PERMFILE109045

• Permit No: M1999098
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 12/9/1999
• Doc Name: M-99-098 CAMAS COLO INC
• From: KIM DAVIS
• To: DMG
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Kim Davis
30856 Rocky Road Greeley, CO
[phone]

,,
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
80631-9375
Federal Express
AB 8157 7198 5103
December 9. 1999
Mr. Carl Mount
Division of Minerals and Geology
1313 Sherman Street, Room 215
Denver, CO 80203
Dear Mr. Mount:
SUBJECT: M-99-098 (Camas Colorado, Inc.)
f~FCE1V~D
~~~ ,J J7
1} i_ ~ ~ ~ ~eo~o9Y
~~v~s~on o1M~~ecalg &
I currently reside in the Orr Minor Subdivision located between the subject mining activities proposed by Camas
Colorado, Inc. (hereinafter "Camas"). In addition to the homes located in this subdivision, there ore four homes
that have been in existence prior to Weld County's permitting of the original mining area. If Camas' plans ore
permitted we will effectively become a peninsula of land surrounded by the Poudre River, mining operations and
subsequent water storage ponds. I have numerous concerns about the negative impact these plans will have on the
general aesthetics of this area, wildlife habitat and populations, the hydrologic balance and structural integrity of
our homes and other permanent man-made structures.
As background information it may be useful to know the original mining operation was permitted by Weld County to
C 6 M Minerals in March 1990 for lands west and southeast of our land. C 6 M Minerals suspended their plans in
1995 when they withdrew their DMG permit application. My subdivision, Orr Minor, was permitted by the County in
1993 and construction of homes began in 1994. With the exception of two families, none of us of the time of
purchase were informed of the existing permit. Subsequently Camas bought out C 6 M Minerals and earlier this
year began plans to revive the mining operation. In October of this year Camas filed an amendment to the existing
county permit (to add land immediately to the east of my property and reduce the amount of mined land to the
southeast) and simultaneously filed their DMG permit application.
After considerable research I am now fully aware of the State's mission to preserve lands slated for aggregate
mining and to encourage the extraction of such commercial natural resources, and understand the underlying basis
for the mission. The county's error in permitting Orr Minor Subdivision has placed me in the position of a person
who is negatively affected and aggrieved by the possible permitting of Camas' mining and reclamation plans.
Because of this unenviable position, I request the Division and Board's consideration of the objections and concerns
delineated in this letter. I further request the board deny Camas' permit for the following reasons:
The application is incomplete [Section 34-32.5-115(a), CRS] because it does not contain data concerning the
impacts to the hydrologic balance or on surrounding structures, as well as other critical issues.
2. The mining operation will adversely affect the stability of many valuable and permanent manmade structures
located within two hundred feet of the affected land (Section 24-32.5-115(e), CRS]
3. The proposed reclamation plan does not conform to the requirements of Section 24-32.5-116, CRS [Section 34-
32.5-115(8), CRS], specifically
a. 34-32.5-116(2), CRS: lock of satisfactory explanation of all general requirements
b. 34-32.5-116(4)(c) and (d), CRS: lack of any groundwater monitoring plans or discussion of unauthorized
pollutants
c. 34-32.5-116(f), CRS: lack of specificity regarding revegetation plans