Laserfiche WebLink
responded that Ms. Taliaferro probably had not mis-interpreted the statute nor sidestepped her <br />responsibilities. I believed her to be correct; the statute did not appear to provide for bond <br />forfeiture except as follow-up to permit revocation. I reiterated it is the permit holder's <br />responsibility to maintain the bond and if the third party and/or the bank refused to continue the <br />bond the permit holder must replace the bond or risk enforcement action for failure to maintain <br />the bond. I reiterated the contractual issue between Glacier Gravel Products and Sandco is a <br />non-jurisdictional issue for the Division. <br />Mr. Helmericks vehemently disagreed. <br />I encouraged Mr. Helmericks to discuss the issue with my supervisor, Steve Shuey, and/or the <br />Program Supervisor, David Berry. <br />Mr. Helmericks appeared entrenched in his position and resistant to terminate the conversation. <br />Therefore, I stated that I would review the file and get back to him tomorrow. <br />A review of the file indicates the existing $5,000 financial warranty is in the form of Irrevocable <br />Letter of Credit No. 1076, through Burns National Bank, provided by a third party, John Dillon dba <br />Sandco. Burns National Bank no longer exists and the new bank, Bank of Colorado, is resistant <br />to assuming and/or honoring the third party LOC. According to a correspondence from Frank <br />Anesi, Esq., dated February 12, 2009, Bank of Colorado has no record of the LOC and Sandco <br />has no contractual obligation or intension of posting the bond. In a letter dated November 21, <br />2008, the Division informed Mr. Helmericks of the bond issue and imposed a 90 day deadline for <br />Mr. Helmericks to correct the bond issue, due February 27, 2009. <br />On February 20, 2009, 1 called Mr. Helmericks at (970) 259-3995. 1 informed Mr. Helmericks that <br />I had reviewed the file and that Ms. Taliaferro was correct and he should resolve the bond issue <br />by February 27, 2009. Furthermore, the file indicated that his operation was overdue for <br />inspection and bond review and that I would be scheduling an inspection in the near future.