My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL32337
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL32337
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:54:57 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:16:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
3/29/1993
From
CORLEY CO
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
• III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />The Corley Company <br />PNOne 632-5050 P.O. Boa 1821 <br />COLORADO SPRINGS COLORADO 80901 <br />Mar. 27, 1993 <br />RECEIVED <br />MAR 2 9 1993 <br />Ms. Catherine W. <br />Div. of Minerals <br />1313 Sherman St. <br />Denver CO 80203 <br />Begej <br />& Geology <br />Division of m..ICI~I~ «ueology <br />Dear Ms. Begej: <br />We wish to reply to your letter of March 23, 1993, concerning the Sec. <br />24 reclamation. <br />We did review the 1971 composite photo that you had left for our <br />inspection. That photo does not confirm or deny our basic contention <br />with regard to the waste material in the area your refer to as the <br />"drainage". As we have told you many times, there was waste material <br />placed in that area by Black Diamond, but GEC dumped waste there also, <br />particularly in bad weather when they could not reach the regular dump <br />site. The aerial photos do not have sufficient detail to show the <br />additional material unless 3D photos are available. <br />Because you have reached the same conclusion concerning Sec. 24 <br />reclamation, although with different data and facts, we would request <br />that the Board also decide at the April, 1993, meeting what should be <br />included in that reclamation. <br />You have not responded to our Mar. 19, 1993, letter. The questions <br />about the permits and bonds of Weckerling and GEC are important to <br />resolving other issues of Sec. 24 reclamation. We were unable to see <br />those documents because they have been archived, and your records are <br />not complete to allow ready access. Please give us this information <br />before Apr. 20, 1993. <br />Ide do have a copy of the GEC permit nc. SC-77-48, dated Aug. :.6, 1977, <br />covering the E~ Sec. 24. There is a paragraph that states that "GEC <br />Minerals desires to consolidate and convert all previously field permits <br />to include a'.1 lands previously mined since July 1, 1969". The next <br />paragraph states that the specified permit application is a "conversion <br />of the previous permit issued under the Colorado Open Mining Reclamation <br />Act of 1973". Further ... "a new comprehensive bond which specifically <br />includes coverage of lands previously mined but not reclaimed by GEC and <br />it predecessor under previous permit bonds". This document alone <br />presents evidence that GEC is responsible for its predecessor's mining. <br />Sincerely, <br />~~ <br />W.D. Corley, ~ <br />Presiden*_ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.