My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL49126
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL49126
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:27:15 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 4:52:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1984065
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
9/1/1989
Doc Name
PROPOSED DECISION & FINDINGS OF COMPLIANCE FOR RN1
Permit Index Doc Type
FINDINGS
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.
/
21
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 />g) Three hundred feet of an occupied dwelling unless a written waiver <br />from the owner has been provided (2.07.6 (2 )(d)(v)). <br />The permit area includes several thousand feet of Garfield County <br />Road 335 which was to be upgraded and used as a coal haul road. <br />Since the permit area was, therefore, within 100 feet of the <br />outside right-of-way line, Stipulation 12 to the original permit <br />was written. Stipulation 12 required submittal of documentation of <br />the notice and approval requirements of Rule 2.07 .06(2 )(d)(iv) for <br />Garfield County Road 335 prior to construction commencement. NC EC <br />committed to resolve this issue with the appropriate documentation <br />and approvals, however, since the mine never became operational and <br />the site will only undergo reclamation efforts, the Division finds <br />Rule 2.07.06(2)(d)(iv) to be satisfied and Stipulation 12 no longer <br />necessa ry . <br />5. The applicant has submitted information showing that no cultural or <br />historic resources exist within the permit area on page 3-12 of Volume I <br />of the application. Pursuant to Rule 2.07 .6 (2)(e), the Division finds <br />that the proposed mining operation will not adversely affect any publicly <br />owned park or place listed on the National Register of Historic Places. <br />The proposed operation is in compliance with the requirements of this <br />secti on. <br />6. For this reclamation operation, the private mineral estate has not been <br />severed from the private surface estate, therefore, the documentation <br />specified by Rule 2.03.6(2) is not required. <br />7. On the basis of evidence submitted by the applicant and received from <br />other state and federal agencies as a result of the ~ ction 34-33-114(3) <br />compliance review required by the Colorado Surface Coal Mining <br />Reclamation Act, the Division finds that New Castle Energy Corporation <br />does not own or control any operations which are currently in violation <br />of any law, rule, or regulation of the United States, or any State law, <br />rule, or regulation, or any provision of the Surface Mining Control and <br />Reclamation Act or the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act. <br />(2.07.6(2)(g)(i) ). <br />8. The applicant does not control and has not controlled mining operations <br />with a demonstrated pattern of willful violations of the Act of such <br />nature, duration, and with such resulting irreparable damage to the <br />environment as to indicate an intent not to comply with the provisions of <br />the Act. (2.07.6(2){h )). <br />9. The Division finds that reclamation operations to be performed under this <br />permit will not be inconsistent with other such operations anticipated to <br />be performed in areas adjacent to the permit area. (2.07.6(2)(1)). <br />10. The Division has received and approved a reclamation bond in the form of <br />a CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT, in the amount 5288,000.00. (2.07.6.(2)(j)). <br />-11- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.