2008-08-01_REVISION - M1980244 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

in the City of Victor The State of Colorado also recognized CC&V in 2004 for its voluntary reclamation efforts to reclaim the Cameron process facility. These are but a few recent examples of CC&V's successful reclamation efforts. CC&V has submitted a reclamation plan for MLE consistent with prior reclamation plans submitted to and approved by the State of Colorado for the Cresson Project (Amendment No. 6, Amendment No. 7, and Amendment No. 8). That reclamation plan satisfies the requirements of the Mined Land Reclamation Act and provides for re-establishment of grazing and wildlife habitats as the approved post-mining land use. Ms. Harris raised blasting activities by CC&V. CC&V conducts blasting activities in conformance with State requirements. The MLE permit application contains detailed information on blasting, as found in Volume III, Appendix 4. CC&V has no plans to close State Highway 67 for blasting purposes. Finally, attached are schematics of CC&V's activities in order to place the operation into perspective and potential address some of Ms. Harris' other stated comments. McDonald email of June 16, 2008 Ms. McDonald raises matters that are outside of the Mined Land Reclamation Act. No response is required, however, CC&V references the report on property values addressed above and respectfully disagrees that its operations will hurt tourism. Jeffery email of June 17, 2008 Ms. Jeffery raises matters that are outside of the Mined Land Reclamation Act. No response is required, however, CC&V reserves the right to relocate the Gold Camp Trail if it interferes with mine operations. CC&V may also temporarily close the Trail, as constructed on CC&V's privately owned land, comparable to closure of the American Eagle overlook, also on CC&V's privately owned land, during certain blasting activities out of an abundance of caution. Ms. Jeffery also appended a "Letter to the Editor" that appears to be outside of the Mined Land Reclamation Act other than potentially the reference to National Historic Landmark. If germane, CC&V references its response above on the topic. Poch emails of April 28, 2008 and May 10, 2008 Mr. Poch has been prolific in his comments submitted to DRMS and others, of which some of the comments pre-date and others post-date the public comment period for the MLE permit application. Additionally, Mr. Poch recently exchanged comments on ex part communication; thus, CC&V provides comments received at CC&V by email so that DRMS has a complete file. A significant amount of misinformation continues to permeate Mr. Poch's comments notwithstanding repeated discussions with Mr. Poch by CC&V representatives. Some of that misinformation has been addressed above, such