Laserfiche WebLink
Environmental Assessment <br /> Number Hay Gulch Citizen Advisory Panel Recommendations <br /> 16 To reduce risk of impacts from subsidence to adjacent property,the boundaries of Tract E in <br /> the proposed lease modification should be reduced to no less than 1000 feet from the nearest <br /> residential structure. <br /> 17 As a condition for approval of the Class II Land Use Permit, GCC shall ensure that all local, <br /> state, and federal laws and regulations are in compliance and full transparency and availability <br /> of filings are made public.Any expansion of the mine operations shall require a new Class II <br /> Land Use permit. <br /> 18 La Plata County should adopt the Colorado Department of Local Affairs 1041 policies to <br /> allow LPC greater control over development projects. <br /> 19 GCC shall be required to pay appropriate road impact fees and these fees shall be allocated <br /> directly to CR 120. LPC shall implement appropriate financial penalties for non-performance <br /> of any conditions to the Land Use permit or interim conditions. <br /> 20 GCC should do everything reasonably possible to mitigate those negative impacts to the <br /> surrounding community with focus on these recommendations. <br /> 21 GCC should begin discussion and negotiations with residents living on CR 120 regarding <br /> compensation for causing a decrease in property values and quality of life. <br /> Notes:BLM=Bureau of Land Management,CDRMS=Colorado Division of Mining and Safety;CR=County Road;EIS= <br /> Environmental Impact Statement;GCC=GCC Energy,LLC;GVW=Gross Vehicle Weight;MPH=miles per hour;OSMRE_ <br /> Office of Surface Mining and Reclamation Enforcement <br /> In summary,the LPC LUP permit review process was extensive and inclusive,which included: <br /> ■ Three neighborhood compatibility meetings held by GCC with LPC facilitating (respectively on <br /> September 11, 2012; December 19, 2013; and April 2, 2014); <br /> ■ Two public meetings held by GCC(December 18, 2014 and January 27, 2015); <br /> ■ One general public meeting held by HGCAP; <br /> ■ Frequent, direct meetings with individuals and groups of neighbors by County Staff, <br /> ■ Frequent, direct meetings with individuals and groups of neighbors by GCC; <br /> ■ Frequent meetings between GCC and HGCAP; <br /> ■ A significantly expanded public notification area; and <br /> ■ The Fort Lewis Mesa Planning District group as a commenting agency. <br /> 1.9.5 2017 Supplemental Scoping Comment Summary <br /> On January 6, 2017,the BLM and the OSMRE sent a notice of supplemental scoping to a mailing list of <br /> 133 interested parties comprised of local, state, and federal governmental agencies and representatives, <br /> adjacent landowners and/or attorneys representing the landowners, several departments within the UMU <br /> Tribe, and several environmental/conservation non-profit organizations. In accordance with the 2011 <br /> USDOI Policy on Consultation with Indian Tribes and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, <br /> OSMRE sent a notice of supplemental scoping to 47 tribes from the Colorado Office of Archaeology and <br /> Historic Preservation directory of tribes with historic ties to Colorado. The Durango Herald also <br /> published an article about the proposed project including information on how to submit supplemental <br /> DOI-BLM-CO-S010-2011-0074-EA <br /> September 2017 <br /> -31- <br />