APPCOR10900

• Permit No: C1980004
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Date: 7/9/1981
• Doc Name: MCCLANE CANYON REVIEW OF ADEQUACY RESPONSES & MY PREVIOS MEMO
• From: MLR
• To: BRIAN MUNSON
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

STATE OF COLORADO RiC HARD D. ~. Govmnnr
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
D. Monte Pascoe, Executive Director
MINED LAND RECLAMATION
423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. [phone]
David C. Shelton
Director
July 9, 1981
TO: Brian Munson
III IIIIIIIIIIIII III
999
FROM: Susan Mowry
SUBJECT: McClave Canyon Review of Adequacy Responses and my Previous Memo
This memo will serve to update and replace my previous memo of June Z8, 1981.
1. My copy of the application does not have page 3-18. This is a page of their
response and should have been included. Perhaps this page is just missing from
my copy - check it out. (cormnent 2.03.3 No. I)
2. The applicant has still not submitted a narrative on land capability and
productivity for the land use section (continent 2.04.3 No. 1). They instead,
say the inform ti on is available in the soils and vegetation baseline sections
and table 4.4-3.
3. In question 2.04.4 number four, why is just a portion of the permit area
shown on map 2.2-1, also by using 3 maps namely map 2.2-1 figure 3, and figure 4
in the report, one can determine the relationship of the cultural resources to
the disturbed areas, if that is clearly defined as you requested I'll eat
my hat. How important it is, that is up to you.
4. The applicant's response to question 2.04.9 No. 5, is that none of the cultural
areas are scheduled for disturbance and they will not propose any mitigation
measures until a site is listed on the Historic Register.
5. Climate information (2.04.8) still does not include annual maximum and
minimum. Only the mean figures ("normal") are based on at least ten years of
data. The data period is not specified for the other items. The data is from
Grand Junction - not Fruita as you suggested.
The wind rose situation has got me totally confused. You will have to check
this out yourself, (see previous memo for more detail on confusion).
6. In question 2.05.6(1) No. 4, the applicant was requested to include a copy
of their emissions permit. They have not submitted it but instead a copy of an
application for an amendment to their permit appears in Appendix E.
7. The applicant's response to questions in section 2.05.6(2), Fish and Wildlife,
is "It was agreed that no response was necessary to these comments".
Sections reviewed include: 2.03.3, 2.03.8, 2.03.9, 2.03.10, 2.03.12, 2.04.3,
2.04.4, 2.04.8, 2.05.6(1) and (2)