My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE69269
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE69269
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:14:46 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 10:47:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2004051
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
10/27/2004
Doc Name
Rationale for Recommendation for Approval Over Objections.
From
DMG
To
William Schenderlein Mike Refer Andrea L. Benson and Peter L. Baurer
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.
/
8
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
Anulication Exhibit L -Reclamation Costs: <br />1. "Second, the Association is concerned that upon completion of the mining operation, the reclamation plan may not <br />be implemented. It is our understanding that Aggregate will be required to provide a financial warranty to the <br />Division in an amount acceptable to the Division to ensure that when miming has ceased the reclamation project will <br />be completed. The Association feazs, however, that the amount set forth in Aggregate's application as the financial <br />warranty may not be adequate to cover the costs of a reclamation plan that may be implemented decades from now . <br />The Association seeks the Division's expertise to determine the appropriate amount and requiring it to be increased if <br />necessary .hr addition, the Association would like to ensure that in the event a different entity other than Aggregate <br />takes over the mining operation, that it too will be held responsible for completing the reclamation of the property <br />and providing an adequate financial warranty therefore." <br />(Andrea L. Benson, Alperstein & Covell, PC; Wartenberg Improvement Association; September 10, 2004) <br />Response- All financial warranties aze set and maintained at a level which reflects the actual current cost of fulfilling <br />the requirements of the Reclamation Plan. The Division prescribes tYie amount of financial warranty taking into <br />account the nature, extent and duration of the proposed mining operation, type and estimated cost of planned <br />reclamation by the State of Colorado according to the requirements of the Act and reclamation plan. in the event that <br />the reclamation plan may be implemented decades from now, the Division makes reference to Rule 4.2 of the <br />Construction Materials Rules and Regulations (the Rules). Rule 4.2.11;1) allows the Office or Board to review any <br />financial warranty for adequacy at any time. In the event of a different entity taking over the mining, the cunent <br />permit holder could continue to hold the permit and would then remain responsible for the reclamation, or the new <br />operator could assume the responsibility by submitting a "Request for Transfer of Construction Material Pemrit and <br />Succession of Operators" form as described in Rule 1.12 of the Rules. Section 1.12.1 gives the Office the ability to <br />review the current reclamation band and "The successor Operator may be required to post a Financial Warranty of a <br />greater or lesser amount than the existing Financial Warranty dependent upon the actual site reclamation obligation." <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.