Laserfiche WebLink
• iiiiiiiiiiiiiu iii • <br />CONCERNED CITIZENS OF OURAY COUNTY <br />20 Parkway <br />Ridgway, CO 81432 <br />May 2, 1992 <br />RECEI~E® <br />dAY 0 6 1991 <br />Larry D. Oehler <br />Mined Land Reclamation Division <br />Colorado Dept. of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 423 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />FAX No. (303)832-8106 <br />RE: Peck, Inc. Limited Impact Operation <br />Reclamation Permit Application <br />Submitted April 14, 1992 <br />Dear Mr. Oehler, <br />Mined Land <br />Reclamation qn~~~~n <br />(110(2)) <br />We wish to offer the following comments regarding the <br />referenced application. <br />Background Information: <br />Peck, Inc. first submitted an Application for Permit from your <br />division on July 11, 1990. That application was submitted under <br />the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act, 34-32-101 ET.S~.,CRS <br />1973 as amended. It involved the same parcel of property as the <br />present Limited Impact Application. The permit was denied <br />following a hearing on February 27, 1991. Prior to the hearing, <br />your Board issued deficiency letters on 10/10/91, 11/13/91, <br />11/16/91, 11/30/91 and 2/1/92. The letters of 11/30/91 and <br />2/1/92 recommended denial of the permit because the applicant <br />failed to provide substantial evidence on the problems identified <br />by the Division. Those problems included a lack of studies and <br />technical information that would allow the Division to analyze <br />1) offsite Impacts, 2) Hydrologic Impacts, and 3) Mining and <br />Reclamation Plans. <br />We have reviewed the current application and have concluded <br />that it is similarly deficient. We find no competent studies or <br />plans to review and feel that the Applicant is following the same <br />course that led to the previous denial. The public and your <br />Division cannot be left substantially in the dark regarding this <br />operation which is proposed for a highly sensitive area. <br />Buecific Deficienaiea: <br />It is extremely difficult to comment on specific deficiencies <br />since the Application contains primarily conclusionary comments <br />about the operation and virtually no studies to analyze. <br />Nonetheless, comments at this point are as follows: <br />