Laserfiche WebLink
d. 34-32.5-116(h), CRS: ma~m disturbance to the hydrologic balanc~uring and after mining <br />e. 34-32.5-116(k), CRS: inappropriate choice of vegetation precluding the "best chance' for reclamation. <br />In addition, ground inspection of existing Camas operations in Weld county indicate noncompliance to corresponding <br />reclamation plans, particularly in the area of noxious weed control and timely reclamation. This appears to be a <br />violation of Section 34-32.5-120, CRS. <br />There is a test that Camas must meet as set forth in the statues and regulations. They have not met that test and <br />therefore, the application is incomplete. We have several drain tiles transversing the affected area. Camas, as <br />they have publicly stated, should not be nllowed to simply improvise water mitigation as they encounter the drain <br />tiles. Instead, they should be required to identify the tiles and specify a plan for mitigating disturbance of those <br />tiles prior to permit approval. Also, the application is incomplete because there is no mention of the air permits <br />required for the cement and asphalt plants they intend to operate. <br />We, as citizens impacted by this proposal, are entitled to know in advance what the impacts on our neighborhood <br />and structures will be so that we may adequately evaluate and comment on the proposal. Due process and <br />fundamental fairness require that we be given the opportunity to comment on their plan and we cannot do that <br />without the necessary information, not currently contained in the application. Actually, there are several areas of <br />the application in which information necessary to adequately evaluate the impacts on the surrounding hydrology, air <br />and structures is simply not provided as required by the statute. <br />Combining a mining operation with residences in a riparian area surely stipulates close scrutiny of all technical <br />issues and data, particularly hydrologic, prior to permitting this operation. Our situation is unique because of the <br />proximity of the proposed operations to our homes and other structures. Therefore, more information is required <br />for us and you, the DMG,to adequately evaluate the impacts of the proposed operations. Without data such as <br />that regarding the impact on structures and the hydrologic balance, the application is incomplete and should be <br />rejected. <br />I nsk that, at a minimum, you deem the application incomplete and suspend all hearings until such time as Camas has <br />provided the necessary information and we have been afforded the opportunity, prior to the hearings, to have our <br />experts review it as we are entitled. <br />The attached chart, based on Camas' Regular 112 Operations Permit application and the regulations contained in the <br />Mineral Rules and Regulations of the Co/orodo Mined Lond Reclamation Board for the Extraction of <br />Construction Maferio/s, delineates and supports the above assertions. Your consideration of these issues is <br />greatly appreciated and I look forward to discussing these concerns in the future. Please contact me at (970) 353- <br />0545 if you have nny questions or require additional information/clarification at this time. <br />Regards, <br />Kim Davis <br />Attachments: <br />M-99-098 Objections Chart <br />Division of Wildlife Letter dated November 5, 1999 <br />Drain Tile Map <br />Enclosures: Polaroid pictures <br />pc: Granberg, M. <br />