My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV06709
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV06709
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:07:44 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:36:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977193
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
11/26/1996
Doc Name
THE AGGREGATE SOURCE INC AMENDMENT TO PERMIT M-77-193
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
AM3
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.
/
2
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 />Mined Land Reclamation Board -2- Nov. 22. ;996 <br />B. Stormwater management of THE Aggregate Source <br />property has not changed; holding pond #4 has <br />not been built. Ouc property is still in <br />jeopardy, as it has been for the past two <br />years. The Storm Water Management Plan in <br />the new Amendment Application, page 9, 117, <br />states: "Tezak Heavy Equipment Company, Inc., <br />will construct and have all structures <br />operating effectively by October 31, 1996." <br />This obviously is not so. <br />C. Due to requirements made on this mining <br />operation by NLRB (Minerals and Geology), <br />Colorado Department of Health (Air Quality <br />Control Division), and the Fremont County <br />Commissioners, the problems of blasting <br />conditions and dust control Have been <br />alleviated. <br />D. As to excessive truck traffic, THE Aggregate <br />Source, Inc., hosted on site an operating <br />asphalt batch plant belonging to D. G. Husk ins <br />Construction of Wetmore, Co. This plant <br />operated from the first week of April 1996 <br />until May 14, 1996, without obtaining permits <br />or exception/variance from Minerals and Geology <br />(NLRB) or from Fremont County. At full function <br />(the most usual situation) this produced more <br />than 400 truck passages per day on Tunnel Drive, <br />which is still a residential street. <br />While this batch plant was operating, Tezak sought, through <br />use of the court, to deter us (Smith's and Everett's) from <br />cononents to, complaints to, and the seeking of redress from <br />governmental agencies for operational violations. Our notice <br />of suit against us was received on April 18, 1996, which you <br />may note was during the period of operation of the asphalt <br />batch plant. <br />Defending against this suit has cost us thousands of dol.iars <br />and hundreds of hours of our own time. <br />Sincerely yours, <br />phill B. SmiQth <br />fOC~tz. <br />Colita N. Smith / <br />cns <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.