REV05283

• Permit No: M1981277
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 7/7/1999
• Doc Name: ADEQUACY REVIEW
• From: DMG
• To: LOUKONEN BROTHERS
• Type & Sequence: CN1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

• iiiiiiiiiiiiiiuhi •
99~ ir~i'E OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Department o(Na[ural Resources
1313 Sherman Sr., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
July 7, 1999
Leonard and Michael Loukonen
Loukonen Brothers
12993 N. Foothills Hwy
Longmont, Colorado 80503
RE: Loukonen Brothers 112 Conversion Application, File No. M-81-277
Beech Hill Quarries; Adequacy Review
Dear Leonard and Michael Loukonen,
DIVISION OF
MINERALS
GEOLOGY
RECLAMATION
MINING•SAFETY
Bill Owens
Governor
Greg E. Walther
Eaeculwe Director
Michael B. LOng
Dinsion Director
Listed below are adequacy review comments for [he Beech Hill Quarries 112 Conversion Application for
Permit Number M-81-277. The Division of Minerals and Geology (Division) is required to make an
approval or denial decision no later than August 12, 1999, therefore, your response [o the following
adequacy review concerns should be submitted [o the Division as soon as possible. Please be aware that
the 1 12 Conversion Application completion date was ordered by the Mined Land Reclamation Board
(MLRB) during the April 29, 1999 Board Hearing. Any change to this decision due date must be
approved by [he MLRB.
On November 11, 1998 the Division inspected the Beech Hill Quarries in response to a citizen
complain[ letter. The complaint letter stated that mining was taking place into property owned by an
adjacent landowner in Larimer County. The Division's inspection revealed that a portion of the
Helsinki Pit, roughly 50 feet wide and 150 fee[ long extends north of the survey markers designating
the Boulder-Larimer County line. The operator was required to file a revision or amendment [o the
permit clarifying the permit boundary. It does not appear [hat this issue was addressed in the
conversion application.
The applicant depicts the entire site in Boulder CoLtnty and all notices and publication reference the
site in Boulder CoLtnty. The application does not mention a portion of the Helsinki pit in Larimer
County. Based on the Division's inspection, a portion of the Helsinki pit appears to be in Larimer
County. The applicant has a number of options to address this issue;
File a copy of the 112-conversion application with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder and
notice of the application to [he Larimer Board of County Commissioners and [he Big Thompson
Soil Conservation District. The applicant will also need to republish the notice referencing
Larimer County. All time frames for the public comment period and DMG review will start over.
Itt addition, the Division's decision due date will need [o be exteltded by [he MLRB. This option
should be considered if the operator continues to m ine or disturb this area, OR
• Petition to the MLRB that the area in Larimer County will not fall under the 112 Conversion
Application, or require a separate mining/reclamation permit. The applicant would be required to
reclaim the site in a time frame designated by the MLRB. The operator will need [o petition the