PERMFILE111671

• Permit No: M2000118
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 9/29/2000
• Doc Name: FAX COVER PINO PIT FN M-2000-118 RESULTS OF ADEQUACY REVIEW
• From: DMG
• To: BARNHART AGENCY INC
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

•
STATE OF CO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGt'
Depanmern of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman $t, Room 215
DivlSloN Or
Dem'er, Colorado 80203
Phone [phone] MINERAL S
FA\: 13031 832-8106 &
GEOLOGY
R E C L A M A T I O N
MINING•SAFETY
September 29, 2000
BIII ovens
Mr. Joe Gagliano cOVef"Of
Barnhart Agency Creg E. ~\'alcher
212 W. 13'" SL E.ecm me Dveno~
Michael B Lung
Pueblo, CO 81003
Drvieon Duenor
RE: Pino Pit (File M-2000-118) Adequacy review of 1 12 application
Dear Mr. Gagliano:
The Division has completed its initial review of the 112 permit application for the Pino Pit and has identified the
following adequacy concerns:
PERFORMANCE AND FINANCIAL WARRANTIES: These required warranties have not been provided
with the application.
~J Although the permit application, as submitted, may eventually eceive approval from the Division, a permit
will not be issued for this operation until acceptable Performance and Financial Warranties are received by the
Division.
NOTICES: At this time, the Division has no evidence that a notice of the permit application has been sent
I.~' to the owner of record of the surface and mineral rights to the affected land, i.e. Ed Pino, as required by Rule
y~~-.,0 1.6.2(1)(e)(i) or to all owners of record of surface lands within 200 feet of the boundary of the affected land, i.e.
Q~ ~~''"" Ernest Shafer, as required by Rule 1.6.2(1)(e)(ii). Mr. Shafer is indicated on the Exhibit CPre-Mining and Mining
" ~9t~ Maps to own the property bordering the Pino property on the east and, even with a 50 foot setback of the permit
area from that property boundary and another 50 foot buffer zone between the permit boundary and the affected
~lv area, the Shafer property appears to lie within 200 feet of the boundary' of the land to be affected by [he mining
R~. operation. There is also no evidence, at this time, that the public notice required by Rule 1.6.2(1)(d) has been
~~' published the required number of times.
' Proof of the notices required under Rule 1.6.2 must be provided by the decision date for the application in
order for the Division or the Board to consider approval at that time.
EXHIBIT C (RULE 6.4.3): The description of the "Permit Boundary Traverse" that appears on the Pre-
Mining Map provided under this Exhibit does no[ agree with the description given under Exhibit A. The Division is
inclined to accept the Exhibit A description as accurate. The Exhibit A description appears to correspond both to
the illustrations of the permit area provided on the maps relative to the NE corner of Section I as well as to the
9K copy of Ed Pino's deed to the property provided under Exhibit 0.
Please provide a revised copy of the Pre-Mining Map with an accurate description of the Permit Boundary
Traverse. (Please also see the review of the Exhibit F Map below.)
EXHIBIT C (RULE 6.4.3(a)1: Various maps provided under this Exhibit are intended to show all
adjoining surface owners of record but the information presented on the maps appears to be incomplete and, in one
case, inaccurate. There is a hexaeonal symbol with the number 9 on the maps but the corresponding property owner
0$ is not identified in the "Key", and the owner corresponding to hex symbol 8 may be mis-identified. A review of the
copies of the deeds provided under Exhibit O indicates that Ed Pino, alone, is the owner of record of both the areas
apparently indicated by hexaeonal symbols numbered 8 and 9.