Laserfiche WebLink
~ <br />STATE a III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Deponinent of Natural Resources <br />131 3 Sherman St., Room ? 15 <br />Denver, Culorad0 AU2U7 <br />DIVISION O F <br />Phone: an31 eeh 3se~ MINERAL 5 <br />FAI. (303) R3'_-87On & <br /> GEOLOGY <br /> 0.ECLAMA710N <br />July 20,1999 MININ G•SAFETY <br /> BJI Owens <br /> Governor <br /> Greg E IV.JCho <br />Mr. Lloyd V. "Buck" Barnhart Eves°""e o"°"°` <br /> <br />Barnhart Agency, Inc. Michael B Lung <br /> <br />212 W. 13`h St. Di„sr°n o,re<r°r <br />Pueblo, CO 31003 <br /> <br />RE: Adequacy Concerns, P mit No. M-77-197 <br />Dear Mr. Barnhart: <br />The Division has reviewed your conversion application from a 1 ]0 to 112 for Permit No. M-77-197 and <br />has the following concerns: <br />I. EXHIBIT A - Legal Description -Adequate <br />II. EXHIBIT B -Index Map -Adequate <br />III. EXHIBIT C -Pre-Mining and Mining Plan Map(s) of affected lands to include the location of any <br />recorded easements on the General Information Section. Under change in acreage, the total amount <br />of the permit area is reported as 9.6 permitted acres plus 36.32 for a total of 46.57, but it only adds <br />up to 46.42 acres not 46.57 acres. However, the Pre-Mining and Mining Maps show 27.71 acres in <br />Tract B, 9.6 acres under [he 110 permit and 9.46 acres of Bureau of Land Management land for a <br />total of 46.77 acres. Please explain the discrepancy. <br />IV. EXHIBIT D -Mining Plan <br />Under the method of mining description, the Operator states "The final reclamation plan is for [he <br />grand fathered industrial use on the Operator's deeded portion of the permit area." However, the <br />County letter dated July 7, 1999 states that the area is currently zoned residential. Has the Operator <br />applied for a zoning change for post mining from residential to industrial? Please provide proof <br />that the area is zoned industrial or change the post mining land use from industrial to residential. <br />A. Under the Water Diversion and Impoundments Section, the Operator states "There will be <br />no water diversions or impoundments on site since no water will be used for this operation <br />and none is available." During the pre-operational inspection on July 9, 1999, water was <br />being diverted from an upland area to be used for the concrete batch plant. Since the plant <br />is within the permit area, has the Operator obtained the appropriate permit for this water <br />from the State Engineer's office? Is your storm water permit from Colorado Department of <br />Public Health and Environment going to address possible discharges from the batch plan[? <br />