Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />section I of this letter and previous written statements identify numerous areas where the <br />proposal is contrary to the DMG laws and regulations and give sufficient grounds to deny the <br />application under § 34-32.5-115(4)(c), C.R.S. <br />III. The proposed mining operation and the reclamation program are contrary to the <br />laws and regulations of the state of Colorado. <br />Several required applications have not been obtained or applied for. The applicant states <br />in Exhibit G that certain permits are "pending." Telephone inquiries on December 5th and 10th <br />to the relevant state agencies have uncovered no pending applications. The Water Quality <br />Control Division has notified Mr. Stone, in writing, that no application has been received <br />regarding the Stone Gravel Pit. see Attachment 1. Further, the applicant has not shown that <br />fugitive dust and other emissions, from both stationary and mobile sources, have been permitted <br />or will not create violations of the federal/state air quality standazds. The deficiencies in the <br />application that aze set forth in section I of this letter and previous written statements identify <br />numerous areas where the proposal is contrary to Colorado laws and regulations and give <br />sufficient grounds to deny the application under §34-32.5-115(4)(d), C.R.S.. <br />IV. The proposed mining operation and the reclamation program are contrary to the <br />laws and regulations of the United States. <br />Several federal issues are relevant to the consideration of this application. There has been <br />some indication that archeological resources are federal concerns and thus "non jurisdictional <br />issue[s] for DMG." Attachment 2 at 3. However, the statutory grounds for denying an <br />application specifically include rejection of proposals that are contrary to federal law. §34-32.5- <br />115(4)(d), C.R.S.. Therefore, DIv1G consideration of issues of federal law has been squarely <br />addressed in the statute, have been raised by several objectors and aze relevant inquiries within <br />the permitting jurisdiction of the DMG. <br />BLM owns the surface estate and is required to follow certain procedural requirements <br />contained in the National Environmental Policy Act, Federal Land Policy and Management Act, <br />and the Endangered Species Act before the BLM, and therefore the applicant, can determine the <br />extent of the applicant's right to enter and use the surface estate. The application is based on an <br />6 <br />