My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL44776
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL44776
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:13:28 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 1:17:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
11/18/1983
Doc Name
MEMO GECS RECLAMATION DORECHESTERS DISPONSAL OF REUSE IN PITS
From
MLRD
To
DAVID SHELTON
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.
/
2
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
Richard D. Lamm <br />Governor <br />• III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />999 <br />• <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />David H. Getches, Executive Director <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DI\ <br />DAV{D C. SHELTOh, Director <br />November 18, 1983 <br />T0: David She <br />FROM: Fred Banff <br />RE: GEC's Reclarg~tion/Dorchester's Disposal of Refuse in Pits <br />I have given some thought to the GEC/Dorchester reclamation issue. This memo <br />explains how we should proceed. <br />Dorchester does not want to amend their permit to include the refuse disposal <br />activities in the East Pit. Therefore, if the activity is to be approved, it <br />is to be approved as part of GEC's permit. The review and approval of the <br />disposal plan should be conducted from that perspective. A preliminary plan <br />could be approved prior to December 27, 1983 if it would clearly reduce <br />reclamation liability. <br />In deciding how we should proceed in the long run, it is necessary to project <br />the outcome of the overall GEC issue. There are two possibilities. First, <br />GEC comes up with the $191,000.00 bond by December 27, 1983. The Division <br />could approve, without much complication, a revision to the GEC permit which <br />included the disposal of Dorchester's refuse in the East Pit. Since disposing <br />of the refuse in the East Pit should reduce the reclamation liability, there <br />should not be a problem in approving the plan. In fact, under this scenario, <br />it may be possible to approve a plan for leaving other pits open for an <br />extended period of time as refuse disposal sites. <br />The second scenario is more difficult to manage. In this scenario, GEC fails <br />to post the adequate bond by December 27, 1983. At that point, the Division <br />should move to have the Board revoke the permit. Bond forfeiture procedures <br />should also go forward. However, I presume that GEC will want to propose a <br />reclamation plan to the Board in order to avoid immediate forfeiture of their <br />existing bonds. If so, they will need to propose a specific reclamation plan <br />which includes a time schedule for complete reclamation. This reclamation <br />plan could include the disposal of refuse in aterial from Dorchester for the <br />specific period of time. As far as Dorchester is concerned, the principle <br />difference between this scenario and the first scenario is that the pits could <br />not be left open for an extended period of tune unless Dorchester assumed the <br />responsibility for those pits in their perrnit. <br />423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.