Umatilla County commissioners on Dec. 10 approved a land‑use application to add a portion of Tax Lot 12800 to the county’s Goal 5 inventory of significant aggregate sites and to apply the county’s aggregate resource overlay zone, clearing the way for expanded quarry operations under specific conditions.

In a staff presentation, Megan Bobczeski, unit planning manager for Umatilla County Community Development, told the board that staff’s mapping makes the proposed site approximately 67 acres, although the applicant’s materials indicated about 47 acres. Bobczeski reviewed applicable approval criteria under Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 23 and cited relevant Oregon Revised Statutes and county development code sections. She said the planning commission had unanimously recommended approval (8–0) with modified conditions and that staff proposed closing a prior 1989 conditional‑use permit to reduce future confusion.

Carl McClain, representing the applicant, said the site meets both the quantity and quality requirements for basalt used in county and state roadwork and other construction uses. McClain told commissioners the resource was “upwards of probably close to 15,000,000 tons” with depths “anywhere from 150 to 200 feet,” and requested prompt approval so owner/operator Jeff Hines could resume producing rock for local needs.

Members of the public, including city administrator David Slat and local contractors, testified in favor of the proposal, saying the pit supplies critical rock for local road repairs and reconstruction after flood events and supports planned commercial development in Echo and Stanfield. Proponents asked the board to reconsider a one‑year inactivity clause in the proposed conditions, arguing it could create unnecessary re‑application burdens in cases of temporary pauses.

During questioning, commissioners and members of the public raised concerns about potential noise and reclamation. McClain and Bobczeski said the existing pit’s topography and proposed berms limit off‑site noise and that DOGAMI (the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries) reclamation standards would require the site to be reclaimed to stable slopes and that overburden would be used to restore farmable land where appropriate at the time of final reclamation.

Bobczeski clarified that state administrative rules define a site as “active” when rock is stored on site or equipment is present; the county’s zoning process requires an over‑the‑counter zoning permit — not a full Goal 5 re‑application — if a site is inactive for one year but still retains stored rock or equipment.

Following deliberation, one commissioner moved to accept the planning commission’s recommendation and approve the application as conditioned; the motion carried on a unanimous voice vote. The decision is final unless a timely appeal is filed with the Land Use Board of Appeals.

Authorities cited in staff materials included Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 23; Oregon Revised Statutes referenced in the packet; and county development code sections cited in the staff report. The board also required that the 1989 conditional‑use permit be closed as a condition of approval to avoid overlapping permits.

The hearing record was closed at the meeting and the board took final action to approve the application consistent with the planning commission’s recommendation.