Laserfiche WebLink
received <br />~~ -- -- ---III •• <br />III IIIIIIillllll <br />RUSSELL, WILDEl..,,,,.,9~,,,-,11.~ ~ DAWSON, <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW <br />HARRISON F. RUSSELL <br />Rl1FU5 O~ WILDERSON <br />ROBERT M O~HAYRE <br />MICHAEL G DAWSON <br />OF COUNSEL <br />ROBERT E. WRIGHT, JR <br />120 NORTH TAYLOR STREET <br />P.O. BO% 179 <br />GUNNISON, COLORADO 81 230 <br />December 16, 1999 <br />Mr. Wallace H. Erickson, Environmental <br />Protection Specialist <br />Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology <br />701 Camino Del Rio, Room 125 <br />Durango, Colorado 81301 <br />DEC 2 p 1998 <br />~'"a^9c Re1d <br />~ilGan or M;,,~,~ s ~icg~ <br />TELEPHONE <br />19 )OI 041-J.] 20 <br /> TELECOPIER <br /> 19 )OI 041 -]094 <br /> EMAR <br /> RWO~PC~PCP] MR <br />/ <br />F~~E: Y <br />M-99-o~~ ®F' <br />Via Fax (970-247-5104) and Certified <br />Mail, Return Receipt No. 2326 884 368 <br />Re: McLain Ranch/Brown Derby Mine access <br />Our file: 14,556 <br />Dear Mr. Erickson: <br />This firm represents David J. McLain and LaDonna J. McLain, the owners of the <br />McLain Ranch in Gunnison County, Colorado. This letter constitutes the McLains' Request <br />for Administrative Appeal pursuant to Rule 1.4.7 of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation <br />Board's Hard Rock/Metal Mining Rules and Regulations, the particular details of which are <br />as follows: <br />1. Permit Number: Brown Derby Mine, Permit No. M-99-074 <br />2. Applicant: Precious Offerings Mineral Exchange, Inc. <br />3. Appellants: David J. McLain and LaDonna J. McLain <br />4. Decision Appealed: Determination that legal right of entry for Brown Derby Mine access <br />road has been demonstrated by applicant as required by the Colorado Mined Land <br />Reclamation Act, Section 34-32-101, C.R.S. and the Hard Rock/Metal Mining Rules and <br />Regulations. <br />5. Basis for Appeal: The determination at issue was apparently based upon an opinion <br />dated October 15, 1999 by Bruce C. Kirchhoff, attorney for the applicant, that since public <br />funds were allegedly expended for construction of the subject road pursuant to the Defense <br />Highway Act of 1941, which itself required the existence of a right of way or access <br />easement as a prerequisite to such expenditure, "...there is no reason to believe that the <br />Forest Service did not acquire proper right of entry prior to construction." The same opinion <br />acknowledges that no documents creating such right of entry have been found despite <br />diligent search. <br />