Laserfiche WebLink
Rule 4.05.4(4) See Item 11, Part 4 under Rule 2.05.4 above. <br /> Rule 4.07 See the Rules for the text of this Rule. <br /> The permit is in compliance with this rule. Some drill holes and underground openings have been <br /> sealed, or otherwise managed as approved by the Division,26 and some are still open, or open in <br /> some fashion, to accommodate current operations. <br /> Descriptions of drill holes are found in the PAp49. A summary of the status of 12 wells and <br /> explorations holes is presented on page 4-v of the PAP. All holes are reported as reclaimed with <br /> the exception of M-8, M-9, PZ-1, PZ-2, PZ-3, D-IA and D-2A. Holes M-8 and M-9 are <br /> monitoring wells currently in use as a part of the mine water dishcarge treatment system. Holes <br /> D-IA and D-2A are currently in use for monitoring of groundwater near the mine waste disposal <br /> site. Holes PZ-1, PZ-2, and PZ-3 were started and completed underground, and are not exposed <br /> openings. <br /> Information on the sealing of portals and shafts was reviewed, and is summarized in Attachment <br /> 2. <br /> Rule 4.16.3 An alternative land use of"developed water resources"was approved by the <br /> Division. From page 4-95 of the PAP, "Therefore the land owner will realize a beneficial use of <br /> the treatment system because it will have a reliable source of water for its cattle operation." [The <br /> proposed postmining land use is compatible with adjacent land use [Rule 4.16.3(1)]. The <br /> proposed alternative land use was approved by the landowner50. A letter was sent by the <br /> permittee51 to the Pitkin County Planning Department in coordination of the proposed alternative <br /> land use, but no reply from Pitkin County was found, nor was a definitive statement or <br /> demonstration that the use was compatable with existing local landuse policies and plans found. <br /> Division letters (July 1, 1992) of the filing of Technical Revision 13, the technical revision that <br /> implemented the alternative land use, were sent to the Office of the State Engineer, Division of <br /> Wildlife, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Colorado Water Quality Control Division, and the <br /> U.S. Forest Service. Division records indicate that Division letters (September 16, 1992) of a <br /> proposed decision which included the alternative land use change were sent to the same <br /> agencies, and a legal notice sent to the Aspen Times for publication. [Rule 4.16.3(1)]. No copy <br /> of a Division letter to Pitkin County was found. A response of concurrence was received from <br /> the Office of the State Engineer (July 16, 1992). Appropriate plans were submitted for the <br /> treatment facilities [Rule 4.16.3(2)]. The quality of water discharged from the treatment system <br /> is better than that exiting the mine [Rule 4.16.3(3)]. The features of the water treatment system <br /> are permanent, therefore no unreasonable delays in reclamation were engaged [Rule 4.16.3(4)]. <br /> The Colorado Division of Wildlife was specifically notified by Division letter, but the U.S. Fish <br /> and Wildlife Service was not notified [Rule 4.16.3(5)]. The technical revision was approved with <br /> a decision date of September 15, 1992. <br /> Item 15 Please add to the PAP a letter from Pitkin County that the "Developed Water <br /> Resource"land use is compatable with local land use policies and plans. <br /> North Thompson Creek Mines -to- 6 Feb 2001 <br />