Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Harvey W. Cultis <br />Cynthia M. Beyer-Ulrich' <br />David L. Kueter <br />'Also licensetl in the Slale of Wisconsin <br />VIA HAND DELIVERY <br />June 23, 2000 <br />III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />sae <br />HARVEY W. CURTIS <br />& ASSOCIATES <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW <br />1441 Eighteenth Street, Suite 200 <br />Denver, Colorado 60202 <br />(303) 292-7144 <br />Facsimile (303) 292-1764 <br />email: curtisandassoc®lawyernet.com <br />Mc Carl Mount <br />Office of Mine Land Reclamation Board <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street. Room 215 <br />Dem~er, Colorado 80203 <br />RECEI~lE~ <br />,;U~ 2 3 2000 <br />Division of Minerals &Ge0logy <br />Of Counsel: <br />Star L. Waring <br />Christina A. Fiflis <br />RE: LARIATMINETECHNICALREVISIONSUBMITTAL,PERMITNO. <br />M-77-251, NE'/4 OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 69 <br />WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO <br />Dear Mr. Mount: <br />Thank you for your telephone call on June 19, 2000 concerning the Robinson Brick <br />Company's proposed Technical Revision to the Lariat Mine Permit No. M-77-251 ("Lariat Mine <br />Permit"). It is my understanding any response by Mc John W. Stockwell, Jr. is due on June 23. <br />2000. The Technical Revision would allow mining in "Stage 2", Mr. Stockwell's undisturbed <br />property, where no mining has previously occurred. <br />The Technical Revision sought by Robco would allow hvo properties to be scarred at the <br />same time. There was wisdom in the original plan to have the mining on [he two parcels to take <br />place consecutively rather than concurrently. Indeed, changing the permit would dramatically alter <br />the sequence and consequences of mining and reclamation activities. It is axiomatic that such a <br />sweeping change will have more than a "minor effect" upon the proposed reclamation plan. <br />Obviously, the greatest impact on the reclamation plan would be that the Revision would allow two <br />disturbed areas to exist at the same time, which was not contemplated by the original permit. While <br />i[ might be true that "Robco has not increased the affected land acreage and has not changed the <br />provisions of the reclamation plan" (letter from Michael G. Leidich to Carl Mount dated May 22. <br />2000), it is equally true [hat two areas of unreclaimed land will exist simultaneously under the <br />Technical Revision where only one area would have otherwise existed under the original permit. <br />Post-it" Fax Note 7671 Date ~ ~'/ pag°es~ <br />To From <br />1 a <br />Co./Dept. <br />~7 <br />n5dw <br />~ L~ Co. <br />Phony 30 .~b~_-LQ D Phonen J ~~ '~O 3 <br />Fa><# 0 ' 9 -101 Fax p fJ0 301- $I~ <br />• <br />