1997-06-05_REVISION - M1981302 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to File M-81-302 -2- June 5 . 1997 In their comments, the City of Boulder appears to express a preference for the currently approved reclamation plan, which includes 38 .1 acres of water surface, as opposed to the proposed reclamation plan which includes 4 . 2 acres of water surface . The post-mining land use under both the current and proposed reclamation plan is wildlife habitat and general agriculture . The lower land grades and reduced water surface levels in the proposed reclamation plan would not affect the operator' s ability to achieve the specified post-mining land uses. A reduction in water surface acreage in the reclamation plan would tend to enhance general agriculture uses and would provide an increase in terrestrial wildlife habitat . There would be a commensurate reduction in aquatic life and water fowl habitat . The Division has made the finding that the revegetation plan proposed in the amendment is adequate to meet the post-mining land uses selected by the operator. The City of Boulder raises the issue that the proposed reclamation plan exhibits a general lack of concern for impacts on neighboring land interests. The creation of adverse off-site impacts through the implementation of a mining or reclamation plan is an area under the Division' s jurisdiction, and the City of Boulder' s specific concerns in this regard will be analyzed later in this memo. The City of Boulder expresses a concern that the proposed reclamation plan is more suited to future development of the site than is the current reclamation plan. By increasing the acreage of land surface while reducing the acreage of water surface within the area to be reclaimed, the operator would be enhancing the property from a future development perspective. However, as stated above, an increase in the acreage of land surface is not contrary to the post-mining land uses of wildlife habitat and general agriculture. In order to develop the land, the operator would either have to successfully achieve these post-n.ining land uses, and obtain bond release and reclamation permit termination, at which time the land owner would be free of any regulation under the Mined Land Reclamation Act as to how the land is managed, or the operator would have to obtain approval of a permit amendment changing the post-mining land use to industrial/commercial . The following citations from the statute and the regulations are pertinent to an operator' s rights to modify an approved reclamation plan or change the specified post-mining land uses. 34-32 . 5-109 (3) - No governmental office of the state, other than the board, nor any political subdivision of the state shall have the authority to issue a reclamation permit pursuant to this article, to require reclamation standards different than those established in this article . . .