Laserfiche WebLink
<br />east end of the disturbed area, but not shown on the permit map: If it still exists, please provide more information <br />as to its condition (i.e., open, grated, cased, vent'fan; etc.). <br />There aze a couple vent hole features and electric lines shown on the general location map directly up the slope <br />from this portal azea, though they may become part of the Sunday Mine permitted operation. If they are part of this <br />St. Jude Mine permit, please confirm this. <br />It is assumed that all areas shown in brown with hachures denote waste rock dumps, which are to be graded to 2:1 <br />slopes or less as part of final reclamation. <br />I agree that the new surface detail superimposed on the map base must be tied back in to the topography, for both <br />the final mining and reclamation maps. Please be reminded that reclamation maps should depict only those features <br />which will remain onsite after reclamation is finished. All roads, buildings, berms, etc., that aze to be removed <br />should not be included on the reclamation maps. Stormwater controls which are to remain should be shown. <br />There is a delineation presumed to show the outei "footprint"..ofall past disturbance, in addition to the labeled <br />affected area boundary. This irregular footprint exceeds the polygon of the affected area boundary mainly on the <br />south and east sides by up to one acre in total. However, because the boundaries were never marked, mining <br />activities were never shown on annual report maps, and the 1998 map updates were incomplete, it was not fully <br />realized until now. It is not known if these areas were affected under a previous operator. The areas which can be <br />demonstrated to be actual offsite damage (road cuts, waste rock fills, adversely affected surface drainages, etc.) <br />may add up to a possible violation. Though it may seem unfair, I .will have to discuss this situation with the <br />program supervisor to determine whether enforcement action is warranted. If so, the best cure for such deficiency <br />will be to reconfigure the boundary to include all such offsite disturbance in the permit, and to bond for its <br />reclamation. These are items we are already working toward. You must revise the map to show a "proposed <br />boundary configuration" of an area of the same acFeage. Configure it as you deem best for your future operations, <br />but constrained according to the criteria given. Straight sides with.defmite comers aze obviously the easiest to <br />mark. If enforcement action is necessary, your proposed configuration will not become final until the Board <br />approves them. „ <br />Summary <br />These comments and questions will hopefully assist you iti fuializing the maps for this permit, by explaining how <br />this Division proceeds in determining which areas and features?are to be included in the bonded reclamation <br />liability, and within the boundary on the maps. Ycux,preliminaryrnap is a very good start, and should take minimal <br />effort to reach a complete and adequate stage for.our uses. <br />I look forward to receiving the revisions. Please ensure that you submit all maps, especially oversized maps (larger <br />than 11" x 17") in duplicate. Additionally, all final maps are to be signed by the preparer. As before, please do not <br />hesitate to contact me ifthere are questions. I may be reached,. and/or the maps mailed to the Division's Durango <br />field office: 701 Camino del Rio, Room 125, Durango, CO 81301; telephone 970/247-5103 or fax 970/247-5104. <br />Sincerely,rr ~~~~ ~ ~~~~~QQ / <br />h~'LNVV'r°`. v <br />Bob Oswald <br />Environmental Protection Specialist ,, <br />A;lstjude map/rco '~~ <br />