My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-10-16_PERMIT FILE - M2009074
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2009074
>
2009-10-16_PERMIT FILE - M2009074
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:56:13 PM
Creation date
10/20/2009 1:10:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2009074
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
10/16/2009
Doc Name
Adequacy Response #1-email
From
Environment, Inc.
To
DRMS
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.
/
19
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
ENVIRONMENT, INC. PAGE 2 <br />OCTOBER 1 6, 2009 <br />2) The attached airphoto shows the Permit Line/Affected Lands <br />line in red. Note that much of the old mine floor (blue <br />outline) is north and west of the permit line. The wetland <br />area you noted is all on the old mine area and will not be <br />affected by this mining operation. The previous owners used <br />the flat area along the old mining face to store the old <br />trailers and assorted parts, all but 2 of which have been <br />removed. <br />I forget from time to time that the Division has 2 defini- <br />tions that I do not use, one is for "Affected Lands" and the <br />other is for "Permit Area". I tend to interchange these <br />terms since in all the permit I do I have only "Affected <br />Lands" this way there is no misunderstanding on what can be <br />disturbed within the permit area. Normally I have this <br />correct in the Legend of the maps, well I missed it this <br />time. Attached are revised Map Exhibits E-1 & E-2 maps <br />showing the Permit Line/Affected Lands are one and the same. <br />The heavy green line is the Permit Line/Affected Lands. <br />The used of the Industrial/Commercial designation best fit <br />the current use, not the Zoning. Using one of the other <br />choices would not have been an accurate representation of <br />the use at this time. I could have actually picked 4 or 5 <br />of the choices but those would have been no more accurate. <br />If you need me to change that please advise which to pick <br />and I will submit a revised Page 4. <br />The total area to be disturbed under the plan is 9.99± acres <br />of which 3.77 acres is pre-law area that will be redis- <br />turbed. The 8.57 acres is the area disturbed by mining but <br />reclamation will be required on the 9.99 acres, as the areas <br />outside the mining area may be used to store topsoil or for <br />access roads around the mined area that will have to be <br />seeded. <br />3) The wetlands are shown on the attached air photo and are not <br />within the permit area. I believe the wet areas are there <br />because the previous miner excavated pot holes in the under- <br />lying shale creating a series of shallow depressions that <br />have filled with precipitation or storm runoff from the <br />surrounding area. Colorado Backhoe Service will not affect <br />these wetlands. <br />4) It is the landowners responsibility to remove this material <br />not the Divisions or the Operators. The remaining trailers <br />are their property and I question whether they could be <br />moved without their permission. When we asked them about <br />removal of the junk they said that the material would piled <br />and burned some time this winter. Mr. Joseph has said he is <br />willing to provide the equipment necessary to remove any <br />left over waste once he has the reclamation permit and will <br />have equipment on the site to facilitate loading and hauling
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.