My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL32200
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL32200
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:54:53 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:13:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1982121
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
4/22/1994
Doc Name
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR APPEAL
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.
/
12
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
<br />community pit on the quarry site was to protect the deposit <br />from possible speculative location activity and/or minerals <br />material trespass." <br />Same Page, Last Paragraph: <br />"AS of September 1„ 1993, any right that may have been <br />established by the previous claimant, lessee, or operator to <br />the limestone waste rock was lost to the U. S. Government. <br />Hence, none of the existing waste material present within the <br />quarry, regardless of how it was generated, can be sold from <br />the site by the new claimants, their lessees, or operators. <br />Anyone removing limestone waste rock from the quarry will be <br />held accountable for willful trespass of mineral material." <br />Same Exhibit, Second Page: <br />"Any newly generated waste cannot be sold or bartered by the <br />claimant, lessee, or operator unless specifically authorized <br />by this office." <br />From Exhibit E, First Page, Second Paragraph: <br />"Since the locatable grade limestone had to be selectively <br />mined from a much larger section of non-locatable limestone <br />and waste rock, the operation did generate a considerable <br />quantity of material that could not be directly marketed under <br />the mining laws." <br />This statement is incorrect. None of the material, either <br />screened fines, or stockpiled limestone was mined from a "larger <br />section of the non-locatable limestone". The screened fines are <br />the product remaining after screening of the locatable quality <br />limestone for qualifying purposes. The larger sizes of qualified <br />limestone stockpiles in the quarry were extracted from a locatable <br />deposits. <br />Page 2, Second Paragraph the statement that: <br />"the State is now set to foreclose on the company's <br />reclamation bond, which is secured by a deed to the company's <br />Carbondale rock dust plant" <br />is wrong as it relates to the quarry. A reclamation bond on the <br />quarry is secured by senior trust deed on the Carbondale Industrial <br />Park, a property having an appraised value in excess of S1, 000,000. <br />The quarry permit is in good standing, and the property is not in <br />reclamation, nor is it directed to be reclaimed. <br />Same Page, Fourth Paragraph the statement that: <br />"While the operation is still under valid state mina permit, <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.