Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~: <br />n <br />u <br />disregards general applicable regulations as well as its own reclamation <br />promises. <br />1. The MLRD, 1n 1985, found Hallett in vlolation of its Reclamation Plan <br />for the Dltmar Quarry. Specifically, the board found improper salvage of <br />topsoil, mining outside of permit boundaries, and lack of revegetating <br />within permit areas. <br />2. Currently, Hallett's McLain pit 1n Franktown appears to involve mining <br />1n excess of permitted area, failing to undertake revegetation, and mining <br />beyond the limits of its state "limited impact" permit--mining in excess of <br />that acreage allowed under the "limited impact" permit without having gone <br />through the processes, the public hearings, and the requirements adopted to <br />safeguard the public Interest. The alleged violation in this instance 1s not <br />only of reclamation plan promises, but also of state law. <br />3. Last spring, MLRD investigators found that Hallett's Walker pit, also <br />1n Franktown, was 1n vlolation of permit requirements because stockpiling <br />and equipment storage was occurring outside permit boundaries. <br />Additionally, we continue to hear complaints from individuals planning <br />to oppose this quarry at county level that unapplied for prospecting by <br />Hallett has taken place along the Franktown Cherry Creek. <br />III. <br />We have grave concern that there may be atypical relationships among <br />the Senator-Applicant in this case, the head of the Natural Resources <br />Department, and the heads of Natural Resources sub-departments <br />[particularly, State Parks, State Wildlife, and the Mined Land Division]. <br />It troubles us that Mr. Berry's confirmation as Director of the Natural <br />Resources Department was pending at the time that Senate Bill 162 was <br />being voted through the Senate Agricultural and Natural Resources <br />Committee. Mr. Berry testified that his then department, the Mined Land <br />Board, had tew obJecttons to the rewrite of the Reclamation Act. Support <br />from the members of the Senate subcommittee on Natural Resources would <br />seem to be Important to the confirmation of a Natural Resources Director. <br />Senator Winkler, of course, was sitting on the Committee throughout this <br />period. And as we all now know, he voted for and co-sponsored the relevant <br />legislation. <br />It troubles us that Mr. Banta testified last fall--at the invitation of <br />Senator Winkler--at a Franktown master plan hearing that reclamation was <br />alive, well, and unchanged by SB 162. The Franktown plan sought to <br />3 <br />