2006-06-14_REVISION - M1978314 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

conservation. A gravel pit expansion will adversely affect the esthetics of the reaches and the enjoyment of the surrounding lauds. The proposed gravel pit expansion will have a aevero and detrimental impact on the gage and Sharptail Qmtue populations in its vicinity. These specie have been proposed for "Endangered Species" designation. Bgeria Park is as area that has had atillioas of dollars iaveated is it by concerned citlmns who want to protect and prsetve the fast, and beat, bastion of large scale traditional ranching sad prime, landscape scale private wildlife habiUt is the Brea. TGe Bow/Doer Not Eaw Jdrbllcdos l7a September 10, 2004, the Division of Minerals and Geology (the "DMG'~ approved a transfer of the 110 Permit to King Mountain. As a result of that trenefer, King Mountain became the "permitted operator" of the gravel pit. Thereafter. on November 23, 2004, King Mountain filed its Converelon Coastruotlon Materiels Application with the DMa roquostiug rho addition of 331 arras to the permit boundary, 184 of which wars to be miaod. lh that date, King Mountain had hero operating the gravel pit under the 110 Permit for just over two months. C.R.S. ~3432.s-110(3) (a) (the Colorado Mined band Reclamation Act (the "AoP')) expressly stets: "Any operator conducdng ea opetadon under a permit issued under this section [Section 110 permit] w/u+ Ga Geld tGa pereriY for two conaecrrtiw yarn or men and who subsequently desire to expand it to a aims in excess of the limitation set forth is subeeetion (1) of this section may request the conversion of the permit... " Under that plain statutory language, King Mountain may not convert the 110 Permit to a 112 Permit until it has operated the gravel pit for a minimum of two years, j,¢~, until September 10, 2006. The statute clearly applies to ggy operator, not just the original pennittee. Conversely, anyone else, including a successor operator, who hen bald a permit far less than two yeah, is not eligible to apply for a oonveraion. The requirement that a sueceeaor (Dike any other) operator operate the gravel pit for at least two consecutive years is logical. I! provides both the DMO and the operator time to dotamiae whether the new operator v quaHfiad to manage and run the mine, to establish and confirm the operator's iatentiotu with r~taot to the mine, and to insure that the operator ie SaancIally stable for the long tarot life of the nrino. Xing MoxntaGr'a Fnllerrs To Comply 1WbYi TGe Finsrreia/ Wwro-rty Rsqub+rmenr Under C.RS. X34-32.3.117(1) and (3)(e), the Board may not issue rho l t2 Permit to King Mountain until King Mountain provide a financial warranty which include "pr+oof of 8naaciai respoueibitity". gQg pjgQ Rule 4.1(2). The bond guarantee compliance with the operator"s reclamation plan end the terms end conditions of the operating permit As such, the finanaia! warranty requirements of rho Act provide strong economic incentive for the operator to complete reclamation and return rho mined land to productive uea This is particularly important when a shell corporation ie the operator that doesn't even own the land but rWter losses it for its operations. King Mountain's failed to provide a financial warranty with respect to ire initial application for Pemsst Coavaraion. King Mountain also did not submit its required annual report or pay the annual fee. Given this pattern, the Board should be concerned about King Mountain's reliability on the issue of