My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL40541
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL40541
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:59:43 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 10:44:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981035
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
FEDERAL LEASE COC-60941(4) EPA IMPACT
Permit Index Doc Type
Other Permits
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
~~ t <br />Response: This comment was responded to at the hearing by Mr. <br />Beecham (pages 14 thru 16). In addition, as stated in the response <br />to comment 2, the statements concerning the marketability of the <br />• coal was based on current information and an opportunity was <br />provided the hearing attendees to provide any additional information <br />they considered to be more current than what was set forth in the <br />environmental assessment. No additional information was submitted <br />either at the hearing or in written comment. <br />Hearing Transcript Comment e: page 16, paragraphs 4 and page 17, <br />paragraphs 1 thru 3. <br />Response: As was stated in the response to comment 2 and 3, there <br />was no intent to imply that both mining operations could not <br />coexist. In addition, as was stated in the response to comment 4, <br />the environmental assessment has been changed to reflect the <br />information of the other leases secured by National Ring Coal. <br />Hearing Transcript Comment 9: page 17, paragraph 6. <br />Response: The statement is correct in that the preferred <br />alternative of the environmental assessment is to offer the proposed <br />lease area for competitive bidding. However, as stated in several <br />responses above, there has been no decision made in the <br />environmental assessment document as to which company will be <br />awarded the lease and/or which company will or will not survive. <br />Whether a mine survives or has a chance to start up is not within <br />BLM's decision making authority. That is a factor of the company's <br />or individual's economics and the decisions derived therefrom. <br />• In addition, paragraph 1, page 19 has been revised to clarify the <br />need for a cultural resource survey on newly disturbed areas <br />resulting from this leasing action. This revision is in response to <br />comment 1 made by the Colorado Historical Society (see Appendix II). <br />Also, the Colorado Department of Health submitted a comment <br />indicating the possible need for an Air Pollution Control Division <br />permit (see Appendix II). No changes were made in the EA since the <br />subject permit is not pertinent to the competitive leasing process. <br />The emissions permit referred to must be shown to be in effect <br />during the mine permitting process and the operation cannot begin <br />prior to the issuance of that permit. <br />VI. List of Preparers <br />Robert S. Kershaw <br />Charlie Beecham <br />john Castellano <br />Kristie Arrington <br />Kathryn Bulinski <br />Dennis Murphy <br />Minerals/All <br />Minerals/All <br />Wildlife/Threatened b Endangered <br />Archaeology/Historic <br />Lands <br />Hydrology <br /> <br />21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.