My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE61817
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE61817
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:08:20 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 7:18:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2001046
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
2/26/2002
Doc Name
Preliminary Adequacy Review Response
From
DMG
To
Banks and Gesso LLC
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.
/
2
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
STATE. OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman SL, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 866-3567 <br />FAX: (303) 832-8106 <br />February 26, 2002 <br />DIVISION OF <br />MINERALS <br />GEOLOGY <br />ftECL-A MATION <br />MINING•SAFETY <br />Banks and Gesso <br />LLC sin ovens <br />, <br />Attn: Tug Martin Governor <br /> Greg E. Walther <br />720 Kipling Street, Suite 117 Executive Director <br />LakeWOOd, C~ 8~2 t5 Michael B. Lang <br /> Division Director <br />RE: File No. M-2001-046; Nix Sand and Gravel Mine; Owens Brothers Concrete <br />Company; Preliminary Adequacy Review Response <br />Dear Mr. Martin: <br />The division received your adequacy responses to our letter of August 10, 2001 on <br />Februazy 13, 2002. Given the complexities of this application, there have been several <br />requests to extend the review timeframes, the most recent until February 27, 2002. As <br />explained below, the division is not fully satisfied with all of the responses at this time <br />and is not be in the position to approve the application in its current state. However, it <br />appeazs that the applicant is very close to addressing any remaining issues. <br />In reviewing the responses, many of the azeas of concern have been adequately addressed <br />and a couple of others could be stipulated as a condition of approval. However, some of <br />the areas must be addressed in full prior to approving this application. In particulaz, the <br />damage agreements for structures within 200 feet of the mining limits, or engineering <br />analyses in lieu of damage agreements, must be completed prior to an affirmative <br />decision on this application. The response indicates that only 2 of 6 required agreements <br />have been returned. In addition, the groundwater impact reports aze still under review by <br />our office. Given the sensitive nature and complexity of this issue, we aze being very <br />cazeful to conduct a thorough review and analyses of this item prior to rendering a final <br />decision on the application. Unfortunately, this will not be completed before the decision <br />date of February 27, 2002. As a result, the division suggests that the operator request <br />another 30-day extension to address these items. <br />In the meantime, a formal letter outlining any and all of the remaining issues, including <br />any comments on the groundwater and wetlands evaluations will be forwazded to your <br />office in a timely a manner as possible. As previously stated, it would appeaz that our <br />office is very close to rendering a decision on this application and one fina130-day <br />extension should be adequate to complete this review. If you have any questions, please <br />contact me at (303) 866-3567. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.