PERMFILE106422 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4. Has the Applicant demonstrated compliance with applicable local permits, licenses, and approvals as required per Section 1.4.1(5)(d) of the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for Constmction Materials? Specifically, "the applicant does not have a Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOTj state highway access permit in order ro access the subject property and conduct their mining operation ", "the applicant has failed to comply with Gilpin County's Special Use Review (SURD Permit requirements, per Section 1.4. /(5)(d) of the CLA for Construction Materials ", and "archeological and paleontological studies have not been conducted to determine the presence and /ocarion ojcultural and paleontological resources (clearances have not been obtained) ". DMG Response -The Applicant has demonstrated an approved highway access permit as issued by CDOT on August 23, 2005 and has also committed to obtaining approval of all appropriate pemrits required by federal, state and local law prior to engaging in quarry activities. Regazding azchaeological and paleontological studies, the proposed MMRR Quany is not a federal project and involves no federal undertaking. There is no indication that Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act is applicable to this proposed operation. However, the Applicant has conducted a database search for known historic resources in the azea and none were found. Rule 1.4.1(5)(d) is a rule that generally applies to applications. Amore specific requirement for 112 permit applications occurs in Rule 6.4.13 which provides that a 112 applicant must identify which permits, licenses, and approvals the Operator/Applicant holds or "will be seekine in order to conduct the proposed mining and reclamation operations: effluent dischazge pemuts ... county and zoning land use permits ..." (emphasis supplied). In this instance the Applicant has identified all applicable local and county permits it will be seeking, as appropriate, including the special use/zoning permit identified by the objector. Where there may be an appazent inconsistency between two regulations, as here, the more specific requirements for 112 applications appearing in Rule 6.4.13 supercede the general requirements established in Rule t.4.1(5)(d). This interpretation is consistent with the statutory requirements in Section 34-32.5-109(3), C.R.S., of the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Constmc6on Materials, which carried forwazd the same language contained in Section 34-32-109(6), C.R.S., of the Mined Land Reclamation Act (MLRA), both of which provide that : "the operator shall be responsible for assuring that the mining operation and the post-mining land use comply with city, town, county, or city and county land use regulations... Any mining operator subject to this article shall also be subject to zoning and land use authority and regulation by political subdivisions as provided by law." This language was added by the Colorado legislature in S.B. 88-162 in 1988 to the MLRA to "decouple" local land use issues from mine permit issuance requirements under the jurisdiction of the Mined Land Reclamation Boazd (MLRB). Prior to passage of S.B. 88-162 section 109 of the MLRA had required that the MLRB assure that the issuance of a mineral reclamation permit not be granted in violation of any local land use regulations. See Section 34-32-109(6), C.R.S. (1984). To clarify that local land use aad other pemti[s were aot required [o be acquired or sought by a minerals permit applicant prior to obtaining a mineral reclamation permit from the MLRB, this amendment changed the existing language in the MLRA to the language now appearing in both Acts so that the MLRB's mineral permitting processes could go forward separate from local permitting and zoning processes. Moreover, the statutory language in Section 34-32.5115(4)(c)(I), C.R.S., requiring that the MLRB may deny an application if the proposed operation "is or maybe contrary to .. local pemilts, licenses and approvals, as applicable to the specific operation" does not require that the applicant obtain or apply for all necessary or appropriate local pemuts prior to being issued a minerals reclamation permit. This Office and the MLRB have consistently interpreted this requvement as allowing issuance of a minerals reclamation permit as long as there is no scenario under which the proposed operation will be absolutely prohibited by local and other laws and regulations. The applicant here has committed to complying with all applicable local land use and other regulatory requirements and has identified which ones may apply, consistent with the requirements of both Sections 34-32.5-I 15(4)(c)(I) and (II) and 109, C.R.S and so is in compliance with these statutory requirements. If the applicant commences operations in violation of any local land use or