My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-02-06_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981035
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981035
>
2016-02-06_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981035
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:19:07 PM
Creation date
2/8/2016 9:47:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981035
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
2/6/2016
Doc Name
Cross Creek Preemption letter
From
Law office of Luke Danielson
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
RAR
DIH
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
OGCC <br />of America <br />County's intent in proposing these truck limitations, so we wanted to clearly articulate the direct <br />consequences and why GCC cannot agree to them. <br />While GCC is willing to voluntarily limit coal truck traffic as part of these negotiations for a permit, <br />GCC does not believe the County has the legal authority to impose such a limitation. The County <br />cannot legally cap the number of coal trucks to and from the mine on CR 120 because this is a de <br />facto limitation on mine production, which the County may not do under Colorado preemption law. <br />Rather, limitations on mine production may only be imposed by the State under the applicable <br />state mining laws. <br />2. Section 1.1 and Exhibit A— Contingencies of Lease Modification and Lease by Application <br />CR 120 improvements detailed on Exhibit A as Phase If and later must be expressly conditioned <br />and contingent upon GCC obtaining approval from the Bureau of Land Management on its Lease <br />Modification application. CR 120 improvements detailed on Exhibit A as Phase III and later must <br />be expressly conditioned and contingent upon GCC obtaining approval from the Bureau of Land <br />Management on its Lease by Application. <br />If GCC does not obtain these Bureau of Land Management approvals, the Mine's lifespan <br />decreases significantly. Then, the CR 120 improvements become financially infeasible and GCC <br />would just phase down and close the Mine making the CR 120 improvements unnecessary. The <br />recent U.S. Department of Interior announcement of a moratorium on leasing of coal on Federal <br />lands further demonstrates the importance of conditioning Phase II and beyond on approval of <br />the Lease Modification and Lease by Application. The Department of Interior's estimate of three <br />years to complete a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement does not provide an <br />established time table and must be viewed as strictly an estimated delay. <br />3. Section 1.6(d)(iii) — Issues After County Final Approval and Acceptance of Road Improvements <br />The last sentence of Section 1.6(d)(iii) should be deleted. The purpose for the Warranty Period <br />and the County preliminary and final review processes is to determine whether there are any <br />defects or failures in the Road Improvements. If there are any issues identified during that time <br />period, GCC would be contractually bound to correct them under the Road Improvement <br />Agreement. GCC cannot agree to a broad provision which states that County approval and <br />acceptance does not constitute a waiver of the County's rights to make future claims, allowing the <br />County to make a defect claim twenty years from now. A set time period to identify and fix issues <br />needs to exist, and it does with the two year Warranty Period and County preliminary and final <br />approval and acceptance processes. <br />4. Section 5.1 — Maintenance Fee <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.