Laserfiche WebLink
believes that temporary surface use for exploration drilling within Box Canyon along the <br />existing trail would have little if any adverse environmental consequences and should be <br />allowed. MCC also beheves that the 1,512 acres which are excluded under this stipulation <br />and the other "No Surface Occupancy" stipulations are excessive. <br />• The exclusion of the Box Canyon area for mine related surface facilities including, we • <br />assume, ventilation shags, etc., also reduces operational flexibility. If this stipulation leads to <br />the exclusion of all surface use, support facilities would have to be located in outlying azeas, <br />which may be impractical and cost prolu'bitive. At a minimum, the lease sho_u!d not preclude <br />the construction of some surface facilities. <br />MCC does not agee with the classification of all of the Box Canyon drainage as being <br />riparian. The actual riparian corridor is restricted to the narrow drainage bottom itself. In <br />addition, the riparian Brea and buff..r zone deLn.:.t~ an l~.rp 2 of the EA shou:d not be <br />extended onto MCC surface lands located at the mouth of Box'Canyon: <br />The timing stipulations, which disallow surface activities below 6800 feet in elevation within <br />the December 1st through Apri130th time frame to avoid conflict with winter ranges, reduce <br />operational flexibility and would likely lead to increased production costs. MCC's inability to <br />conduct development drilling, facilities construction, and maintenance activities for b months <br />of the year could jeopazdue operations. Increased risk is also associated with potential future <br />reclassification ofcrucial winter ranges which could disallow those areas of shallowest cover <br />from future use. <br />The stipulation which disallows mining beneath an alluvial valley floor (AVF) as well as <br />"other parts of the proposed lease which could damage water that supplies the AVF, due to <br />the potential connection between the AVF and the Mesaverde Formation", does not identify • <br />the restrictions to mining operations or area limitations which maybe imposed in the future <br />by the Regulatory Authorities. Unspecified future restrictions, which could limit operations <br />or limit the reserves available for mining, creates substantial uncertainty as to the reserves <br />available for mining and diminishes the value of that reserve. <br />The controlled surface use stipulations, which limit activities within areas of moderate and <br />high geologic hazards or areas of 40% - 60% slopes; cover 100 % of the lease tract area. In <br />the EA, this stipulation appears to have been extended to include surface lands owned by <br />MCC (Map 6) in an attempt to restrict their use. Although a waiver for surface use maybe <br />granted after review and approval by a special interdisciplinary team, there appear to be no <br />assurances. The stipulations go so far as to state that waivecs "should not routinely be <br />expected" and that "additional future stipulations may imposed". MCC believes that its <br />ability to develop the reserve is jeopardized by these uncertainties. <br />The regulatory authority should not apply lease terms applicable to oil and ens leasing and <br />production to a coal lease. Reference is made to U.S. Forest Service Oil and Gas Leasing record <br />of decision dated April 1993, Appendix A-2, paragraph 9, which states "direction for other <br />mineral resources remains unchanged". The coal exploration drilling and minor surface use <br />• <br />