Laserfiche WebLink
J. E. STOVER ~ ASSOGIATES, INC. <br />P.O. BOX 60340 <br />GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81506 <br />PHONE: (970) 245-4101, FAX 242-7908 <br />MINE ENGINEERING <br />MINE RECLAMATION <br />May 21, 2007 <br />Dan Mathews <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety <br />101 South 3rd Street Suite 301 <br />Grand Junction, CO 81501 <br />~~~~~~`` <br />MAY 23 [uui <br />Division of F. ,,.,m, <br />Mining and Safety <br />Re: CAM Mining, LLC <br />Munger Canyon Mine <br />Technical Revision Application, TR-22, Adequacy Review No. 2 <br />Permit No. C-1981-020 <br />Dear Mr. Mathews: <br />CIVIL ENGINEERING <br />CONST. MANAGEMENT <br />The DRMS's letter dated May 17, 2007 transmitted its second adequacy review <br />for the referenced technical revision, On behalf of CAM Mining LLC, following <br />are its responses to the DRMS' comments and concerns: <br />6. DRMS: Stipulation No. 32 of the approved permit requires submittal of a written request for <br />retention of the lower, privately owned section of haul road, prior to initiation of final reclamation <br />of the Munger Mine Bench and Upper Access Road. CAM had requested that the stipulation be <br />amended to allow for completion of the work specked in the revised reclamation schedule for <br />2007/2008, without providing written landowner request for retention of the lower road segment. <br />Subsequently, CAM signed an easement agreement with the landowner (#11 Enterprises), <br />indicating that #11 Enterprise °requests and consents to the retention of the road and bridge... ". <br />The °request and consent", however, is subject to certain conditions set forth in the easement <br />agreement between the parties. <br />Given the conditional nature of the "request and consent" language included in the <br />easement agreement, and the fact that the Division is not party to the easement agreement, we <br />believe the prudent and appropriate approach would be to amend the language of Stipulation No. <br />32 within the TR-22 proposed decision, as previously proposed. The proposed language of the <br />amended stipulation would read as follows: <br />Stipulation No. 32 <br />Prior to submittal of Phase I bond release application for the lower road to be retained for <br />the postmining land use, the operator will submit a written request from the surface owner for <br />retention of the privately owned segment of haul road (between the BLM boundary and State <br />Highway 139). The request will indicate the surface owner's concurrence with the plan for road <br />retention presented in permit section 3.3.1. Alternatively, a revised reclamation plan for the lower <br />road segment demonstrating compliance with Rule 4.03.1(7)(a)(i) through (ix) will be submitted to <br />the Division. <br />Please let us know if the revised wording of the stipulation is acceptable to you. <br />Note that the landowner request for retention of the road segment should include specific <br />reference to their concurrence with the plan for road retention as presented in permit <br />section 3.3.1. <br />