Laserfiche WebLink
OS1J .. ~ .. ~.. ,..... <br />IH RCILV <br />~n R. Hinton AT Western Division RCFfRTO <br />Don Manning AT Denver Office ~ATf July 21, I°80 <br />SUBJECT: REPLY TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL GUESTIOrdS FROM CAP,L COf~iNOR <br />I) The attached map shows The permit boundaries as o heavy line <br />and the areas of past and present rnining as subdivisions within <br />this. For areas sho~+,n as past or present rnining, disturbance <br />will involve removing and replacing the top 80 to 100 feet of <br />the land surface. For areas within the permit boundaries shown <br />as no rnining, disturbance will include roads, building, foundations, <br />power lines and similar support facilities. <br />2) All new irnpacis will be direct and within The permit area if <br />Mr. Connor means by indirect such offsite facilities as access <br />roods to the mine sire, power supplies. and cool transportation <br />facilities. <br />3) The general types of construction activities which might affect <br />eligible resources, were covered by point I. Specifically for the <br />• Haybro site, the only disturbance planned of this tune is She <br />improvement of the road which runs from the mine office north <br />-'• to the county road. .This irnprove~nenT will be limited To widening <br />and straightening portions of The road and reducing the grade <br />where it drops from the old spoil bank to the county rood at <br />the northern end. Ina longer term, we' would like to remove <br />the buildings and reclaim this site such os we had done aT the <br />Keystone Mine. Mr. Connor should be made aware that there is <br />a potentially serious conflict between the archaeological preservation <br />rules and the reclamation required under active mine bonding <br />requirements and abandoned land reclamation r~,les. <br />Irrespective of our current mining plans and permit boundaries, <br />the archaeological report must show fulfillment of the responsibilities <br />under Section 106 of The National Historic Preservation Act <br />over the entire area of the survey, since our plans and boundaries <br />are likely to change in the future; w e do not ~.vant to redo work <br />that should already have been done. Also, the archaeological <br />report should not include the attached rnap since the final detailed <br />mine plan will be included elsewhere in the report. <br />r. <br />Jon R. Hinton <br /> <br />cc: F. H. Haller <br />R. .°,_Krouse <br />C. R. RiceJP. B. Leidich <br />306 <br />