My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR10975
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
1000
>
APPCOR10975
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:31:30 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:16:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981071
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
1/2/1980
Doc Name
MEMO ENERGY FUELS CORP ECKMAN PARK APPLICATION
From
MLR
To
KEITH KIRK MIKE MCCARTHY
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.
/
9
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
<br />Page 8 <br />Keith Kirk, Mike McCarthy <br />January 2, 1980 <br /> <br />38. Section 816.156 (Roads: Class I: Restoration) - The applicant should <br />indicate the expected volume of spoil that will be removed from the <br />fills and where this material will be returned to. <br />39. Section 816.156 (b) - Asking for a variance. <br />G. Special Performance Standards (Part 819 - Auger Mining) - The applicant <br />states that auger mining methods will be utilized at the site and is therefore <br />required to submit information which demonstrates compliance with this section. <br />The application currently does not address this section. <br />H. Miscellaneous Information <br />1. The applicant must submit proof of publication in order for the staff <br />to recommend approval for the application. <br />2. The application must contain the return receipts from the notified <br />adjacent landowners. <br />3. On Map Ol3 it appears that the adjacent landowner on the southern boundary <br />has been left off of the map. Other areas also do not appear to have <br />the adjacent landowner identified. <br />4. The permit term is not consistently indicated throughout the text. In <br />one section it is referred to as five years while in others it is referred <br />to as eight years. This should be clarified. <br />5. The application review was mainly oriented towards the future mining <br />operation, and how this application demonstrates that this mining will <br />be in compliance with the applicable regulations. I must advise that <br />I did not critically review how the older mining areas were being in- <br />corporated into this plan. I will again review the application to make <br />sure that all the stipulations (if any) attached to previously approved <br />permits are included in this application. The applicant could search <br />his files and submit any permit conditions which are pertinent to this <br />application. For example, no information is given in regards to the <br />fill being constructed from the 16284 box cut spoil. Also, the 'applicant <br />should indicate what areas fall under the 1973 and 1976 Colorado laws. <br />6. The application calls for a 100' buffer zone along Foidel Creek, while <br />coal lease OIE-22644 calls for a 200' buffer zone. Please clarify. Also, <br />special stipulation (g) indicates no channel encroachment or relocation <br />will be permitted on either the Foidel Creek drainage or Fish Creek. <br />This automatically limits the placement of Excess Overburden Stockpile <br />ll2 to option a. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.