Laserfiche WebLink
<br />11 <br />7 June '95 MLRD (A. Sorenson) inspettion of COM, Inc. millsite showing no water In tailings <br />pond. "1'wo (2) PB identified. Inspector's conclusion was that a discharge of tailing <br />pond water down Cash Gulch occurred, amoantiag to some ten thousand (10,000) <br />cubic feet. ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~! l ~1 <br />~,;,.i,o•+~ S~«~~ ~ ~ c results, FAX dated <br />Note: fd'A sampled water from Hazel A on this date; see analyti <br />7/30/95. <br />8 .lone '95 BCLUD (Sprague) Itt to DMG (Sorenson) reiterating County position on allowable ore <br />sources for Mill. <br />9 .tune '95 DMG (A. Sorenson) ltr to COME (R. Mason) replying to Committee letter of 10 April <br />'95. Letter states, among other things, that the Division or Board could issue a permit <br />to the Mill oven though there may be unresolved ]and-use issues; that "...(1)f at some <br />point it becomes clear that there exists little or no potential to secare a source of <br />ore ... the operator could be required to reclaim the sites...' <br />20 June '95 DMG (A. Sorenson) Itr to COM, Jnc. (T. Hartley); adequacy review of permit <br />application. Indicates, among other things, that site can be permitted without bond for <br />building demolition but that, 'If at some point Boulder Cotmty notifies the Division that <br />the mill building canna remain as a beneficial post-operational feattre under local zoning <br />regulations, the bond will have w be iaarased to cover the cost of building demolition <br />and removal and building site reclamation.' <br />21 June '95 COM, Inc. (T. Hartley) ltr to DMG (A. Sorenson); response to Permit Application <br />Adequacy Review addtrsses water baLtnce and quality-assurance issues raised by COME. <br />Item seven (7) mentions a two foot temper lift approved by tfie Division. To <br />the hest of COME's Imowledge, this represents, the only approved dam raise to date <br />(97/912); compare this with requirements imposed in DMG (A. Sorenson) hr dated <br />95/2128, with an implementation date of 95/fi/I4. <br />22 June '95 Formal public hearing to consider permit revocation and bond forfeiture for failure to <br />obey a Board order. M LRD Staff tocommendation was that Mill permit be revoked <br />and 543,000 bond be forfeited. Board decision was to grant a turtJrer month for <br />raolutioa of permit application is.~rres, with reclamation to commence on July 28, 1995 <br />if 4Tanes not resolYCd. <br />23 June '95 DMG (M. Long) Itr to COM, Inc. (Hartley) and Mi Vida Enterprises (Steen); notice of <br />possible violation for two (2) violations of Board Orders issued Feb. 22, 1995. <br />~. <br /> <br />2:3 June '95 BC Land Use (Sprague) Itr to DMG (Sorenson) stating County position, "Our position <br />at this time is that the mill building cannot remain as a beneficial post-operational <br />feature.' Letter goes on to request additional bonding for demolition and removal of <br />huilding. ~ <br />_. - --- <br />