Laserfiche WebLink
a) An area designated unsuitable for surface coal mining operations [2.07.6(2)(d)(i)]; <br />b) An area under study for designation as unsuitable for surface coal mining operations <br />c) The boundaries of the National Park System, the National Wildlife Refuge System, <br />the National System of Trails, the National Wilderness Preservation System, the <br />Wild and Scenic Rivers System including rivers under study for designation, and <br />National Recreation Areas [2.07.6(2)(d)(iii)(A)]; <br />d) Three hundred feet of any public building, school, church, community or <br />institutional building, or public park (2.07.6(2)(d)(iii)(B)); <br />e) One hundred feet of a cemetery [2.07.6(2)(d)(iii)(C)]; <br />f) The boundaries of any National Forest. More specifically, the proposed operation <br />(portions of the lease area) is within the boundaries of Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre <br />and Gunnison National Forests. The Secretary has approved this by indicating that <br />West Elk leases within the forests are suitable for underground coal mining. Refer <br />to the OSM 1981 Mine Plan Approval, the BLM Report of Coal Unsuitability <br />Criteria and a letter from the U.S. Forest Service dated October 3, 1986, concurring <br />with West Elk's Mining Plan (2.07.6(2)(d)(iii)(D)). Refer also to a letter written by <br />the BLM on March 8, 2005, stating that MCC's plan is adequate to meet all current <br />Federal regulations regarding R2P2 and MER. Refer also to the Coal Unsuitability <br />Analysis for Jumbo Mountain Coal Lease, prepared by the Uncompahgre Basin <br />Resource Area of the BLM, which includes an Environmental Assessment. The <br />Apache Rocks Permit Revision is addressed by the U.S. Forest Service in their letter <br />of December 5, 1995, and by the BLM in their letter of November 24, 1995. The <br />Box Canyon Permit Revision is addressed by the U.S. Forest Service in their letter <br />of January 6, 2000, and by the BLM in their letter of December 10, 1999. The US <br />Forest Service addressed the South of Divide Revision (PR-10) in their letter of <br />Apri127, 2006. The US Forest Service addressed the Dry Fork lease area in their <br />Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Dry Fork Federal Lease-by- <br />Application (COC-67232), August 2005. <br />g) One hundred feet of the outside right-of--way line of any public road except where <br />mine access or haul roads join such line, and excepting any roads for which the <br />necessary approvals have been received, notices published, public hearing <br />opportunities provided, and written findings made [2.07.6(2)(d)(iv)]. More <br />specifically, the West Elk mine permit area is within 100 feet of the outside <br />right-of--way line of State Highway 133. <br />At an informal conference held May 12, 1981, in Paonia, Colorado, to review public <br />input on the proposed West Elk Mine, no mention of any concern with the location <br />of the surface facilities in relation to the existing or proposed right-of--way of State <br />Highway 133 was expressed or implied. <br />20 <br />