Laserfiche WebLink
3. The Boazd modified the proposed prehearing order to reflect the withdrawal of James <br />B. and Janice L. Hamner, and the resolution of issues 2, 6 and 7. <br />4. The Board has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this case <br />pursuant to C.R.S. § 34-32.5-114. <br />5. The Division recommends approval of this application with one condition, set forth <br />below. <br />6. The issues set forth in the prehearing order are; <br />A) Has the Applicant established a reasonable timetable for backfilling and <br />grading consistent with good mining and reclamation practices? <br />B) Has the Applicant identified the projected amount of water from each of <br />the sources of water to supply the project water requirements? <br />C) Has the Applicant specified how it will comply with Colorado water laws <br />regazding the protection of existing water rights? <br />D) Does the Applicant's plan minimize disturbances to the quality and <br />quantity of surface and groundwater systems, including potential impacts from a <br />batch concrete or asphalt plant? <br />E) Does the Applicant's reclamation plan provide for grading to control <br />erosion and siltation of the affected lands, to protect the state highway right-of- <br />way from damage? <br />Backfilling and Grading Timetable <br />7. The Objector is concerned about the Applicant's timetable for the proposed <br />mining operation. <br />8. Construction Materials Rule 3.1.5(4) states that all backfilling and grading <br />shall be completed as soon as feasible after the mining process. The <br />Applicant is obligated to establish reasonable timetables consistent with good <br />mining and reclamation procedures. Construction Materials Rule 6.4.4 states <br />that the Applicant is not obligated to meet any specific dates for initiation or <br />completion of mining in a phase. <br />