My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE135119
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE135119
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:35:51 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 3:05:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2003037
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
7/21/2003
Doc Name
Objection
From
Friends of Spring Creek Mesa
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.
/
15
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
07/21/03 15:47 FA% 970 325 7333 TH6[&M <br />Mr. Carl B. Mount <br />July Z 1, 2003 <br />Page 9 of 10 <br />items noted by DMG, the applicant must supplement the material required by <br />Rule 6.4.5(2)la-, (c), (d), (f)(ii) & (iii); Rule 6.4.12. <br />Miscellaneous <br />The application is deficient with regard to the application submittal <br />requirements of Rule 6.4.8 -Wildlife Information; Rule 6.4.10 -Vegetation <br />Information, specifically regarding annual crop production information; and <br />6.4.11 - Climate. Tha application must be amended to include the <br />information and data required by these Rules prior to public or agency review <br />and comment and certainly prior to permit approval. <br />Petition for Hearing <br />The- foregoing reflects those concerns of my clients that have jurisdictional <br />bearing in this forum. My clients are engaged in other regulatory venues <br />regarding this proposal and are actively pursuing protection of their property <br />rights in those venues as well. <br />This application, for the reasons stated herein and others, is premature. It <br />does not contain significant information and data that are necessary prior to <br />mandated public review and agency action. The most logical course of <br />action is for the applicant to collect the necessary data and resubmit a new <br />compliant application, if the project remains feasible. Certainly, the <br />information and data that is missing is significant enough to constitute more <br />than a technical revision to the application. The new information required in <br />this instance should at the very least be treated as an amendment triggering <br />the notice and resetting provisions of Rule 1.6.6 and Rule 1.8.1. <br />However, in the event that this application review process proceeds, and in <br />light of the varied and substantial concerns regarding this application, as set <br />forth herein, my clients respectfully request a hearing before the MLRB <br />pursuarit to the provisions of Rule 1.7.1(1) regarding the Haldorson permit <br />application. <br />Very " ly your <br />S~ t~c n osh <br />oio <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.