News & Updates

Citizen Group Concerned About Planned Quarry

Our Lake--One Voice

Let YOUR Voice Be Heard
Give Us Your Opinion on the Quarry Issue
By Filling Out This Survey

THE FACTS OF THE MATTER

April 23, 2007: Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources, Land Reclamation Program, received a permit expansion application from Magruder Limestone Company Inc. to open a new limestone mine on 205 acres in Miller County. See map for exact location. Note on the map that the sewer force mains are in an easement within the Magruder property and that the property abuts the Joint Authority treatment plant property on three sides.

May 17: Company published, for four consecutive weeks a “public notice” of the permit request in the Miller Country Autogram-Sentinel

Notice was sent to Miller country officials. Although the law requires notice by certified mail to contiguous property owners, none was sent and none required because the application mine plan area was totally within the Magruder property.

Permit is for time period to the year 2107.

June 20, 2007: “Many” letters containing comments and requests for a public meeting were received by the Director. On June 20 in a phone conversation with Program staff, Magruder Limestone declined to hold a public meeting.

June 26, 2007: Pursuant to law, those who had submitted letters of concern and request for a public hearing were informed of the Magruder decision and were informed they had 15 days in which they could request of the Commission that a formal public hearing be held. Such letters were received from 44 citizens

July 13, 2007: Larry Coen, Director of Missouri’s Land Reclamation Program recommends to the Land Reclamation Commission the approval of Magruder Limestone Inc.’s request to expand their permit to include the 205 acre plot in Miller County. In this letter to the Commission, Director Coen addressed each of the issues voiced by the concerned citizens. (See summary of Director Coen’s responses.)

Sept 27, 2007: Citizen’s request is presented to the Land Reclamation Commission. See below for comments from both sides of the issue. Following presentations by Maguder and by those concerned, the Land Reclamation Commission voted to allow a formal hearing on the proposed permit.

Jan 27, 2008: Hearing Officer issues notice that the only issues allowable in the formal hearing are those related to the safety of the force mains and the treatment plant.

March 24, 2008: Formal DNR hearing to be held in Osage Beach City Hall.

Positions Stated At Sept 27 Land Reclamation Commission Meeting

Magruder's Position		Concerned Citizens’ Position
Magruder’s position on the issues was discussed by Magruder VP Dean McDonald:. 1. There are few immediate neighbors and easy access from the site to highway 54. 2. Blasting concerns: There have been no new complaints about blasting since Magruder took over the Sunrise beach quarry.. 3. Traffic concerns: Magruder would provide hard surfaces for all roadways at quarry exits.. 4. Noise pollution is not a regulatory issue of the Land Reclamation Commission.. 5. Surface water runoff: Reports not required until after quarry operation commences.. 6. Sewer force mains easement: They have hired experts to design their mining operations so as to not impact the sewer mains and the plan to stay even further away from the mains than their consultants advise.. 7. Property values: They might not decrease, they could even increase.. 8. There is no planning and zoning requirements in Miller County.. 9. Magruder is a good neighbor.. 10. Air pollution and dust control: Magruder has requested a Environment Assistant Visit to ensure they were doing all they could to prevent air pollution.. 11. APAC already has a valid mining permit right next to the Joint Authority treatment plant..		1. Steve Mauer, Joint Authority attorney, stated that damage to the force mains would require shut-down of the sewer plant. This would cause great economic harm to the whole lake community. 2. Activities of APAC are controlled by the Authoriity and blasting is not permitted. 3. Mauer asked, if Magruder is such a good neighbor, why did they refuse to have a public meeting? 4. Osage Beach Mayor Penny Lyons spoke of her concerns. One of her concerns was that the notification process was flawed in that it had allowed Magruder to follow the letter of the law by using the loopholes of notification in a newspaper whose publication area did not include the area of concern and that Magruder deliberately placed the mine area within their own property in order to avoid notification of their neighbors. 5. The force mains are only four feet deep in many locations. 6. Two 300 foot deep water wells in the area could be fouled if the force mains fail. 7. The $15 to $20 million treatment plant could be damaged by the blasting. 8. During tourist season, the plant treats up to two million gallons of waste per day. 9. Damage to the plant or to the mains would do irreparable harm to area tourism, which is second in the state only to Branson. 10. Rick King, Treatment Plant Superintendent, explained that damage to the force mains would result in the raw sewage entering the Osage River. 11. Nicholas Edleman, a professional engineer, expressed his expert opinion that since the pipelines are rigid, and were designed to be such, and are shallow and that since Magruder’s permint would allow mining right up to the edge of the easement, damage to the mains is a real concern. 12. Nancy Vancelli, Osage Beach City Administrator, stated that if the force mains or the plant were damaged it would send raw sewage into the Osage River threatening two endangered species. 13. Suzie Bax, a nearby resident, stated that there are 261 redidential properties within one mile of the quarry property. 14. Vicky Stockman spoke of her fear of loss of livihood from their Riverview RV Park because of its proximity to the quarry.

Director Coen's Response To Citizens' Concern

(Go here to see Director Coen's letter)

Director Coen recommended approval of the permit. He responded to the provided written concerns of citizens and city officials by stating the following:

1. Magruder complied with the law requiring public notice, “…whether or not people surrounding the proposed mine site receive the newspaper or not …a small rural paper on the other side of the county.”

2. in regard to the law that states that it is required that written notification be provided to properties “…adjacent to the proposed mine plan area”, Director Coen concluded that, since the proposed “mine plan area” was inside the boundary of the Magruder property, there was no requirement that any other property owners be notified. Further, since the property was only in Miller county, there was no requirement that the cities of Lake Ozark or Osage Beach be notified.

3. in regard to the potential damage to the force sewer mains, Director Coen showed some concern, stating “We encourage Magruder Limestone Company to prevent any possible economic or environmental damage associated with the force mains or easement.” In regard to heavy equipment driving over the force mains, the Director states, “Magruder will need to work out this concern with the Sewer Plant.”.

4. in regard to noise pollution (a major concern of a near-by RV park) Director Coen was also sympathetic, even to the point of offering suggestions such as providing the name of the person at Magruder to whom the complaint could be registered. But, he then stated “There are no environmental provisions that allow the Missouri Department of Natural Resources to administer protection against noise pollution.”

5. in regard to damage to creeks and streams that run into the Osage River, Director Coen responded that there are existing regulations to which Magruder must abide in order to prevent any such problems.

6. in regard to quarry traffic concerns, the Director simply stated that DNR has no authority to regulate traffic on public roads.

7. in regard to the dust problem, Director Coen states that DNR has no authority to regulate dust due to quarry trucks on public roads but DNR does mandate that no visible dust generated within the quarry escape the quarry property.

8. in regard to concerns about blasting, Director Coen states that a current approval already exists for a 15 acre quarry to APAC that is adjacent to the treatment plant and that blasting from that quarry would also cause damage to the sewer treatment plant. Further, if any damage is caused by the blasting then civil litigation action is called for. Director Coen recommends that a “blasting survey” be performed on private property before blasting commences and/or that a consultant be hired to perform seismograph studies within the property. The Director further suggested that Magruder provide a blasting schedule to anyone living or working within a half mile of the point of detonation. But the bottom line statement from the Director was, “We have no ability at this time to provide aid or relief for anyone concerning the detonation of explosives…”.

9. in regard to concern about water well damage, the Director stated that such concerns “…are understandable, although this does not happen often.” He goes on to state that there are no laws in Missouri that provide protection for maintaining a viable groundwater supply.

10. impact on property value. The Director acknowledges that the quarry could cause property values to drop, and that restitution should be sought. He acknowledges that the the Land Reclamation Act “…identify and perpetuate the taxable value of property…” but does not provide guidance for property devaluation.

11. impact on livihood, business. The Director states that he has seen no evidence that proximity to a quarry has reduced the value of property.

12. concern about location in a residential area. Director Coen states that any issues will be resolved by the good neighbor character of Magruder Limestone Company.

In conclusion, Director Coen recognized citizens’ frustration with the following statement: