection of West Corinth Road and Woodchuck Hollow Road, immediately adjacent to the dam property.
    [Show full text]
  • Derby-West Charleston Transmission Lines
    HISTORIC RESOURCE REVIEW AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, HANDS MILL DAM (VT STATE ID #225.01) REMOVAL PROJECT WASHINGTON, ORANGE COUNTY, VERMONT Detail of a postcard entitled “Washington Vt. from George Bohonon’s.” Courtesy of the Vermont Historical Society, Leahy Library, Barre, Vermont Kate Kenny and Catherine A. Quinn University of Vermont Consulting Archaeology Program 111 Delehanty Hall 180 Colchester Avenue Burlington, VT 05405 UVM Report No. 1303 December 8, 2020 HISTORIC RESOURCE REVIEW AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, HANDS MILL DAM (VT STATE ID #225.01) REMOVAL PROJECT WASHINGTON, ORANGE COUNTY, VERMONT Submitted to: Gianna Petito, District Manager Winooski Natural Resources Conservation District 617 Comstock Road, Suite 1 Berlin, Vermont 05602 Submitted by: Kate Kenny and Catherine A. Quinn University of Vermont Consulting Archaeology Program 111 Delehanty Hall 180 Colchester Avenue Burlington, VT 05405 UVM Report No. 1303 December 8, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ ii PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................. 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING .................................................................................................... 6 HISTORIC BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 7 Saw Mill .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]