GENERAL40541 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Since there is no anticipated Surface disturbance within the proposed lease boundaries, no cultural inventories were performed on the lease area. However, depending on the outcome • of the competitive bidding process, a possibility exists that additional surface disturbance may occur. If this becomes the case, a Class III cultural inventory would be required by CMLRD at the time a mine plan is processed. This is also provided for in the special cultural stipulation attached to all coal leases issued. There are no prime or unique farmlands or floodplains and wetlands within the proposed lease area. V. Public Participation/I~,gencies or Individuals Consulted Mike Savage, Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division Caryl Helmin, National King Coal, Inc. Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement A public hearing was held on October 25, 1989, to obtain comments on the Environmental Assessment (EA), the maximum economic recovery of the coal, and the method of determining the fair market value of the coal. Agencies, organizations, and persons who presented testimony at the hearing or commented on the EA during the comment periods follow. The hearing transcript and comments received are contained - in Appendix II. Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division Colorado Division of Wildlife Edwin J. Lobato, Blue Flame Coal Company • Robert Lobato, Blue Flame Coal Company Carolyn Lobato Bleidt, Blue Flame Coal Company Colorado Historical Society The text of the EA was revised in response to two written comments by Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division (NERD) and two written comments by Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) (see comment letters in Appendix II). Page 7, paragraph 2, of the EA was changed to reflect the information supplied in MLRD comment 1. Page 13, paragraph 4, of the EA was changed to reflect the information supplied in MLRD comment 2. In response to DOW comment 1, a discussion has been added under the Wildlife heading of part IV, Environmental Consequences concerning water impoundment (page 14, paragraphs 2-5). In response to DOW comment 2, the reference to the Chimney Rock area peregrine falcon study has been deleted (page 10, paragraph 8). Following are BEM's responses to substantive oral comments made at the Public Hearing held on October 25, 1989. Hearina Transcript Comment 1: page 5, paragraph 4. Response: The purpose of the public hearing was not to establish the fair market value and maximum economic recovery of the resource, • but to obtain public comments on the environmental assessment, the method of mining to be employed to obtain maximum economic recovery of the coal, and methods of determining the fair market value of the coal to be offered. • 19