My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE102396
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE102396
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:56:18 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 8:46:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
9/10/2004
Section_Exhibit Name
Exhibit 16d 18 Right Ventilation Shaft Wetland Delineation Report
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.
/
28
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
3 ~ <br />~~ <br />... <br />~ ~ <br />St' <br />O <br /> <br /> <br />report: In addirion, I have attached a copy of the minimum COE wetland report standards <br />and requirements for your information. <br />Avoidance of these delineated wetland areas is recommended and should be feasible <br />based on our conversations with your engineering- staff. At the bleeder shaft site in <br />_.,. Section_ 1 l,_ relocating the..road to the west would avoid wetands associated with the <br />__ <br />stock ;pond`completely. It.is my understanding-that the Section Tl shaft=pad location"" <br />could also be adjusted to avoid Fish Creek and its associated wetlands. By avoiding:these <br />areas you" will not:"be required to submit a wetland delineation report nor file- a <br />preconstruetion notice or permit application to the COE before commencing with these <br />activities. <br />The intake. shaft site in Section 17 is a bit more complicated. The eurreritfproposed" <br />location is in the center of an intermittent drainage channel. This azea is considered <br />Jurisdictional Waters of the. iJS and subject "to regulation. If. mining conditions are <br />suitable, relocating the shaft pad out of the. drainage is.highly, recommended: Relocating <br />to the south is the best alternative from a regulatory stand' point.. This would avoid <br />impacts to Jurisdictional Waters and eliminate the need for any'"sort of filting with the <br />COE. Relocating to the north would require crossing 8ie draireage.with the access road. <br />This action would .-require COE authorization, and likely be covered under the <br />Nationwide Permit system. This is a feasible option from a. regulatory standpoint as <br />Nationwide Permits are relatively easy and inexpensive.: to obtain. Maintaining the <br />current proposed location is the least feasible option in- regazds to regulatory <br />considerations. 'T'his action would likely require that an Individual permit application to <br />be"submitted for the project.; This"can be a time consuming undertaking and involves the <br />scrutiny.ofnumerous state and:federal regulatory agencies. <br />Please call _me with any review comments or changes to the report: I would be glad to <br />discuss with you any question regarding"these findings or for clarification on regulatory <br />issues. HIvII would be available to prepare all or portions of any reports you may require <br />as you proceed with this project. We appreciate the opportunity tb work with you on the <br />development of this project. <br />SincereRly: . <br />~~^'`"~ <br />~,l~_ <br />David Wileden <br />Environmental Scientist <br />Enclosure <br />14 Inverness Drive East, Suite G-228, Englewood, CO 80112 <br />303-770-9788 • kcar{san~ha6itaYmana¢ementinccom • www.habiYatmariaeemcmtinccom <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.