My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-02-24_PERMIT FILE - M2016050
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2016050
>
2017-02-24_PERMIT FILE - M2016050
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2017 1:59:16 PM
Creation date
2/27/2017 1:51:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2016050
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
2/24/2017
Doc Name
Rationale to approved PHC and MLRB Hearing
From
DRMS
To
Interested Parties
Email Name
SJM
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.
/
7
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
The application materials did not include documents and comments from the Colorado Parks <br />and Wildlife and was addressed in the Division's second adequacy review. In response the <br />Applicant submitted two letters from Colorado Parks and Wildlife. The agency indicated the <br />proposed operation was not in conflict with any federal or state law. Many of the <br />recommendations from the Colorado Parks and Wildlife have been incorporated into the <br />application materials, including reclaiming disturbed areas with native grasses common to the <br />area, monitoring and controlling noxious weeds and fencing recommended by Colorado Parks <br />and Wildlife. The Office determined the adequacy responses satisfied the requirements of <br />Rules 3.1.8 and 6.4.8, regarding the protection of wildlife. <br />In the permit application, the Applicant stated that there may be a possibility of an asphalt <br />plant and ready mix batch plant. The Applicant has committed to submitting a Technical <br />Revision to the Division if an asphalt and ready mix plant are approved with Mesa County. <br />Additional measures have or will be reviewed to mitigate wildlife impacts from such operations <br />if or when a revision is submitted. <br />Conclusion <br />On February 24, 2017, the Office determined the application satisfied the requirements of Rule <br />3.1.6(1)(a). The Division has determined that the application satisfied the requirements of <br />Section 34-32.5-115(4) C.R.S., and issues its recommendation to the Board to approve the 112c <br />application for the C Road Pit, File No. M-2016-050 over the stated objections. <br />Page 4 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.