My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE68290
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE68290
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:13:57 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 10:17:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2000158
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/12/2001
Doc Name
PARTY STATUS FORM
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.
/
6
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 />Xcel Energys° <br />PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY <br />3/7/2001 <br />State of Colorado <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St. Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203-2273 <br />Dear Erica Crosby File # M-200-158 <br />Fort St. Vrain <br />16805 W.C.R. 19r/z <br />Platteville, Colorado 80651 <br />The purpose of this letter is to outline our issues and concerns about the Platte Sand and Gravel LLC for <br />gravel mining and related activities adjacent to our property. Fort St. Vrain (FSV) owns property on the <br />east side of the South Platte River adjacent to the applicant, as well as, the applicant owning property on <br />the west side of the river adjacent to our site. These comments are being submitted within 5 working days <br />prior to the Informal Conference. We attended the DMG informal conference held in Milliken, Colorado <br />on 3/7. At that time, we identified ourselves as an `objector to the application' for, at least, the purpose of <br />gathering additional information to satisfy our concerns. <br />Our plant hasn't received any information directly from [he Stale of Colorado regarding [his application, <br />but it could easily have been sent to other offices at Xcel Energy. Please send any further correspondence <br />directly to the plant at 16805 WCR 19 1/2, Platteville, Co 80651 Attn: Marty Block. <br />We have also participated in some of the discussions between the neighbors and the applicant. Public <br />Service Co, now Xcel Energy, has a rich history of working closely with the neighbors from the time of the <br />initial siting of the nuclear operations at FSV. We intend on continuing our participation in this process as <br />the application moves through the various stages of approval. <br />FSV has been in discussions with various gravel mining operators for the last three years regarding mining <br />on our property east of [he South Platte River and south of the applicant. We have discussed our proposal <br />for mining gravel on our property with Platte Sand and Gravel LLC, the applicant, as a potential vendor. <br />Our purpose in mining the gravel is to develop water storage to supplement the water supply to FSV and <br />other generating assets as we continue to meet the growing energy needs of Colorado. We expect to be <br />making application to Weld County for our own mining operation, a[ some point, because this storage is <br />important [o meet our business objectives. <br />Our specific concerns regarding the application are listed below. We understand that the DMG only <br />considers certain issues [o be within their purview and other issues are under the authority of Weld County. <br />We've noted some of these same concerns to Weld County. <br />We understand the applicant's right to mine the gravel on his property similar to what we may <br />eventually propose. We don't understand [he need or right for the other related asphalt batch plan[ <br />and recycling operations and the applicant hasn't been clear around his business purposes for this <br />expanded operation. The applicant indicated a current problem with excessive concrete spoils a[ their <br />Denver operation and we are concerned about our neighborhood being negatively impacted by this <br />part of his proposed operation. <br />We think the size of the concrete recycling storage piles should be clearly specified by the applicant <br />and limited in the permit processes. There are runoff concerns on any storage pile [ha[ should be <br />addressed in the permit. Impacts to [he river via storm water runoff or potential contaminates due to <br />any recyling operation should be well investigated. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.