My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV104483
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV104483
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:15:47 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 1:17:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1994093
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/18/2001
Doc Name
CAMAS COLO INC
From
DEPT OF LAW
To
DENNIS HANSON
Type & Sequence
TR3
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.
/
4
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
Page 3 • • <br />to get notarized in order to meet requirements. The filing fee for Camas' amendment <br />application could be credited against the filing fee for the 1 l0 permit. <br />Under Thorton's license agreement with Commerce City to affect the street under <br />which the pipeline will run, the term "licensee" includes employees, agents and <br />contractors of Thorton. It would seem that if Camas was an agent of Thorton for <br />purposes of this agreement, then Camas would have the rights and be bound by the <br />obligations under the license agreement. [f notarized and if notarized documents <br />show that Camas is an agent of Thorton's under this agreement, this agreement would <br />allow compliance with regulatory requirements for the operator to have the legal right <br />to enter onto Commerce City property and to have compensation agreements required <br />under § 34-32.5-115, C.R.S. <br />As to the agreements with the well owners, if these agreements were notarized and <br />they allow Thorton to assign the contracts to Camas, then Camas would have <br />compensation agreements with the well owners. <br />6. Lastly, there is a procedure by which a person that has an interest that may be <br />affected can petition the Mined Land Reclamation Boazd for a declazatory order. See <br />2 C.C.R. 407-4, Rule 2.5. Such a petition must be filed at least 10 days prior to the <br />Board's meeting date. In the present matter, Camas could petition on the issue of <br />whether the modification should be a technical revision or a permit amendment. <br />This issue would be decided by the Board determining whether the road under which <br />the pipeline would be installed should be part of the permit area. If the road is <br />included, then the change to the reclamation plan would be treated as an amendment <br />since affected land would be added to the permit under 2 C.C.R. 407-4, Rule 1.1(6). <br />If the road was determined not be considered affected land, the modification would be <br />a technical revision. If the modification is considered a technical revision, the <br />regulations do not require a demonstation of a legal right to enter, but do require <br />compensation agreements for man-made structures. <br />This option would require Camas to request waiver of the requirement of filing 10 <br />days prior to hearing (if Camas wanted to go to the January Board which is set for <br />January 24-25, 2001) and would require the water welt agreements to be notarized <br />and assigned to Camas. The Division requests that if Camas wants to go to the <br />January Board, the petition be filed as soon as possible but no later than 4 p.m. on <br />January 19, 2001. <br />Please let me know if you have questions or comments. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.