Laserfiche WebLink
requesting a three-year extension to Zephyr's CUP, the consultant states that "Current <br /> disturbance is 4.89 acres including 7078 ft. of exploration roads." At an average width of 20 <br /> feet, 7078 feet of exploration road disturbs 3.25 acres. This suggests that only 1.75 acres of <br /> surface disturbance has occurred relative to the remainder of Zephyr's exploration activities. Is <br /> the Department monitoring the areas disturbed by the Zephyr's exploration and road building <br /> activities? If so, how is this being accomplished and is that methodology explained in the annual <br /> report to the Board "for their review as required by regulations"? <br /> Also specified in Section 2 is the requirement that"The applicant shall provide the <br /> Department with documentation from the Fremont County Weed Coordinator that the applicant <br /> has in place an acceptable weed control plan, and that it will be implemented and maintained, if <br /> required, prior to commencing operations." Is the Weed Coordinator's documentation and <br /> Zephyr's weed control available for public review? If the county Weed Coordinator did not <br /> require such a plan, is there documentation of that decision? Did subsequent inspections indicate <br /> what noxious weeds might have been introduced or spread as a result of Zephyr's operations and <br /> what measures were taken to control and eliminate the problem? Does the annual inspection <br /> report state what, if any, specific pesticides were utilized in the control efforts and in what <br /> quantities? <br /> In that same section 2 (K) it states that the "Applicant shall provide the Department with <br /> documentation of an acceptable means for sewage disposal for the employees, from the Fremont <br /> County Department of Environmental Health prior to commencing operations." Was such <br /> documentation given to the Department and is that documentation available for public review? <br /> In Section M, the CUP states that"Any...test pits must be graded to minimize runoff to <br /> adjacent areas". The RGPP is aware of five trenches within the CUP area that are cut vertically <br /> on a 30% slope. The trenches are six feet deep, six feet wide and total nearly 500 linear feet in <br /> length. In Zephyr's application for Driveway Access and Address Permit(12/12/2012) they state <br /> that any trenches "...will be filled and reclaimed immediately...". Despite this stipulation and <br /> statements in Zephyr's application, these test pits have been left open and ungraded in excess of <br /> two years. Was a report of this lack of reclamation included in the annual Department review of <br /> the permit? <br /> In Section O, the CUP states that the applicant is required to provide a copy of a"Stormwater <br /> management plan (permit) approved by the Colorado Department of Public Health and <br /> Environment (CDPH&E) or documentation from CDPH&E that such a plan is not required". Is a <br /> copy of Zephyr's stormwater management plan available for public review? If such a plan was <br /> not required, Is the documentation from CDPH&E relieving Zephyr of that responsibility <br /> available for public review? <br /> The latest CUP extension was granted contingent upon proof of legal access to Zephyr's <br /> private lands south of Temple Canyon Road. Zephyr claims, and apparently the Fremont County <br /> Attorney concurs, that their only access to their lands is across private lands and insists that an <br /> existing trail crossing those private lands is in fact theirs to access by right of prescriptive <br />