Laserfiche WebLink
13. The weight of the evidence demonstrates that with the groundwater monitoring condition <br />and the ban on use of chemicals for dust suppression, as set forth below, the Applicant <br />has met the minimum requirements of Section 34-32.5-116(4)(h) and Rule 3.1.6. <br />14. Issue 7(C): Projected Amounts of Water to Supply Project Water Requirements, <br />Rule 6.4.7(4). <br />15. Rule 6.4.7(4) requires an applicant to indicate the projected amount from each source of <br />water to supply the project water requirements for the mining operation and reclamation. <br />The Applicant stated that any water used in the proposed operation will be obtained in <br />full compliance with applicable Colorado water laws. If necessary, water maybe <br />purchased off-site and transported to the site for use in cleaning and washing operations. <br />16. The weight of the evidence demonstrates that the Applicant has met the minimum <br />requirements of Rule 6.4.7(4). <br />17. Issue 7(C), Identification of all Affected Lauds, Ru-e 6.4.1. Rule 6.4.1. requires an <br />applicant to identify the affected land. The Objectors claimed that a weigh station is not <br />included within the definition of affected land but should have been because it will be <br />used in the proposed mining operations. The Applicant testified that the weigh station is <br />preexisting and is used for other purposes, including weighing timber. The Applicant <br />testified that the weigh station does not fit the definition of affected land, which requires <br />that a surface be disturbed as "a result of such [mining] operation." Rule 1.1(3). <br />18. The weight of the evidence demonstrates that the Applicant has met the minimum <br />requirements of Rule 6.4.1. <br />19. Based on the specific responses to issues raised by the Objectors, as set forth above, and <br />based on the Division's recommendation, it is appropriate for the Boazd to approve the <br />Thompson Properties <br />M-1983-102 <br />