My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP39903
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP39903
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:28:03 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 8:34:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982055
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
11/2/1998
Doc Name
1997 ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORT RATON CREEK MINE PN C-82-055
From
DMG
To
ENERGY FUELS MINING CO
Permit Index Doc Type
ANNUAL RECLAMATION 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.
Page 1 of 1
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
iii iiiiiiiiiiiuiii <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />131 3 Sherman $t., Room 21 5 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: 13031 866-3567 <br />FA%: 17031 8128106 <br />November 2, 1998 <br />Allen S. Weaver <br />Mine Engineer <br />Energy Fuels Mining Company <br />P.O. Box 449 <br />Florence, CO 81226 <br />RE: 1997 Annual Reclamation Report, Raton Creek Mine, Permit No. C-82-055 <br />Mr. Weaver: <br />II~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL, <br />RESOURCE`.; <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br />lames 5. Lochhead <br />Eaecmive Dveaor <br />Michael a. Long <br />Division Director <br />The Division of Minerals and Geology has completed review of the 1997 Annual Reclamation Report for <br />the Raton Creek Mine. No significant issues were identified following this review. However, we do have <br />one comment concerning the letter from the Soil Conservation Service, which was included with the <br />report. <br />The Division does not agree with the NRCS visual assessment that the vegetative community is a "diverse <br />mix of native grasses and an introduced forb (titer milkvetch)". Conversely, the Division believes much <br />of the re-seeded, reclaimed area to be a monoculture of titer milkvetch, particularly in the area which <br />received no topsoil. The NCRS also notes "the response is exceptional considering the soil and macro <br />climatic conditions" and adds comments concerning a "growth rate [which] has been reduced by the <br />adverse growing conditions of the site." No discussion or information is presented as to the specifics <br />regarding the soil and macro climatic conditions or the adverse growing conditions. The Division believes <br />that the NRCS position is poorly supported and very supe~cial. However, the Division duly notes the <br />position of the NRCS for the purposes of monitoring and reporting. <br />We have no further questions or comments at this time. <br />Sincerely, <br />A~~~~ ~ <br />ent Gorham <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.