Laserfiche WebLink
of Historic Places as determined by the State Historic Preservation Office. On July 9, 2003 the <br />Division sent a letternotifying SHPO of the permit revision application and requested their <br />evaluation of the project with regazd to cultural and historic resources in the azea. On July 25, <br />2003 the SHPO responded that the nature of the proposed project would not necessitate further <br />cultural resource work and provided concurrence for the project to proceed (2.07.6(2)(e)(i)). <br />6. Foidel Creek is solely an underground operation, therefore the documentation required by Rule <br />2.03.6(2) is not required (2.07.6(2)0). <br />On the basis of evidence submitted by the applicant and received from other state and federal <br />agencies as a result of the Section 34-33-114(3) compliance review required by the Colorado <br />Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act, the Division fmds that Twentymile Coal Company does <br />not own or control any operations which aze currently in violation of any law, rule, or regulation <br />of the United States, or any State law, rule, or regulation, or any provision of the Surface Mining <br />Control and Reclamation Act or the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act <br />(2.07.6(2)(8)0). <br />8. Twentymile Coal Company does not control and has not controlled mining operations with a <br />demonstrated pattern of willful violations of the Act of such nature, duration, and with such <br />resulting irrepazable damage to the environment as to indicate an intent not to comply with the <br />provisions of the Act (2.07.6(2)(h)). The Applicant Violator System was queried on May 20, <br />2004. The result of this query was the operator has no outstanding violations. The system <br />recommendation is "issue" the permit. <br />9. The Division fmds that surface coal mining and reclamation operations to be performed under <br />this permit will not be inconsistent with other such operations anticipated to be performed in <br />azeas adjacent to the permit azea, (2.07.6(2)(1)). <br />10. The Division cunrently holds a reclamation performance bond from the applicant in the amount <br />of $7,118,370. The Division estimated the remaining reclamation liability for the Foidel Creek <br />Mine to be $5,885,103, as of July 24, 2003. Since then, reclamation liability of $3,943 has been <br />approved in Minor Revisions. Therefore, the total estimated reclamation liability is $5,889,046 <br />($5,885,103 + $3,943). This total amount reflects the Division's projection of reclamation costs <br />for worst-case disturbance that will occur during the permit term (2003-2008). The Division <br />believes the currently held reclamation bond is sufficient to complete all remaining reclamation <br />on the site, and no new or additional performance bond is required as a result of this permit <br />revision (2.07.6.(2)(j)). <br />11. The Division has made a negafive determination for the presence of prime farmland within the <br />permit azea. The decision was based on the publication "Important Farmlands Inventory of <br />Colorado" USDA, Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly SCS), Denver, Colorado, <br />October 1982. It states that no prime farmland mapping units aze found within the permit area <br />or within Routt county. The local office of the NRCS confumed this finding in a letter dated <br />September 24, 1984. This letter can be found in Exhibit 24 (2.07.6(2)(k)). <br />12. Based on information provided in the application, the Division has determined that alluvial <br />valley floors exist within the permit or adjacent azea. The alluvial valley floors aze known as the <br />Fish Creek AVF, Foidel/Middle Creek Confluence AVF, and the Trout Creek AVF. Based on <br />information provided by the operator, the Division fmds that for all of the above AVFs: <br />16 <br />