Laserfiche WebLink
<br />A. <br />8. <br />Grarrting of Party Status -King Mountain wiN accept the determination d <br />the pre-tt~ring aonferertoe otTrc:er and the CMLi2B <br />Peru Application Should be Dsnied: <br />1. The CMLRB Does Not Hava Jurisdiction -King Mountain disagrees <br />with this asaerticn. However, we will leave the determination to the <br />Attort-ey General's Olfic:e and to the Board's Atfomey, Tyson Poweli, in <br />particular. <br />2. King Mountains' Failure !n Comply YVtlir Mte Financial Warranty <br />Requirement Raises Conoems About Its t-lrranclai Viability - n is our <br />fine belief that this issue is a total'Red Harting" as Kmg Rilountain's onry <br />failure was a mistake wNh tl~e original Letter of Credit and that mistake <br />was corrected and the finandal warrardy was submitted in proper format <br />for the entire warranty amount. King MouMarYs titartciat viability is not in <br />question here. <br />3. Significant Advarse_Impacis - M should be Hated tltat during the <br />application process, the posting and publication process. Cie adequacy <br />reviews and the responses to adequaq reviews, aN issues now raised <br />were covered thoroughly by the appNcant and the DRAG staff with <br />appropriate referrals to and cNscussions with outer state agendas. The <br />public had the opportunity to comment and object at that time altltough no <br />one did. We wiN fist the issues flow re(Sed artd our response: <br />a Wildlife Concerns - It is our position ittat during tite o~rigirrel <br />process of referral and revew that all of the issues flow raised <br />were covered thoroughly and adequately through intensive wait <br />w~1Ft the referral agendas on the part of the applicant and the <br />DMG staff: fling Mourriain representatives worked with DOW <br />personnel e~xtaftsively to prepare a mitigation plan acceptable to <br />boit- DOW and the DMG. In fact, the reclamation plan seed mixes <br />were modified extensively during that process to include aN of the <br />Doors conoems for reclamation m e Sage Grouse friendly habitat <br />improvement for the property. iGrtg Mountain also deleted <br />signiFicartt portions of the property from minetg activities limiting <br />staged mkting an the approximate 320 acres fn approximately 184 <br />saes to He mined in smaN increments. The rrifertal and review <br />process worked. However, the currant opponents ol>jed to that <br />outcome. After a thorough reading of their concerns, roe find Bret <br />. ~ rio new evidence is presented that would justify a reopening of <br />this arse. Everytiting that was said in the current objection letters <br />is simpy a reiteration of issues raised during the original process. <br />b. Conservatlon and ProoeM Values - These objections are <br />outside of tfre scope of tite DMG and CMt,RB Rules and <br />Regulations and therefore outside d their regulatory authority. <br />a T nsoortaHon and Safety Con - Haul traffic antl safety <br />cortaems are outside of fire Scapa of the t)HIG artd CMLRB Rules <br />and Regulations and therefore outside of their regulatory authority. <br />d. Cattle Movement -Same comment as b. and c. above. <br />e. Aesthetic and Recr~tlonal Cortcern~ Same comment as b., <br />c., and d. above. <br />L Waterissues -The Rules and Regulations Dover hydrologic <br />tralanoe and the application was referred fp the appropriate <br />agencies irx~ding the State Wate- Engineers Office. t7uring the <br />2 <br />