i 

• • ( 

Scott R. Morris 

F. A. A. Office of Regional Counsel O C^ f""" C | 

I 1601 Lind Ave., S.W. ' -^'5^.A:„/ 

r •• ^- ' 

Renton, Washington 98057 li-Di P"^ 

I F.A.A. Docket lONM 0004 

7 2010 

F.A.A. Case No. 2009NM700173 _ '"\ Q 

DMSNO, F.A.A.-2010-0534 ^' 

Response to complainant's initial discovery request: Interrogatories and requests for production 

Interrogatory No. 1 : 

Gary Pollack 

117 Fairview Ave. 

Manitou Springs, CO 80829 

Cell (352) 263-5238 

Keith Broyles 

Colorado Springs, CO 

(719) 

INT. #2. 

1. 49CFR Parts 100-185 

2. Fore.st Service Review 07 July/2007, submitted plan of operations for mining claims dated 7/11/07 

3. Letter dated 16 April 2009 from Dillon ranger district's district ranger 

4. Letter 8 Jan 2009 from state of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety, see enclosed copies 

INT. #3 

Same as INT. #1. 

Since it is not legal to coach a witness, I refuse to rehearse future testimony with the witnesses but I anticipate that 

they will corroborate my response to the fullest extent of their knowledge. 

INT. #4 

All sources cited in response to INT.#2 will be presented by Gary Pollack, a factual witness. 

Required for Prod.#2 

see attached letters 

INT.#5 

None Needed 

INT. #6 

None Needed 

INT.#7 

See INT.#1 

And add my 93 year old mother; Alyce GBarrett, 2216 Farragut Ave., C.S. 80907 (719) 635-3305 

INT. #8 

See Answers to complaint filed on 24 Jun 10 (Find Copy Enclosed) 

INT #9 

None needed. 

Request For Prod #3 

None needed on my behalf but 1 hope the complainant plans to exhibit the propane tanks to be in violation. 

INT. #10 

Again see enclosed copies of response to complaint dated 24 Jun 10 

Request for Prod. #4 

See enclosed documents 

INT. #11 

See enclosed documents 
Request For Prod #5 

There are none. Their helicopter crashed and we were never billed. 

Request for Admissions 

Reg, for Ad. #1 

Without a specific date it is impossible to admit or to deny such a broad statement. 

Req. for Ad. #2 

Such serious accusations and demands are difficult to respond to without an actual date of occurrence. 

"About" is not a date. 

Red For Ad. #3 

This is false. Any and all propane is used only at the cabin site, with its function being the cooking of food for the 

miners 

Reg. For Ad. #4 

On a certain flight they were 

Req for Ad. #5 

Another false accusation see response to complaint #11-6 

Req for Ad. #6 

False again see response to complaint #11-6 

Req for Ad. #7 

Wrong again 

See response to complaint 

#11-6 

Reg for Ad. #8 

Admitted 

Req for Ad. #9 

Admitted 

Reg for Ad. #10 

Admitted 
24 .June 2009 

Response in the matter of Peter Simons 

FAA. Docket No. CPIONM0004 

D.M.S. No. F.A.A. 2010 -0534 

F.A.A. Case No. 2009 NM700173 

'-1- ? 2010 

vH^r.9MG DOCKET 

Re: 13.209(B) 

A location of Denver Colorado would be an acceptable location for the hearing. Because of the full time 

mining project taking place from 1 July 2010-30 Sept 2010, a hearing date at a time that would not conflict 

with this schedule is requested. 

Answers to Complaint 

I-Yes 

II 1. Why does the complainant not even know 

The date of said violation? 

Yes - we have done business with A.T.S. 

YesII-3. 

II-4 

II-5 

II-6 

II-7 

II-8 

II-9 

It further applies to both the mine itself and the cabin and cooks shack where food for the miners is 

prepared. The two sites are located at a distance of approx. Vi mile. The propane is used to cook food, 

heat water, etc. It is not used at the mine it.self, and never has been. 

Two couriers escorted the hazard material shipment of four propane tanks and acted as guards to secure 

and protect the shipment. 

Yes, Four backyard bar-b-Q, five gallon size containers. 

This is a serious misrepresentation and exaggeration of the facts. Two of the four containers were in 

their brand new store bought condition, with all labels intact-liquid petroleum flammable-UN 1075 etc. 

The other two were partially painted black on the bottom part of the tanks while the top section which 

contains I.D. number etc weretheir original white color as required by law. 

The bottoms were painted to comply with National Forest Service Requirements for painting the cabin 

(we were erecting) in a camouflage pattern, with colors dictated by the National Forest Service, and 

from a federal gov't color chart. 

Two of these tanks are clearly named and labeled as such. 

At the time of this occurrence we did not have sufficient knowledge or information to deal with this fact. 

According to 49CFR Section 175.26 

A) Each person who engages in the acceptance or transport of cargo for transport of cargo for 

transportation by aircraft shall display notices to persons offering such cargo of the requirements 

applicable to the carriage of hazardous materials aboard aircraft etc. 

A.T.S. helicopter had no such notices posted in their hangars, nor on their helicopters, nor did they offer 

any verbal warnings what-so-ever. 

A.T.S. simply accepted the "shipment" and transported it as a cont+nuation of M.O.T.'s which 

Rules do not apply to aircraft. 
II-IO 

II-11 

11-12 

This avoidance of legally required notices made the knowledge of such rules all but impossible 

for the "shipper" to know. ALso .see 175.30 (A) (1-4) 

None of the containers had a cargo aircraft only label affixed to it. 

The "shipment" did contain identification markings and labels but was not accompanied by a shippers 

certification or declaration of dangerous goods. 

The second sentence of #11 should be preceded by the words "two of. 

Please II-9 

II -13 Again this could apply only to part of the shipment. 

11-14 

These containers were placed aboard a helicopter, by the pilot-in-command, and then the two passengers 

were instructed to board the aircraft. Turning a cargo aircraft into a passenger carrying aircraft was 

strictly the call of the pilot-in-command. 

Ill 

A. See II-6 and II-9 

B. SeeII-9 

C. See II-9 and 11-14 

D. SeeII-6 

E. SeeII-9 

F. SeeII-9 

G. See II-9 and 11-14 

H. SeeII-9 

1. See II-9 

IV 

2. Disagree, it is the point of the hearing to decide liability 

3. The fact cited in 119 combined with the fact that A.T.S. helicopter co is also not "licensed to carry" 

so completely hid all of the laws and requirements of the H.M.R. that no prudent man could have 

possibly avoided the trap set by A.T.S 

Please see enclosed documents from the federal agency - The national forest service and note 

that this mineral exploration project is guided by two primary laws: 

1. The mining law of 1872 guarantees access to said mining claims. 

2. The guiding principal for managing claims in such remote locations is the Prudent Man Rule 

of 1840. 

3. It has been the close observing of this rule that enables the permission to work the claims and 

to put in the cabin in the first place. 

Since this incident with the hazard materials transportation problem, A.T.S. has been 

dismissed, and we have switched to another carrier who is "licensed to carry." Further, the 

mines owner Gary Pollack has personally taken and pas.sed HM206 General Awareness 

Safety Training Class. 

There is nothing more that could reasonably be expected of a prudent man. 

4. In conclusion any request for an assessment against Mr. Siinons should be denied. 
Lis D A United states Forest 

Department of Service 

Agriculture 

White Rivep-^ 

NaiitibnaP' ' 

Forest I 

' ' - ' 7 2010 

th^, :r^^ 

Dillon Ranger District 

P.O. Box 620 

680 Blue River Parkway 

Silverthorne, CO 80498 

(970) 468-5400 

FAX (970) 468-7735 

•arrr 

File Code: 281 0 

Date: April 16, 2009 

Gary Pollack 

P.O. Box 453 

Manitou Springs, CO 90028 

Dear Mr. Pollack: 

I am writing in regards to your recent correspondence and conversation with Paul Semmer, of 

my staff, concerning the proposed plan of operations for the summer 2009 at the Suspect Lode 

mining claims located in the headwaters of Monte Cristo Gidch, south of Breckenridge 

The proposed activities for this summer were originally described in your January 28, 2008 letter 

requesting approval of an update to the Plan of Operations which was origjnally approved 

August 7, 2007. Generally, you are proposing to continue exploration activities at the mine and 

begin to incorporate power tools for drilling and blasting. This summer you are also planning to 

iastall a prefabricated wooden structure as a temporary hving shelter which wiU remain at the 

mine site year-round during the length of the approved Plan of Operations. The shelter will 

consist of two 8 ft. by 8 ft. sheds with an 8 ft. by 8 ft. wooden deck ia between. The shelter will 

be built in smaller modular sections off-site, flown to the mine site via hehcopter and 

reassembled on-site. It wiU only be used during the snow-free period while you are actually 

working at the mine site. 

Last summer Paul met with you at the mine to discuss the proposed location of the shelter and 

conduct an on-site inspection of the area to assess potential environmental impacts. The 

proposed-shelter is in a very exposed location in a rocky alpine talus field with no vegetation for 

screening. With the remote setting and high elevation, well above treeline, it is an extremely 

harsh environment and the placement of a shelter on the talus rocks will not have an adverse 

impact However, as Paul has discussed with you, the construction of a new structure in the area 

will have visual impacts. 

Any structures placed in the area must be done to minimize the visual impact and retain the 

existing character of the natural appearing landscape as much as possible. To that extent, the 

shelter should be painted in a camouflage pattern, as opposed to a solid single color, with colors 

that are at least three shades darker than the surrounding rock and Hchen colors. Based on photos 

of the site, the shelter walls should be painted using a combination of hghter and darker colors 

(using 4 to 6 different ones appUed in random patterns on aU walls). The paint colors shotild be 

selected from the following color specifiqatiqn numbers of the "Federal Standard 595B Colors" 

fan deck: Greys - 26008, 26132, 26152, 26081, 26134, 26099, 26187, 26118, 36099, 36076 and 

Dark Browns - 30040, 37056, 24091. The paint is available at most hardware and paint stores by 

Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper 
referencing the specification numbers when ordering the paint. 

Either rusted corrugated metal, rolled asphalt, or asphalt shingles would be acceptable for the 

roof, although the corrugated metal would probably hold up better in the high alpine 

environment. Any roofing material must be a non-reflective material. The rusted corrugated 

metal would blend in with the stnroimding rock and Hchen and fits with the historic mining 

character of the area. If you choose the rolled asphalt or asphalt shingles, use a "variegated" 

pattern with greys-dark/medium/hght and black. We were not able to find a color chart for the 

rolled asphalt to be able to give you a specific product name or specification number. However, 

we were able to find the following internet site for asphalt shingles, which will help is describing 

the colors for asphalt materials: http://www.mcroofing.ca/color_shingles.html#Enviroshake. We 

recommend an asphalt material color similar to EcUpse - Twihght Grey, Mosaic - Onyx, or 

Tradition - Twihght Grey from the asphalt shingles website. 

• r 

The operations which you propose are not hkely to cause a significant disturbance of surface 

resources and are consistent with the previously approved Plan of Operations dated August 7, 

2007. However, since the modifications proposed for this year include placement of structures 

on the National Forest a reclamation bond wiU be required before I can approve the modified 

Plan of Operations. I appreciate the information you provided with your February 23, 2009 letter 

describing the details for constructing the shelters, including hehcopter transport costs, which we 

will use in calculating the bond amount. I anticipate being able to send you the requirements for 

the reclamation bond in the next few weeks. 

The information above, dealing with the design criteria for the shelters, should be helpfiil as you 

build the shelters in preparation for flying them to the mine site this summer. Arid, I look 

forward to working with you to complete the final requirements for approving the updated Plan 

of Operations this spring. If you have any questions on the matters discussed above please caU 

Paul at 970-262-3448. 

Sincerely, 

1 • 

.^ JA>J'CUTTS 

^—©istrict Ranger 
FROM :rtfiNITOU LIBRARVfe 1 r;„../w/L«= 

7 2010 

^ H I I^I'MoF^igeBSUGg l? 2009 10:21P1H P2 

! 5 !••• 

J... '. 

DOCKET STATE OF COLORADO 

DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY 

Pepartment of Natural Resouicei 

1313 Sherman St, Room 215 

Denver, Colorado 80203 

Phone; (303) 866-3567 

FAX: (303) 832-8106 

January. 8, 2009 

C O I O RA D O 

T> I V I S I O H O f 

RECLAMATION 

MINING 

— &— 

SAFETY 

Mr. Gary PoJJack ' ~ 

c/o Jim Sulton S^,!!^'" 

P.O. Box 453 Harris^ aerm.n 

Manitou Springs, CO 80829 . Ex'ecJnvi DI'^JOI 

Ramid W. CallAny 

RE: Proposal for Prospecting on the Su.spoct Claims, File >Jo. P-2008-060 oivuiort pir«tor 

Natural RnounxTmitee 

Dear Mr. Pollack: 

Tilt: Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safely (DRMS) lia.s reviewed your mineral prospecting proposal for tlie 

Suspect, Northern Suspeot, Southern Suspect, and S-4 Claims in Summit County ( CMC nos. 250 421,250 420, 250 

419, and 259 608 respectively). Ilie review was of your written proposal received by DRMS on May 27,2008 aiid 

also considered our telephone discussion of October 2008. In particular, we discussed the activities you have already 

conducted on these claims and your contemplated activities for 2009. 

The Colorado Mined T.^nd Reclamation Act defines prospecting as: 

...the act of searching for or investigating a mineral depo-ijit. "Prospecting" includes, but is not limited to, 

sinking shafts, tunneling, drilling core and bore holes and digging pits or cuts and other works for the 

purpose of extracting samples prior to commencement ofdevelopment or extraction operation."?, and the 

building of roads, access ways, and other facilities related to such work.., The term ... does not include any 

single activity which results in the disturbance of a single block of land totaling one thousand .six hundred 

square feet or less of the land's surface, not to exceed two such disturbances per acre; except that tlie 

cumulative total of .such di.stutbanoes will not exceed five acres statewide in any prospecting operation 

extending over twcnly-four consecutive montlis. 

You have .stilted that you have not and will not di.sturb more than 1600 square feet of surface during prospecting 

operations on these claims. You stated that planned activities for 2009 include the construction of a small cabin and 

use of a compressor and air tools to continue excavation on a vein located on tlie Northern Saspcet Claim for 

collection of samples. These activities will occur in different locations on the claims, but the aggregate surface 

disturbance will be well under 1600 square feet in total. Aa long as the disturbance is less than" 1600 square teet, and 

does not include exploration drilling of bore hol&s, you do not need to file a prospecting notice with the DRMS. The 

incomplete prospecting notice you filed with DRMS in May 2008 has been coded into our databa.sc as "Not Mining 

or Prospecting."" If your plans going forward will include total disturbance on these claims that will be in cx.c6ss of 

1600 square feet you must file for a prospecting notice with the DRMS and have the notice accepted in writing prior 

to conducting the activities that will create the disturbance in excess of 1600 total square feet. 

If you have any questions, please contact me at 303-866-.1567, ext 8143 or a( allen.$orensot^(5),stat&.co.us. 

Allen C. Sorcnson 

Reclamation Specialist 

cc: Paul Semmer, USPS, Dillon Rimger District 

c:\uBS filos\My DocumenCK 4-19^06 IhruVtuspeet claims NOl nitt ncedeJ.dcK; 

Office of Office of 

Mined l^nd Reclamation Dnnvmr • rnmW !.*.'•!<«- - n. 
USD A United States 

^^^KfM Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest 

Service 

White River 

National 

Forest 

Dillon Ranger District 

P.O. Box 620 

680 Blue River Parkway 

Silverthorne, CO 80498 

(970) 468-5400 

FAX (970) 468-7735 

File Code: 2810 

Route To: (Files) 

Subject: Suspect Lode Mining Claims 

To: Project Files 

Date: 7/11/07 

Review of July 2. 2007 submitted Plan of Operations for Suspect Mine Claims 

Claims are "Active" recorded with BLM as CMC250421 (Suspect), CMC250420 (Northern 

Suspect), CMC 250419 (Southern Suspect) and CMC259608 (S-4) on Public Domain lands and 

subject to 1872 mining law and 36 CFR 228A rules and regulations. Forest Service will work 

with claimant to provide reasonable access pursuant to an approved plan of operations. 

Internal District scoping disclosed no significant environmental impacts as long as access to the 

claims is restricted to cross-country foot travel only and helicopter to hauling materials and 

supphes. Any development of a designated travel route, foot or motorized, would require 

extensive environmental analysis and potentially cause significant impacts to botanical 

resources. 

Claimant has been working the mine for several years. An evaluation of the geology and historic 

mining in the area, as well analysis of ore samples fi^om the mine verify that the "prudent man" 

test applies to the claims. 

Paul Semmer 

Dillon Ranger District, Minerals Administrator 

Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recyded Paper o