Laserfiche WebLink
ranches, rural agricultural, and residential land use. The Act and Rules do not address compatibility of <br />the mining operation to surrounding land uses, but leaves that to local government. Though the area is <br />increasing in residential properties, it is primarily a pinyon, juniper sagebrush rangeland with some <br />pastureland and small ranches. It is also a historic mining area and is adjacent to an active shale mine, <br />as is accurately stated in the application. <br />5. Comments regarding the failure of the applicant to mention 36 homes, a vineyard, <br />orchards and an alfalfa pasture within % mile of the site that would be directly affected. <br />The Act and Rules require that an application portray on one or more maps..."the name and location of <br />all creeks, roads, buildings, oil and gas wells and lines, and power and communication lines on the area <br />of affected land and within two hundred (200) feet of all boundaries of such area" and "show the <br />owner's name, type of structures, and location of all significant, valuable, and permanent man-made <br />structures contained on the area of affected land and within 200 (200) feet of the affected land." <br />The application does include this information. The Act and Rules do not require the application to <br />provide information on structures over 200 feet from the proposed affected area. <br />6. Comments regarding a false and misleading current site description-indicating rangeland <br />rather that old growth pinyon juniper forest. <br />The application specifies that the affected area is currently undeveloped rangeland. This description is <br />supported by the vegetation infonmation provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service Range <br />Site Description. The site does support some old growth juniper, but the vast majority of the vegetation <br />and trees are not old growth. The site can be best described as rangeland/wildlife habitat. DMG does <br />not consider the application to be false and misleading in it's description of the current site. <br />7. Statement that objector cannot find evidence that the applicant has applied for other <br />required state permits. <br />Rule 6.4.13 requires the applicant to provide a statement of which permits, licenses, and approvals, they <br />hold or will be seeking from other federal, state, and local governments or organizations in order to <br />conduct their proposed mining and reclamation operation. <br />The application correctly identifies that it will need an Air Quality Emissions Permit, a Delta County <br />Specific Development Permit, a Stormwater Discharge Permit, and a well permit (if the applicant <br />decides to convert their domestic well permit for this site to a commercial use well). The Delta County <br />Specific Development Permit has been approved and the applicant indicates the Air Quality Emissions <br />Permit, the Storrnwater Discharge Permit, and the commercial use well permit (depending on applicants <br />intentions) will be obtained. Therefore, the application complies with the requirements of Rule 6.4.13 <br />and the applicant is responsible to obtain all required permits and to ensure compliance with the <br />requirements of those permits. <br />8. Comments regarding impacts fo groundwater quality and quantity. <br />The applicant has committed to store no hazardous materials on site, but to fuel and maintenance on-site <br />equipment on a daily basis. The application contains a commitment to obtain a Stormwater Discharge <br />Permit and includes specifications for a sediment control system and a drainage control system designed <br />