2016-04-19_PERMIT FILE - M2016010 ‎(26)‎

• Permit No: M2016010
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 4/19/2016
• Doc Name: Letter of Opposition
• From: Nancy Reed
• To: DRMS
• Email Name: AME
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

V
�f
15 April 2016 R '`cGJVE0
APR 19 Nib
pN7S>4t'fI OF APO
�
Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety �W11 .
1313 Sherman Street, Room 215
Denver, CO 80203
Ms. Amy Eschberger:
This letter is in response to the proposed Reclamation and Mining development at Hitch Rack
Ranch, submitted by Transit Mix Concrete Company, Permit No. M2016010. After reviewing
Colorado Title 34 Mineral Resources, Article 32.5 Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the
Extraction of Construction Materials,the list below identifies objections to the application. The
bullets refer to the relevant section of that law. The rules mentioned are those within the
MINERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE COLORADO MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD
FOR THE EXTRACTION OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS.
• 109 (3) The mining operation does not comply with the SW Highway Development
Plan.
• 112 (3) The map within the Reclamation Plan does NOT show adjoining surface owners
of record.
• 112 (e) The map within the Reclamation Plan does NOT show the name of Little Turkey
Creek Road, which traverses right through the middle of affected land.
• 115 4 a) The application is incomplete:
o Little Turkey Creek Road is an ingress/egress easement located within the affected land.
Owners of that easement are not included in the list of affected land owners.
o Exhibit B—Index Map: Does not adequately show all roads that provide access to the
area, as required by Rule 6.4.2. Little Turkey Creek Road runs from Highway 115,
through the quarry operations area and on up to Eagles Nest. It would provide access to
the quarry area.
o Exhibit C: Maps do not show the name of Little Turkey Creek Road, as required by Rule
6.4.3 (b).
o Exhibit C does not adequately show the existence of the Little Turkey Creek Road
ingress/egress easement which is owned by landowners within Eagles Nest,as required
by Rule 6.4.3 (g)
o Exhibit D has not adequately demonstrated that offsite areas will NOT be adversely
affected by blasting, as required by Rule 6.4.4(i) and Rule 6.5 (4).
o Exhibit G does not adequately address whether the impoundment ponds will comply
with Colorado water laws related to existing water rights.as required by Rule.1.6(1) (a).
o Exhibit L does not include estimates for reclamation of ALL affected land.
o Exhibit S fails to identify Little Turkey Creek Road as a permanent, manmade structure
within 200 feet of the affected lands.