My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1994-03-21_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
1994-03-21_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/2/2021 9:54:08 AM
Creation date
10/5/2012 8:41:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
3/21/1994
Doc Name
Bid Documents (IMP)
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
230
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
8 <br /> that he present this concern to the Board. In response to <br /> questions from the Board, Mr. McCarty stated that he did not <br /> have detailed information, regarding the Land Board' s <br /> objection. <br /> Staff said that if the legal description presented by the Land <br /> Board was outside of the operator' s proposed permit boundary, <br /> no activity would occur in that area, and this would not be a <br /> concern to the Division. <br /> Mr. Long stated that he contacted Mark Davis, of the (Denver) <br /> State Land Board office and was informed that discussions were <br /> being held between the Land Board and the operator, regarding <br /> a section of property on which the State owns the minerals. <br /> Mr. Long said he determined that the section of property in <br /> question is not within the permit boundary of the operator' s <br /> current amendment application, and is not related to the <br /> action being considered by the Board at this time. <br /> Board Chairman Stewart read two letters received by fax today <br /> which were written in support of the proposed operation; one <br /> from June Bradley and one from Cherry Hunter. <br /> During rebuttal testimony, Mr. Hardaway stated that he felt <br /> the issues being considered were addressed by the operator <br /> during their presentation. He summarized by briefly by <br /> addressing each issue <br /> Mr. Hardaway presented the operator' s September 16, 1993 <br /> written response to the issues raised by the parties, <br /> including potential impacts from erosion, blasting and <br /> flooding. He also presented copies of the list of their 21 <br /> permitted operations. <br /> Mr. Hardaway stated that the current calculation for bonding <br /> for the proposed operation is about $13 million and that it <br /> would probably be submitted in the form of a Letter of Credit. <br /> He said the major element of the bond calculation covers heap <br /> leach detoxification. <br /> Mr. Ed Hunter, an advisor to the operator, discussed the <br /> operator' s emergency procedures. He said the emergency <br /> procedures are listed in the permit application, including a <br /> list of about seven (7) agencies to which the operator must <br /> report. Mr. Hunter stated that DMG was the lead agency for <br /> reporting and that the operator is required to report to most <br /> of the agencies listed within 24-hours of the occurrence of an <br /> emergency. <br /> Staff said that the Division is satisfied with the emergency <br /> response provisions contained in the operator' s permit <br /> application. Staff clarified that the provisions of the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.