Laserfiche WebLink
~ 09/16/96 16:21 DES ~ 303 83.2 810 III IIIIIIIII"IIIII ~ N0.059 DOl <br />ROBERT A. WYI.ER <br />1800 ROAD 1351 <br />SII.VERTHORNE, CO 80498 <br />(970)468-6439 <br />September 16, 1996 <br />Division of Muletals and Geology <br />Department ofNetural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Re: L.G. Everist 112 Reclamation Permit Application <br />ladies and Gentleman: <br />The purpose of this letter is to submit for you consideration the following <br />cotnmeats to the above referenced permit application: <br />1. The referenced permit application should be denied ubeer Section 34-32- <br />120 CRS. In recent discussions with management of the operator-applicant, it was <br />confirmed that certain hydrocarbon dischazges to ground water in applicant's current <br />operation have not yet been remedied. As such discharges are in violation of the Colorado <br />Mrned Land Reclamation Aa, the permit should not be granted. <br />2. The referenced permit nppGcation shauld be denied for failure to comply <br />with Section 34-32-102 (1) CRS in that the proposed mine aed reclamation fail "to aid in <br />the protection ofwddlife and aquatic resources". Specifice0y, the finish slopes ofthe <br />"lakes" seated by the proposed operation and reclamation are a dar-ger to wildlife. <br />Applicant's Ea~ibit C, Mining Plan, indicates "Lakeshore will be dug at the 3:1 / 2:1 <br />configuration". Clearly, the proposed slopes aze a danger to wildlife, as well as to people, <br />in that unassisted egress from the "lakes" might not be possible. <br />3. The referenced permit application should be denied for Endure to comply <br />with Section 34-32-116 (7) CRS, which states that "lf the operator's choice of <br />reclamation is for range, the affected land shall be restored to the satisfaction of the board <br />to slopes commensurate with the proposed land use and shall not be too steep to be <br />traversed by livestock...." A note to applicant's Exhibit F, Reclamadon Plan, states "the <br />beneficial end land use is rangeland". The proposed slopes are "to steep to be traversed <br />by livestocl~', are not commensurate with the proposed lead use, pose a danger to both <br />livestock and people, and, accordingly fail to comply with Section 34-32-116 (a) CRS. <br />4. No information is provided by the applicant concerning prevailing wind. It <br />is believed that the prevailing winds affecting the proposed mine site emanate from the <br />west and/or northwest. Since the proposed conveyors, material stockpiles, overburden, <br />(j: cJEoewr <br />