Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENT, INC. PAGE 2 <br /> OCTOBER 20, 2014 <br /> RESPONSES TO REFERRAL AGENCIES. <br /> Colorado Parks and Wildlife - We wish to thank *_he Mr. Chick for taking time to visit <br /> the site and comment on the permit. The responsibility for success establishment of <br /> grass on this site is the operators. The seed mix chosen, is used by the <br /> operator/landowner on other property he owns and has proves successful on those <br /> areas. A weed control plan was submitted with the application describing our plan to <br /> control Noxious weeds listed by Yuma County as needing controlling. The suggestion <br /> on accidental taking will be observed during mining. <br /> History Colorado - We wish to thank Mr. Nichols of History Colorado for taking time <br /> to review and comment on the permit. This area has been actively farmed for many <br /> years so it is unlikely there are any unidentified cultural resources on the site. We <br /> understand the need to contact the local law enforcement if we find human remains. <br /> Division of Water Resources - We wish to thank Mr. Mickelson for taking time to <br /> review and comment on the permit. We understand their requirements on water use <br /> and will retain in our records where the water was purchase to show it is legal for the <br /> industrial use at the mine. <br /> APPLICATION FORM: <br /> 4. On page 3 of the revised application, the question number 7 lists "88" and is likely incorrect <br /> because on the original application page 3 number 7 lists "Franson Family Partnership, a <br /> Limited Partnership". Please resubmit a new and completed page 3. <br /> I don't know that happened, but thank you for pointing it out to me. Attached is a <br /> replacement page 3 for the file with the correction made. <br /> 6.3.12 EXHIBIT L - Permanent Man-made Structures <br /> 5. Within the Application, it states that County Road Aaa is In,^.=+teri within 200 feet of the permit <br /> boundary but not of mining activity and no agreement is needed. This statement is not <br /> acceptable to the Division as required by Rule 6.3.12; please provide a signed and notarized <br /> agreement between the structure's owner and the Applicant regarding compensation of <br /> damages. <br /> Where the mining operation will adversely affect the stability of any significant, valuable and <br /> permanent man-made structure located within two hundred (200) feet of the affected land, the <br /> applicant may either: <br /> The key words to rule 6.3.12 are " . • .Where the mining operation will adversely <br /> affect the stability of any significant, valuable and permanent man-made <br /> structure...". No mining will take place within 200 feet of the road and the <br /> construction of the access road will not be below the grade of the road so it can not <br /> adverse affect to the stability of the road. Road construction ir, net I siining. In the <br /> past the Division has only required an operator to obtain a structure agreement or do a <br /> geotechnical analysis for the structure, IF mining was going to take place with in 200 <br />