1990-01-19_REVISION - M1988112 ‎(3)‎

• Permit No: M1988112
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 1/19/1990
• Doc Name: BATTLE MTN RESOURCES SAN LUIS PROJECT FN M-88-112
• From: MLRD
• To: MLRB
• Type & Sequence: AM1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

r III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ~
STATE OF COLORADO
MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION
Department of Natural Resources
7313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, CO 80203
303 866-3567
FAX. [phone]
RE: Battle n in Resources, San Luis Project,
File No. -88-112
DATE: January 19, 1990
T0: Mined Land clamation Board
FROM: Fred Ba to r ctor
OF. Cpl
~~.
Nom; ~~,$
~ r876 ~
Roy Romei.
Governor
Fretl R. eanla,
Denson Director
Pursuant to the Prehearing Order, the Division is issuing its decision
regarding the Battle Mountain Resources San Luis Project amendment
appl icati ai.
The Divisi m has reviewed the permit amendment applicati m in light of the
requirements of the Act and the Rules and Regulations. During this review
we developed a number of questi ms and canments which required clarification
by the applicant. Also during the amendment review period, we received a
number of d>jectims to the amendment. Sane of the objectors raised issues
which were pertinent to the amendment applicati m and to the demonstration
of c appliance with the Act and the Rules and Regulations. Our adequacy
review included the concepts put forth in a number of the d>jectims.
On January 9, 1990, Battle Mountain Resources supplied the Divisi an with
responses to the adequacy review. A review of this submittal
revealed that a few items required further clarification. The Divi>ion
and Battle Mountain Resources met on January 16, 1990 to discuss the
remaining issues. At this meeting the outstanding concerns were resolved,
Battle Mountain stated that they would attempt to respond in writin~a to
the resoluti ms achieved on January 16, 1990 by January 18, 1990. ~ihe
Division has received and reviewed this correspondence, and has
determined that all of the initial concerns have been satisfactoril~r
resolved.
Based upon the record contained in the permit amendment applicati m and
the responses to the Division's adequacy letter, the Division has determined
that the applicant has met the requirements of the Act (CRS 34-32-112 and 116)
and the Rules and Regulations. The Division has further determined that none
of the reasons for denial of a permit, as stated in CRS 34-32-115, are
present. Therefore, the Divisi m recanmends that the Board approve the permit
amendment.