2011-03-07_REVISION - M1976051 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• 4, C) I RPM, Inc. March 4, 2011 RECEIVED G Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety 'BAR 0 7 2011 Attn: Dustin Czapala 101 South 3`d, Suite 301 GPAND JDN C i'i'ON FIELD OFFICE DrVISICN OF Grand Junction, CO 81501 RECLAMAII N MINING d SAFETY RE: Duckels Construction Adequacy Response to the DRM S Adequacy Letter Dated 2/15/2011. Dear Mr. Czapla: • 1> i`A G INS- I M - 0 5 r7-CO HAR 0 8 2011 Division of Reclamation, Mining and Saft-Ay This is in response to the DRMS Adequacy letter for the Bettger Pit Permit Amendment. In that letter, Mr. and Mrs. Brown state Duckels Construction has not fulfilled the Agreement between Duckels Construction and the Browns. The Agreement was signed when Mr. Kline who owned the property. They claim the Agreement transferred with the sale of the property from Mr. Kline to the Browns. They would like the DRMS and Mined Land Reclamation Board to deny the amendment application and require Duckles Construction to perform on the requirements of the original Kline/Duckels Agreement. They state the gravel pit has and will continue to affect their domestic water well production. (The well number is not stated in the Brown's comment letter. We believe they are referring to domestic wells, permit numbers 162892 and 162528, the new wells drilled by Duckels Construction.) They say the Agreement was a direct result of a specific condition placed on permit #PP1986-033. The Brown letter states, "...The present well is only 17 feet deep...". We believe their claim before the Division and the Mined Land Reclamation Board is not within the jurisdiction of the DRMS, nor the Mined Land Reclamation Board (MLRB) for the following reasons: • The wells in question are more than 1360feet from the closest point (south west corner) of the proposed Bettger Pit expansion boundary. The wells are not structures within 200 feet of the proposed affected area. In fact, they lie greater than 200 feet from the nearest Bettger Pit permit boundary, directly east of the wells. • • The Browns mention the agreement was the direct result of a permit condition to permit #PP1986-003. A search of the DRMS permit files (on-line) does not show a DRMS mining permit or prospecting Notice of Intent with that number. This may be a different agency's permit number. If it is a different agency's permit number, it is our understanding the Board and DRMS are prevented from enforcing against other agencies 1