NPRPO Meeting Minutes

July 5, 2006

Santa Clara Training Center

Española, NM

 

 

Member’s attendance:

Ted Martinez –Chair                                                     Victor Robles – Taos County                                             

Ray Gonzales – Los Alamos County                             Bob Perry – Town of Red River                            

Jim West – Los Alamos County                                    Ivan Guillen – City of Española                              

Patrick Nicholson – Ohkay Owingeh                            Sean Hughes – Santa Clara Pueblo

Sandra Sue Richardson – Picuris Pueblo                       Leon Roybal – San Ildefonso Pueblo

Matthew Roybal – Santa Fe County                             Filimon Sanchez – Sangre de Cristo LG     

 

Affiliate Member attendance:

Sandra Maes – NPRPO Planner                                   Bob Widoe – NMDOT – Planning            

Janet Spivey – NMDOT – Planning                              Levi Valdez – BIA-SWRO@NPA

Benny Martinez – NMDOT –Project Dev.        Phil Gallegos - Asst. Dist Engineer/D-5      

Ron Shutiva – NMDOT – Tribal Liaison                            

 

Guests in attendance:

 

Citizen’s in attendance:

 

I.                    Call to order at 9:40 by Ted Martinez, Chair/Vice Chair.

Ø      Thanked Santa Clara Pueblo staff for the meeting location and refreshments.

 

II.                 Welcome and Introductions –

 

III.               Approval of Agenda –

Ø      Patrick Nicholson, Ohkay Owingeh made a motion to approve the agenda, seconded by Sean Hughes, Santa Clara Pueblo.  Passed unanimously

 

IV.              Approval of Minutes for June 7, 2006

Ø      Sean Hughes, Santa Clara Pueblo made a motion to approve the meeting minutes, seconded by Victor Robles, Taos County.

 

V.                 Presentation by Jim Wood, USACE – Regulatory Branch

Ø      Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

·        Jim is a biologist with the USACE

·        Jurisdiction of waters of the United States includes navigable waterways, interstate waters and their tributaries

1.      The purpose of Section 404 is to insure that the biological and chemical quality of water is protected from discharges of dredged or

fill material that could lead to permanent alterations or destruction of the waterway.

2.      The general rule of thumb is discharge of materials at or below the ordinary high water mark (OHM) would require a permit.

·        Exempted activities originally were not identified at the inception of the Act in 1972. An amendment to the act in 1977 included some exemptions and a general permit.

1.      Two that are widely used in NM are:

a.       Acequia repair or maintenance if repaired or maintained to its original state

b.      Maintenance requirements, such as culvert cleaning or replacement, again maintained or repaired to its original state.

c.       Keeping in mind, that by repairing or maintaining either activity, no “new” or toxic materials are introduced into the waterway and flow is not impaired.

·        Jim provided a brief discussion on the different types permitted activities.

·        Distinguished between State and Tribal Water Quality Authority through Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.

·        Provided information on enforcement of permitted activities and unpermitted activities.  Indicating that fines are very significant and can be very time consuming.

     Compliance mitigation costs can be very onerous.

·        Jim provided a handout for further information.

·        Discussion from group:

1.      Ted stated that this group deals with road projects on a continuum.  Most times when funding gets approved the entity does not get their permits approved in time and can be detrimental to contractual requirements.

2.      Levi asked if replacing a culvert in a road would require a permit.

a.       Jim answered – not if the culvert specifications are the same, but a temporary detour would call for a permit

3.      Ray G. asked if all permit requests go to Albuquerque, and what is the response time

a.       Jim answered – Depending where the location is, which is identified in the handout as to which branch office has jurisdiction.  Secondly, turn around time for a nationwide permit is much quicker than an individual permit, according to the scope of the work identified in a nationwide permit, it is a 2-3 week process, and an individual permit requires a 30-day public comment period

4.  Ted stated that even though you may be working in an ephemeral channel, a notification letter to USACE is still required.

5.   Sandra asked if the example that outlined the installation of a culvert and the washout which led to accelerated erosion on Jim’s power-point presentation, and the USACE recommendation to put in a low water crossing.  Would maintenance of the low water crossing require a permit during times of high water activity?

a.   Jim answered – if specification of the low water were not altered or modified, that maintenance activity would not require a permit, only notification to USACE.

Ø      Section 401 – Clean Water Act – NPS- Environment Department – Erin Trujillo

·        Erin was unable to present due to illness.  NPRPO to schedule at a later date.

 

VI.              Long Range Plan – Section I

Ø      Los Alamos County submitted a CD with information to be included on the LRP and the final Transit Feasibility Study

Ø      Santa Fe County submitted their 1999 Growth Management Plan

 

VII.            NMDOT District V report

Ø      Phil Gallegos gave an update on D-5 activities

·        Announced the close-out of all Federal FY projects deadline of September 30th

·        Noteworthy projects for our regional area include:

1.      US64 – Taos/El Prado project that will let in the Fall

2.      Rockfall mitigation for NM502/4 within Los Alamos County (LAC)

3.      Drainage project within the City of Española

·        Regular STIP cycle next Spring – due to changes in construction cost looks pretty grim

1.      Worst case scenario could end up with two (2) district projects

·        Discussion from group:

1.      LAC is experiencing low bidder turn out with very high bids, which are bidding as high as 40% of engineering costs.  What will happen if the contractual agreements with the LGRF’s cannot be met?

·        Phil stated that NMDOT is experiencing the same thing.  If the entity is experiencing this, they should contact D-5 via a letter of request for an extension.

2.   Ted stated that recently NMDOT had installed a 3-way stop in Los Cordova’s which is at the end of a curve and may lead to potential accidents.  Asked if NMDOT could install more warning and notification signs.

·        Phil stated that this responsibility now fell in his job description and he would have maintenance install more signage.

Ø      Benny Martinez, Project Development from NMDOT General Office announced his role to the RPOs

·        Has been assigned to work with D-4 and D-5 to assist with local lead funded projects

·        Will work with local entities to meet contractual requirements

·        Will provide engineering oversight – not design – but guidance and directions

·        Guidance such as who to contact for utility easements, ROW’s, environmental clearances

·        Would like to establish good relations with the local governments and requests a contact list from the NPRPO.  Sandra to email.

·        Contact information for Benny is 827-5531/490-2623 or email is benny.martinez@state.nm.us

Ø      Bob Widoe, NMDOT – Planning

·        Announced that GRIP II may be moving ahead for the new Legislative Session

1.      The Planning Dept. is working with Municipal League/Association of Counties/NMFA for a unified approach

2.      Looking at the involvement of the MPOs/RPOs in the process

3.      Proposal of $250 Million for projects – strongly recommend that NO changes occur to the current list

4.      Asked that Sandra re-send the final GRIP II list to all entities as a refresher

·        LRP – noticed that we jumped right into projects

1.      Reminds everyone that that the LRP is NOT a 20 year plan for STIP

2.      The group needs to think about how you want your region to look like in 20 years, such as the inclusion of economic development, transit operations

3.      Reminds everyone that the NPRPO has a very good plan to work from

 

VIII.         New Business

a.       Introduction/Discussion of new project proposals

1.      No submittals

b.      Pedestrian grants due by July 31st to UNM

 

X.        Next meeting will be

Ø      August 2nd at Village of Chama – Council Chambers on 4th Street off NM17

Ø      September in Taos County – Location TBA

Ø      October 4th at Ohkay Owingeh – Location TBA

 

X.        Miscellaneous/Announcements

Ø      NPRPO Website – keep the forms coming!

Ø      Entities need to submit in writing their voting member as well as their alternate, if they haven’t already done so.  Thank you to those entities who have submitted, it helps identify the voting members.  Ted Garcia asked that Sandra create a list of who the voting members and alternates are for each entity to be disseminated.

Ø      UNM 2006 Pedestrian Safety Seed Grant due July 31, 2006 by 5:00 pm.  For further information http://www.walkinginfo.org

Ø      LTIF did not get approved, still receiving public comments as stated in an email that Sandra sent out.

Ø      ICIP due to DFA by August 31, 2006.  NCNMEDD planning department will be hosting a series of workshops in July and August to be announced.

 

XI.       Ted thanked the meeting host. Asked for a motion to adjourn; Patrick Nicholson, Okay Owingeh motioned, seconded by Sean Hughes.  Unanimous agreement.