REV05242 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

January 1993 Raton Creek Mine * Adequary Responses ~ 6 7fie truck tunnel appears on Map 17, "Post Mining Topography' 71~e Division has no letter from the landowner requesting that the mucture remain. Phase address and include an explanation as to how this mucture is appropriate for the post mining land use. Otherwise, please eliminate it from all maps Response: The landowner anticipates using the existing truck tunnel as a sub-grade storage facility, primazily for livestock feed and potentially some equipment. The sub- grade installation will provide more constant temperature conditions than a similar surface facility and is well suited for long-term storage. EFMC has contacted the surface owner relative to a formal request for retention of this structure and anticipates receipt and transmittal of the required documentation to the OMLR in the immediate future. 8. Page 488 of the permit is a letter from Mr. A.J, luppa stating that he is satisfred with the reclamation plan as submitted Map No. 1, "General Area and Property Ownership" shows other landowners Please provide the required reclamation plan approval letters from them as well. Please also address the reclamation plan Mr. Irtppa is referring to: the full" reclamation plan, the worst case scenario reclamation plan, or both. Please have all appropriate landowners reply to the reclamation plan that you finally submit. Response: Given the uncertainties associated with Mr. Iuppa's original letter (1982) and potential changes in final reclamation and closure plans which must be resolved through mutual discussions with OMLR (refer to Responses 1, 26, and 3), final landowner comments may be premature at this time. EFMC proposes to contact effected landowners (ie: Iuppa/Cimino, and Montoya) after all reclamation/closure issues have been resolved and at that time provide them with a copy of appropriate reclamation plan documentation for review. I[ should be noted chat the regulatory requiremen[ for surface landowner comment as stated in Rule 2.05.5(I)(b) does not specify approval of [he proposed reclamation plan. Rather, the focus of applicable regulatory provisions appears to be input from potentially effected landowners relative to the proposed postmining ]and use(s). The dated reclamation plan documentation will provide a reasonable basis for final landowner comments relative to postmining land use. If desired, the dated reclamation plan documentation can be referenced in the written landowner comments to avoid future confusion relative to landowner understanding and intent. A:~B56RFS P.LTR 01/OS/9J tpm ACZ Int. * P.O. Box 774018 * Steamboat Springs, Colorado 80477 * 1303) 8796260