APPCOR12879

• Permit No: C1981011
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Date: 3/22/1983
• Doc Name: OSM REVIEW OF MLRD DRAFT FINDINGS & PROP DEC
• From: OSM
• To: MLRD
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
999
United States Department of the Interior
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING
Reclamation and Enforcement
BROOKS TOWERS
1020 15TH STREET
DENVER, COLORADO 80202
March 18, 1983
Mr. David C. Shelton, Director
Mined Land Reclamation Division
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
Dear Mr. Shelton:
The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
reviewed your draft proposed decision and findings of
2 mine. Our comments, and those of the Bureau of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), follow.
OSM's comments
subsidence.
f ~Cf:'F'F.I~
;lgAf; 2 21983
MINED LAND RECLAMATION
COLO. DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOI::CES
and Enforcement (OSM) has
compliance for the Apex No.
Land Management (BLM) and
Cultural resources.--No further surface disturbance of cultural resources in
the permit area is anticipated. We have informed the Colorado State Historic
Preservation Officer to this effect, and have requested him to issue a "no effect"
determination, with stipulations appended to forestall disturbance of any unantici-
pated finds and to mitigate any problems that might arise as the result of
Postmininl; land use.-Routt County has requested that Routt County No. 29
road be unreclaimed. Thus, the premining (1906) land use of grazing and wildlife
habitat would change to public road. Moreover, the applicant has received a
special permit for this change from the Routt County Commissioners incorporating
the underground mine and improvement of surface facilities. However, prior to
issuing this permit,- the County required the applicant to obtain a written
agreement to this change in land use from the surface landowner. This landowner's
consent is not included in the permit application. We suggest that the Mined Land
Reclamation Division (MLRD) require the applicant to submit proof of having
received landowner consent to its proposal.
MLRD has based issuance of the permit.
_HydroloRic balance: surface water.--MLRD's stipulation requiring Sunland
Mining to submit 1-year's worth of surface-water monitoring data as part of the
permit application should make it clear that the data are needed to substantiate
the material submitted to MLRD, and will not affect the findings upon which
Alluvial valley floor.--MLRD's analysis of the alluvial valley floor potential
of the permit area is not included in your draft findings. We cannot comment on
the adequacy of this analysis until we receive a copy of it.
Vegetation. -Because MLRD's findings reject use of the applicant's proposed
alternative seed mix, and because these findings will become part of the permit
when it is issued, we see no need for the stipulation regarding the alternative mix.