My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE131259
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE131259
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:32:05 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 11:04:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2004067
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/30/2005
Doc Name
extension of decision date
From
banks and gesso llc
To
dmg
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
JUN-30-2005 THU 03;02 PM BANKS AND OESSO 1!C <br />~~ hanks and Gesso, LLC <br />~~ <br />June 30,2005 <br />Tom Schreiner <br />Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Avenue <br />Denver, CO 80202 <br />FAX N0. 303 274 8329 P, 02 <br />720 Kipling St.,Suite117 <br />Lakewood, Colorado 80215 <br />(303) 274-4277, <br />FeX (303) 274-E ~~ /~ f <br />www.banksand~ ~/ <br />Re: File No. M-2004-067, Extension of Decision Date Class: Pernlir; ,i~h'j~R~ugrr~/ <br />Dear Mr, Schreiner: <br />In a phone call yesterday, June 29, 2005, you informed us, as the permitting representative for <br />the MMRR Quarry (Regular 112 Application No. M-2004-067), that the case would be <br />scheduled for a hearing at the July 13 meeting of the Mined Land Reclamation Board, requiring <br />a Pre-Hearing Conference this Friday, July 1. This information was not anticipated In our <br />production schedule for adequacy and other technical review items, as we had previously <br />discussed a potential August or September MLRB meeting with the DMG. <br />To date; we do not have the Division's adequacy comments related to the March 23, 2005, <br />submittal of our adequacy response on behalf of the applicant. It is our plan to respond <br />thoroughly to adequacy review comments and new objector items that the Division deems <br />worthy of a response, and we therefore believe that it is necessary to review adequacy <br />comments and develop a response before participating in aPre-Hearing Conference. <br />Obviously, it is our desire that the Division's schedule for a Decision Date also have enough <br />time to review any response, receive clarification, and so forth. <br />We believe that extension of the Final Decision Date to October 19, 2005 is appropriate at this <br />time, with the intent being to ensure that this case will receive a Board Hearing, as needed, at <br />its October 2005 meeting. G(ven these considerations, the applicant in Case No. M-2004-067 <br />also waives its right to a recommended decision within 90 days, subject to the above requested <br />Board Hearing and Decision Date. We reserve the right to request further extension of the <br />decision date in the future should appropriate circumstances arise. <br />Thank you for your assistance in this matter. <br />Sincerely, <br />BANKS AND GESSO, LLC <br />Ale Schatz <br />cc: file <br />Chris Hayes, Esq. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.