My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-07-29_ENFORCEMENT - M2013007
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M2013007
>
2013-07-29_ENFORCEMENT - M2013007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:22:59 PM
Creation date
8/6/2013 3:16:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2013007
IBM Index Class Name
ENFORCEMENT
Doc Date
7/29/2013
Doc Name
DRAFT PREHEARING ORDER
From
DRMS
To
INTERESTED PARTIES
Email Name
WHE
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.
/
8
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
Amanda Winston <br />20798 Solitude Road <br />Montrose, CO 81403 <br />Note: The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety ( "Division ") shall not be a party, but <br />shall participate in the hearing as staff to the Board. <br />III. ISSUES <br />Presentations to the Board shall be limited to the following issues. The parties shall limit <br />presentations to the question of whether the pending application should be approved or denied, <br />based on the issues stated below. The issues stated below are discussed in the Division's July 19, <br />2013 Recommendation to Approve a 112c Application with Objections, Permit No. M- 2013 -007. <br />1. Whether proposed mining operations are compatible with historic, current and future land <br />uses; including whether proposed operations will be in conflict with Montrose County <br />Master Plan; including concerns regarding hours of operation, noise and visual pollution, <br />quality of life and potentially adverse impacts to the view shed, tourism, local economy, <br />and nearby property values. <br />2. Whether conflicting information pertaining to proposed operations was presented by the <br />applicant to various regulatory agencies during the permitting process. <br />3. Whether, given the size of the proposed operation, reclamation as described in the permit <br />application is feasible. <br />4. Whether the application adequately addresses concerns pertaining to water consumption <br />during drought, possible injury to water rights and compliance with water law. <br />5. Whether wind erosion and stabilization of topsoil stockpiles has been appropriately <br />addressed in the application. <br />6. Whether water quality issues have been adequately addressed in the permit application. <br />Specifically whether process water and storm water permits have been secured, and <br />whether leakage from sediment ponds will adversely impact ground water resources, and <br />whether adverse impacts to the quality of ground- and surface- waters resulting from <br />operations have been adequately addressed. <br />7. Whether potential impacts of operations on wildlife and wildlife habitat have been <br />adequately addressed in the permit application. <br />8. Whether concerns regarding man-made structures located within 200 feet of the affected <br />land have been adequately addressed in the permit application. <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.