2016-05-09_REVISION - C1982056 (21)

Home Browse Search

RE: Foidel Creek Mine; C-1982-056 9 East Utility Borehole, MR296 Application, Adequacy Review No. 1 Dear Mr. Nettleton, The Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety received the above referenced application on April 22, 2016. The application was deemed complete on May 9, 2016. After review of the application for technical adequacy, there are several items that will need to be addressed prior to the Division's approval of the application. Each items is listed below under the Rule and permit section to which they pertain. 2.04.4 — Cultural and Historical Resources, 2.05.6(4) Protection of Historic Resources: 1. Proposed revised page 2.04-9.2, does not follow with the preceding page. It appears this page is missing formation that was added with PRI 1. Please revise the page as necessary and review this page and insure it follows with the preceding and following page. 2. Included with the submittal was a Class III Cultural Resource Inventory report prepared by Metcalf Archaeological Consultants dated August 2015. This report, herein called the Metcalf Report, is to be added to Exhibit 6T based on the summary of revisions and additions sheet submitted with MR296. The Metcalf Report is a duplicate of the report that is already included in Exhibit 6L that was added to the permit with the approval of MR289. Given this, it does not appear it is necessary to add this report to Exhibit 6T. Please revise page 2.05-45.30 to cite that the Metcalf Report is included in Exhibit 6L and dated August 2015 to differentiate it from other surveys currently included in Exhibit 6L. Also please provide an updated coversheet for Exhibit 6L to indicate that it includes the MR296 survey area. 3. According to the Metcalf Report, Site 5RT3325 and 5RT3324 are eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Site 5RT3325 is located within the disturbed area if the Option #3 drill pad is constructed. Given this, the statement made on proposed revised page 2.04-9.2 that the proposed project will not impact identified cultural resources is not accurate and will need to be revised. TC will need to revise their plan or remove Option #3 in order to avoid disturbing this site. Avoidance of the site or further testing/mitigation of the site is recommended by Metcalf Archaeological Consultants on page 21 of the Metcalf Report. 4. In a letter dated September 8, 2015 from Edward Nichols the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) that was sent to the Division regarding MR289, PR10 and PR11, SHPO agreed that sites 5RT3324 and 5RT3325 are eligible for listing on the NRNP. In accordance with Rule 2.05.6(4)(b), please provide a protection plan for the 5RT3325 site in section 2.05.6(4) of the permit located on page 2.05-171. 2.04.9 Soils Resource Information 5. The proposed affected area for the 9 East Borehole is outside of boundaries of the know soil resources found at the site depicted on Map 17 and discussed in section 2.04.9 of the permit. For the proposed affected area, please provide the information required by Rule 2.04.9. 2.05.3(4) — Ponds, Impoundments, other treatment facilities and diversions 6. Based on the information presented in the proposed Exhibit 49EE the structure details associated with proposed diversion ditches 1, 2, and 3 were completed without freeboard. There was no discussion in the provided text or design to serve as a justification not to include freeboard in the proposed ditch designs. Per Rule 4.05.3(7)(b), diversion design shall incorporate freeboard no less than 0.3 feet. Please provide detail designs which include freeboard of no less than 0.3 feet