Laserfiche WebLink
The above concerns which are oermain to the Act are addressed in sections of <br />this document as follows: <br />Concern <br />Blasting vibration and noise <br />End land use changes <br />Reclamation scheduling <br />Water rights <br />County road closure <br />Section <br />Findings - B. IV. <br />Findings - A.13. <br />Summary -Description of the Operations <br />and Reclamation Plan <br />Summary - Description of the <br />Environment, Water Rights <br />Findings - A. 4. <br />Members of the public were informed by representatives of the Division during <br />the informal conference that payment for damages alleged to have been caused <br />by blasting at the Nucla mine, and sewage line replacement, were civil matters <br />between Peabody and owners of the structures involved. The public was also <br />informed that road safety concerns and the actual decision on the 5th Street <br />Extension County Road closure were matters that would be decided by the <br />Montrose County Commissioners. <br />Prior to and during the 20 day comment period subsequent to the informal <br />conference [Rule 2.07.4(2)(a)] two letters were received, one from the <br />Colorado Cooperative Company (CCC) on August 29, 1988 and one from the Nucla <br />Sanitation District (NSD) on September 12, 1988. The CCC letter requested <br />that only Parshall flumes be used to measure water quantity inn CCC ditches. <br />The Division has no authority to require Peabody to use any particular type of <br />water measurement device. However, the Division does have the authority to <br />require Peabody to measure water quantity and quality in the West Lateral <br />Ditch (the ditch of concern for the Nucla East mining area) to assure that <br />mining does not adversely affect the quantity and quality of water in the <br />ditch. Peabody has committed to do this (see Tab 15- Appendix 15-1 and <br />Exhibit 7-1 of the permit revision application). Therefore, the Division <br />believes that the concerns of the CCC have been met. The NSD letter raised <br />concerns about damage to the Nucla town sewer line from mining activities and <br />about closure of the 5th Street Extension County Road. The sewer line damage <br />concern is addressed in Section B.IV, of the Findings while the road closure <br />concern is addressed in Section A.4. of the Findinos in this document. <br />In addition to the above concerns, the Division had some adequacy concerns as <br />addressed in a July 5, 1988 letter to Peabody. Peabody responded to these <br />concerns on September 9, 1988, October 13, 1988, October 27, 1988, November 8, <br />1988, November 10, 1988, November 14, 1988, December 27, 1988, and January 10, <br />1989. From one of the responses, it was found that the original publication <br />notice for the permit revision had improperly identified the county road to be <br />closed. Therefore, Peabody published a correction to the original publication <br />in the San Miguel Basin Forum on December 1, 1988. This publication allowed a <br />30 day publicic commen peri'o~and the possibility of a public hearing on the <br />road closure as required by Rules 2.07.3(2)(f) and 2.07.6(2)(d)(iv)(c). No <br />request for public hearing or further comments on the road closure were <br />received during this period. <br />The response letters received from Peabody have adequately addressed the <br />Division's concerns. <br />-5- <br />