PERMFILE124855

• Permit No: M2004067
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 11/21/2005
• Doc Name: Master List: Exhibits 1-209 Exhibits 15-19
• From: City of Black Hawk
• To: DMG
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Memorandum to Corey Hoffmann
November 14, 2005
Page 3
Ill, and 112 operations (see language from Rule 1.4.1(5)(d) and Rule 1.4.5(1) above).
The requirement therefore plainly applies, through the duly promulgated rules and
regulations, to 112 permits, and the Applicant must comply with this requirement. The
application should not be considered complete unless and until the Applicant has applied
for all necessary local government approvals.
The Applicant argues in its September 20, 2005, Response to the 4s' Adequacy Review
that because the 112 application form itself does not explicitly include the statement of
Rule 1.4.1(5)(d) (which requires the statement that the Applicant has applied for all
necessary approvals from local govemment), these provisions do not apply. However,
Rule 1.4.5(2) notes that the application is not considered filed unless it includes all of the
following submittals: (1) the application fee; (2) the application form; (3) all information,
attachments, maps, and exhibits, as listed and described in Subsection 1.4.1 and Section
6.4; (4) an affidavit that notice signs were posted; (5) geotechnical stability exhibit, if
required; and (6) proof of notice. It is clear that the form alone is not anticipated to cover
all of the required submittals. The Rule 1.4.1(5)(d) statement is required under the Rules
regardless of whether it is included on the 112 application form itself.
The Applicant also states in its September 20, 2005, Response to the 4Lh Adequacy
Review that "The Applicant is committed to obtaining approval of all appropriate permits
prior to engaging in quarry-related land uses and will do so in a sequence that is
permitted by both state and local law." Should the Board decide to issue the permit at
this time, the permit should be conditioned so that it is not effective until the Applicant
obtains all appropriate permits. This is consistent with the Applicant's commitment
noted above.
2. Proposed condition: The Applicant shall submit auy change in post-mining use,
including but not limited to water storage, as a Permit Amendment (and not as a Technical
Revision). The Applicant shall also submit information to the County to allow sufficient
time for County review prior to the MLRB pre-approval conference with the County
regarding any changes to the post-mining use. The Applicant shall apply for all necessary
local permits and approvals prior to the submitting an application for any change in post-
mining land use.
Board Jurisdiction: Rule 1.8.1(5) states that "If the Operator notifies the Office of a
proposed change in post-mining land use, the Office shall decide whether such change in
post-mining land use requires a change in the Reclamation Plan and whether such change
shall require a Technical Revision or Permit Amendment." The Constructions Materials
Act contains the following provision: "Before approving a new reclamation plan or a
change in an existing reclamation plan, the board may confer with the local board of
county commissioners ...." C.R.S. § 34-32.5-116(4)(m). (Note that the Mined Land
Reclamation Act contains similar language, replacing "may" with "shall." C.R.S. § 34-
32-116(7)0.)
LEONARD RICE ENGINEERS INC.
2.000 CLAY STREET, SUITE 300, DENVER, COLORADO BO27 1-57 19 • PtionE [phone] ' FAX [phone]