Laserfiche WebLink
5/15/17 <br />I am sorry if any of these questions are created based on my misinterpretation of the documents you <br />sent—I guess the questions related to the whole reclamation process are really boiled down to five <br />general ones: <br />a. Does Bowie have a bond in place which covers all the costs it would take to return the Stevens <br />Gulch and Loadout sites to their pre -mining use? <br />Yes. <br />b. Does the liability for monitoring and/or fixing some of the potential effects of NOT doing the <br />reclamation (subsidence, monitoring water contamination, allowing old structures or <br />infrastructure to deteriorate without regard for visual and or hazardous conditions on the site) <br />accrue to the new owner once the change of use has been inspected and validated by DRMS? <br />Bowie is responsible for all permit conditions until the Division releases the applicable areas <br />from its jurisdiction. This is a fairly detailed and lengthy process that includes public notification <br />and participation. <br />c. Is the County or the state liable for these problems if the new owner allows the deterioration of <br />the sites purchased? <br />When Bowie is completely released from its liability the responsibility of the site falls solely on <br />the owner of that site. <br />d. Does DRMS have to approve the release of the bond and its reclamation requirements once the <br />new owner proves the commercial use? <br />Yes, and this is a process that requires public notification and participation. <br />e. If so, how long does that use have to be proved before release is approved by the DRMS? <br />There is no set time -frame in the rules. The Division has approved commercial/industrial post - <br />mining land -uses at other sites and it was very obvious that they were (and still are) being used <br />for that purpose. The Division is very careful in assessing alternate post -mining land -uses. <br />Questions on Bowie 1 reclamation requirements <br />