Laserfiche WebLink
WASST E-�,U NJ E LN C.k <br /> P.O, Box 3471 Rapid City, SD 57709-3471 PO Box 88 Cortez, CO 81321-0088 <br /> (605)348-0244 (605)939-0650(970)564-1380 <br /> WASTELINE.84532@fmail.com WASTELINE.57709@gmail.com <br /> 01 March 2021 <br /> yMs.Stephanie Mitchell, Environmental Protection Specialist <br /> Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety <br /> 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br /> Denver,Colorado 80203 VIA E-mail/Hardcopy to be n�1MV19M <br /> SUBJECT: Response to Review M-2021-0111IToner Ranch Pit 1I <br /> MAR 0 8 2021 <br /> Dear Stephanie: <br /> Thank you for your review. DIVISION OF RECLAMATIONMININGAND SAFETY <br /> The following items address the comments. Please find attached to this letter the two revised pages and <br /> agreement. <br /> 1. On page 2: <br /> a. An additional notation has been added to the map to clearly indicate the color and location of <br /> the proposed permit area.The colors used have also been noted in a legend on the map and as <br /> part of the legend at the bottom of the page,to ensure clarity. <br /> b. At the request of Hinsdale County,we have added mailing addresses for some of the nearby <br /> property owners. <br /> c. This annotation has been added to the bottom of the page:This permit application is submitted <br /> for Crossfire Aggregate Services LLC by WASTELINE, Inc. <br /> 2. On page 13: <br /> a. A legend has been added near the top of the Mining map(which applies to both maps) <br /> explaining the colors used,which are also labeled and identified in the maps. <br /> b. Although the permit boundary was labeled "Permit bdry"on most segments,additional labels <br /> have been added to the portion connecting the main body of the permit with the road. <br /> c. An annotation has been added to the bottom of the page identical to that on Page 2(item 1c). <br /> 3. The third party claim of an interest in the ditch that is being crossed is not of record; I have now been <br /> advised that there is likely an implied easement for the ditch under Colorado law. Ms.Toner is at a <br /> minimum a co-owner of that ditch and takes water from the ditch below the proposed culvert.She is also <br /> the sole person that maintains the ditch on her property. Her attorney is in active discussions with the <br /> third party's counsel on acceptable specifications for a ditch crossing agreement,which we suggest be a <br /> condition of approval. Please also note that there is a third party indemnification provision in the gravel <br /> lease agreement between Ms.Toner and Crossfire Aggregate Services. <br /> 4. As stated in the application exhibits, FS-635 was identified to us as being owned and maintained by <br /> Hinsdale County Road and Bridge Department,and therefore the indemnity would be part of the County <br /> special use permit(SUP) or the County Driveway Access Permit. However,the County notified us this <br /> week that they were trying to determine whether they or the USFS owns the road. If it is the USFS,the <br /> indemnity would be part of a USFS road access permit.The County sent us their review of the SUP <br /> application on 26 FEB 2021,and the County Road Supervisor has signed the agreement(enclosed). But it <br /> still is not clear if one or both agencies is/are the appropriate party with which to enter an agreement. I <br /> have sent a request for a structural agreement to both agencies. <br /> Please let me know any further questions. Please send your response by email as well as hardcopy, if possible. <br /> 3 Attachments: Revised pages 2 and 13 of Exhibits, Respectfully, <br /> County Structure Agreement <br /> Nathan A. Barton,CE, PE, DEE Project Engineer <br />