My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-08-17_PERMIT FILE - M2016033
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2016033
>
2016-08-17_PERMIT FILE - M2016033
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/5/2020 3:45:16 AM
Creation date
8/18/2016 10:35:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2016033
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
8/17/2016
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Holsinger Law, LLC
To
DRMS
Email Name
PSH
WHE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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
Page 17 of 20 <br /> 119. Drms enforcement process may take weeks or months (possibly years) to investigate and <br /> rectify any problems (particularly damage to Itc rd); rd may be left blocked and/or damaged <br /> —unsafe <br /> (N. Reed) <br /> 120. Being forced to prove operator responsible for damage to LTC rd will place huge financial <br /> burden on easement owners for legal expenses & technical experts <br /> (N. Reed) <br /> 121. Portion of easement rd w/in section 16 downstream of quarry is >200'from affected land so <br /> not covered by structure agreement; but particularly vulnerable to flood damage since <br /> canyon narrows below quarry area & some portions of rd run just few feet above creek bed <br /> (N. Reed) <br /> 122. Who will assume responsibility for repairing flood damage to ltc rd caused by permanent <br /> alteration of quarry area after mining complete? <br /> (N.Reed, C. Kimble) <br /> 123. Will operation use ltc rd to patrol affected lands or any other uses besides crossings? <br /> (C. Kimble) <br /> 124. How long best-case/worse-case scenario will they block residents from ingress and egress for <br /> their property? <br /> (C. Kimble) <br /> 125. How will emergency services be provided when only access (ltc rd) is blocked given there is <br /> no helicopter service possible? <br /> (C. Kimble) <br /> 126. A substantive blasting plan was missing in application; no setbacks for ltc rd discussed in <br /> diagrams or blasting plan to protect stability of rd <br /> (C.Kimble) <br /> 127. No safety zone for blasting specified;flyrock can travel 1 mile or more; what's radius of <br /> flyrock zone & safety zone? what are vibration and flyrock standards that must be met? <br /> Even using % mi radius for safety, the rd is always impacted& often homes including mine <br /> are at risk- using I mi radius is even more pervasive <br /> (C.Kimble) <br /> 128. No evidence that a pre-blasting baseline will be made for properties w/in I mi radius of <br /> affected lands (damage to structure &foundations of homes, viability of wells, risk of <br /> flyrock) <br /> (C. Kimble) <br /> � OF'COIp� <br /> 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver, CO 80203 P 303.866.3567 F 303.832.8106 http://mining.state.co.us01 <br /> John W. Hickenlooper, Governor I Robert W. Randall, Executive Director I Virginia Brannon, Director <br /> `\�*1876 j* <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.