My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE106587
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE106587
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:59:15 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 1:57:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2006046
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
10/4/2006
Doc Name
Fax Copy Decision Date Extension Request #3
From
Banks and Gesso
To
DRMS
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
OCT-04-2006 WED 04:26 PM BANKS AND GESSO LLC <br />~~ Banks and Gesso, LLC <br />~~ <br />720 Kipling St.,Suitelt7 <br />Lakewood, Colorado 80215 <br />(303) 274277 <br />Fax {303} 27a-8329 <br />October 4, 2006 www.6anksandgesso.com <br />Rick Wenzel REC <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety E(I V~D <br />1313 Sherman Avenue, Room 215 <br />co so2o2 OCT p 4 pp06 <br />Denver, <br />Division of Reclamation, <br />Mi ' <br />Re: File No. M-200fi-046, Extension of Decision Date, Grand River`~8f7tct <br />Dear Mr. Wenzel: <br />Thank you for your review and comments related to the applicant's adequacy submittal for <br />the Grand River Park Project (M-2006-046). Based on our discussion of the adequacy <br />review process and your facsimile cover letter today, we understand that it is the Division's <br />suggestion, and in the hest interest of a complete review, to extend the decision date by 30 <br />days. <br />As a general comment concerning the processing of this case, we are concerned at the <br />pejorative language in the current adequacy letter; specifically that the application "has <br />been deemed inadequate," where in the Division's previous adequacy letter it was advised <br />that, pending further review, the application "may be deemed inadequate." While we <br />understand that, until approved, there is always the potential for the Division to find an <br />uncontested application inadequate, we have diligently pursued the resolution of all <br />adequacy items ident~ed by the Division. The record should reflect that the applicant has <br />engaged all appropriate channels of communication with the Division to identify adequacy <br />issues as soon as possible and ensure the adequacy of the proposed operation. <br />Pursuant to Rule 1.4.1(9), the applicant in the present case requests extension of the <br />decision date, to a day 31 days subsequent to the current decision deadline of October 6, <br />2006. The applicant hereby waives its right to a decision until November 6, 2006. We <br />reserve the right to request further extension of the decision date in the future should <br />appropriate circumstances arise. <br />Once again, thank you for your attention and thorough review of this application. We are <br />confident and look forward to documenting that this application meets the Division's <br />standards for approval. <br />Sincerely, <br />BANKS AND GESSO, LLC <br />FRX N0. 303 274 8329 p, 02 <br />cc: Bill Roberts, Silt Sand & Gravel, LLC <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.