Laserfiche WebLink
• • DRAFT <br />AGREEMENT CONCERNING DIVERSION OF WATER INTO MAGPIE CREEK <br />This Agreement is entered into this day of <br />1993 between The Corley Company, Dr. W. Douglass Corley <br />(collectively referred to herein as "Corley") and the Division of <br />Minerals and Geology ("Division") for the purpose of describing <br />the removal and reinstallation of a culvert and drainage located <br />on property owned by Corley. <br />RECITALS <br />1. This Agreement incorporates by reference the provi- <br />sions and recitals set forth in the Compliance Agreement Regard- <br />ing Harrison Western Corporation Responsibilities at the West Pit <br />of the GEC Minerals Site, Fremont County, Colorado, dated April <br />22, 1992 (Compliance Agreement); Agreement Terminating Harrison <br />Western Responsibilities at the West Pit of the GEC Minerals Site <br />Fremont County, Colorado (Termination Agreement); and the Settle- <br />ment Agreement entered into between Corley and Harrison Western <br />Corporation (Harrison) in settlement of The Corley Company v. <br />Harrison Western Corporation, Case No. 92CV209 (Fremont County <br />District Court). <br />2. Pursuant to the Compliance Agreement, Harrison has <br />undertaken various work, including installing a 150-foot diver- <br />sion ditch and culvert below the bonded area to direct water from <br />the "Unnamed Creek" into the Maqpie Diversion. The Division has <br />determined that this ditch and culvert are properly located to <br />satisfy sediment control regulations while minimizing surface <br />disturbance. <br />3. Harrison has experienced considerable difficulty in <br />complying with the terms of the April, 1992 Compliance Agreement. <br />These difficulties arise largely due to extreme precipitation <br />events during 1993, and an inability to come to agreement with <br />the landowner in regard to maintenance of the site. <br />4. The landowner is unsatisfied with location of the <br />outfall of the Unnamed Creek diversion as constructed by Har- <br />rison, and has filed suit against Harrison to compel removal of <br />the culvert. Corley Co. v. Harrison Western Corp., Case No. 92 <br />CV 209 (Fremont County District Court). The landowner has indi- <br />cated a willingness to provide the Division with an alternative <br />outfall design and location. <br />The Division has determined that the actual cost of <br />