Laserfiche WebLink
<br />4. On Page 2 of the letter, under Access Roads, it is stated that <br />the "alluvial well access road beyond the double gate...will be <br />listed as a light duty roar}.,'! Adequate justification is provided, <br />and the permit should be appropriately amended. Note that the term <br />used in the Colorado Rules is "light use road", rather than "light <br />duty road". <br />5~ The final paragraph on the second page of the letter appears <br />°to indicate that portions of the main rail loadout access road <br />between County Road 65 and the loadout do not conform to alignment <br />criteria as listed in "Rule 4.01.2". The letter indicates that <br />"statements to this fact are listed in the approved Permit <br />Documents." <br />Both the letter and the application text in Section IV.H.3 are <br />somewhat unclear regarding which specific road segments exceed <br />which specific regulatory requirements. The application text <br />states that "the one exception was the alignment which followed <br />alongside and parallel to the conveyor and in the same cut and fill <br />section as the conveyor..." <br />The cite of 4.01.2 in the letter appears to be erroneous and should <br />be corrected. The specific road segments which exceed regulatory <br />criteria need to be identified, and the specific regulatory <br />criteria which are exceeded need to be cited. If the road does <br />exceed the design criteria and specifications of 4.03.2(3), the <br />demonstration of environmental soundness as required by <br />4.03.2(1)(e) should be included in an amended "relevant showing" <br />letter. <br />