HCS HB 246 -- SURFACE MINING AND GRAVEL EXCAVATION

SPONSOR:  Ruzicka (Loehner)

COMMITTEE ACTION:  Voted "do pass" by the Committee on
Conservation and Natural Resources by a vote of 11 to 0.

This substitute allows a property owner, an operator conducting
gravel removal at the request of a property owner, or a political
subdivision who contracts with an operator for excavation to
remove and sell excess gravel without a permit if the primary
purpose for removal is to manage seasonal gravel accretion on
property not used primarily for gravel mining.  Gravel removal
must be performed solely on the property owner's or political
subdivision's property and not within a distance to be determined
by the Land Reclamation Commission in the Department of Natural
Resources of any building, structure, highway, road, bridge,
viaduct, water or sewer line, and pipeline or utility line.
Property owners and operators must follow the departmental
guidelines regarding surface mining and gravel removal.

Property owners are limited to selling less than 3,000 tons of
gravel annually with a 1,000 ton per-site limitation and are
required to notify the department before any person or operator
conducts gravel removal from his or her property if it is
intended to be sold commercially.  Notification will include the
nature of the activity, the county and stream name in which the
site is located, and the property owner's name.  Any future
commercial gravel mining activities at the site will not require
the property owner to renotify the department for up to one year.
Any operator conducting gravel removal at the request of the
property owner who removes more than 3,000 tons of sand and
gravel material within a calendar year must have a watershed
management practice plan approved by the commission.  The
application must be accompanied by a fee equal to the fee
currently paid for commercial gravel removal as established by
the department and must contain the name of the watershed from
which the operator will be conducting the removal, the location
where the sand and gravel will be removed, and the description of
the vehicles and equipment that will be used for the removal.

Any person filing a complaint with the department for an alleged
violation of the provisions of the substitute must identify
himself or herself by name and telephone number; specify the date
and location of the violation; and provide adequate information
as determined by the department of the violation.  Any records,
statements, or communications submitted by any person to the
department will be confidential and used solely by the department
to investigate the alleged violation.

FISCAL NOTE:  No impact on state funds in FY 2010, FY 2011, and
FY 2012.

PROPONENTS:  Supporters say that the bill will reduce gravel
accretion in streams and improve fishing and aquatic life.
Permits are currently expensive and time consuming to obtain for
landowners and farmers seeking to manage their own water
resources.  Individuals removing gravel from their own land will
still report to the Department of Natural Resources and must obey
department regulations.

Testifying for the bill were Representative Loehner; and Missouri
Farm Bureau.

OPPONENTS:  Those who oppose the bill say that some relief in the
permitting process might be warranted, but that oversight
procedures for gravel removal by landowners and political
subdivisions is necessary.  Removal of gravel in a stream can be
beneficial in some instances.

Testifying against the bill was Bob Temper, Ozark Fly Fishers.

OTHERS:  Others testifying on the bill say that counties need
oversight because they have done a poor job of gravel mining in
the past.  The bill could reduce permit fee revenue.

Testifying on the bill were Dennis Conrad; and Department of
Natural Resources.

Missouri House of Representatives
95th General Assembly, 1st Regular Session
Last Updated November 17, 2009 at 9:24 am