Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Summit County's objections: <br />1. The two end land-use classifications are interchangeable for the <br />purposes of this application; concerns about reclamation standards are <br />more easily addressed by requesting changes to the reclamation plan, <br />rather than by changing the end land-use. It is unlikely the Board will <br />consider this issue during the Hearing. <br />2. The Board may refuse to consider this issue, on the grounds that <br />it is not within the Mined Land Reclamation Board's jurisdiction, and <br />is the responsibility of the Colorado Department of Public Health and <br />the Environment (CDPHE), as do all surface Water issues. <br />3. The Board may refuse to consider this issue, on the grounds that it <br />is not within the Mined Land Reclamation Board's jurisdiction, and is <br />the responsibility of the Colorado Department of Public Health and the <br />Environment (CDPHE) and the Air Quality Control Division, as do all <br />dust control issues pertaining to operations and fugitive dust <br />emissions. Dust from erosion, or reclaimed areas, is the <br />responsibility of the Mined Land Reclamation Board. <br />4. The Board might agree to consider this issue during the Hearing, <br />since it is a technical issue. <br />5. Again, the financial warranty posted is determined by DMG and must <br />be adequate to cover all proposed reclamation tasks, including wetland <br />remediation, if it is a part of the reclamation plan and thus included <br />in the permit. Further information was requested by DMG during the <br />technical adequacy review, and will be supplied by the Consultant in <br />the near future. <br />6. The Board may refuse to consider this issue, on the grounds that it <br />is not within the Mined Land Reclamation Board's jurisdiction, and is <br />the responsibility of Summit County. <br />7. Again, the financial warranty posted is determined by DMG and must <br />be adequate to cover all proposed reclamation tasks, if it is a part of <br />the reclamation plan and thus included in the permit. Further <br />information was requested by DMG during the technical adequacy review, <br />and will be supplied by the Consultant in the near future. <br />Gary Tuttle stated that a response to the October 1 Technical Adequacy <br />Review written by the Division will be available by October 15 at the <br />latest. <br />Page 5 of 6 <br />