Laserfiche WebLink
Some of the maps submitted with the application even lacked a legend. CC&V must make <br />it easy for the Division and the public to view the application and supporting maps without <br />going back and forth to other maps to verify the accuracy of the information provided <br />throughout the application. <br />IV) Exhibit D- Mining Plan-Rule 6.4.4 <br />A. As stated earlier, the mining operation and the over all description of the operation remain <br />as approved in Amendment # 8. The operator states, "the phase 5 valley leach facility will <br />be the only new facility proposed under this amendment that will contain designated <br />chemicals". However, as proposed, the operator plans to increase the height of the existing <br />Valley Leach Facility Phases I-IV from the current approved height of 590 feet under <br />amendment # 8 to 800 feet under the proposed amendment. Is increasing the height by 200 <br />not considered new construction and new areas for storing "designated chemicals"? <br />Granted, no new liner area will be constructed for the additional ore that is being proposed <br />to be placed on the existing pads, but the total ore volume stored will be increased. <br />B. The Amendment proposes to completely backfill or partially backfill, the Main Cresson, <br />North Cresson, East Cresson and Wild Horse areas. All partial or complete backfill pits will <br />be free draining and surface drainage, if any, will be directed to one of several enhanced <br />storm water management ponds. Given the overburden and ore characterization of the <br />North Cresson proposed mining area, and its potential to possibly generate acidic <br />discharges, would it not make sense to completely back fill this area to original contour? In <br />looking at Drawing C-6, Mine area Cross section labeled as North Cresson Mine Area A-A', <br />it could potentially trap drainage from the Globe Hill area to the Schist Island partial <br />backfill. Please Explain how CC&V will mitigate if such occurrences take place, given the <br />permeability of the Schist Island area and the potential for standing water to exist through <br />time in the partial back fill area. The legend for this map labels green sites as areas to be <br />reclaimed, does that mean the green line in x-section A-A' between elevations 10,400 and <br />10,500 labeled in green, part of a small backfill area ? Please explain. <br />C. The underground workings maps provided with the application shows most of the <br />workings to be located in the North East portions between the Eclipse and Carbonate Green <br />and very small amounts of workings in the southern portions of the valley leach expansion <br />areas. The Chicago Tunnel, a small 110 permit (M-1988-026) owned by CC&V and currently <br />being used by a sub contractor to CC&V as equipment storage area, is located west of the <br />North Cresson mine expansion area. Where is the underground extension of the tunnel <br />workings in relation to the North Cresson Mine extension? What impacts does CC&V <br />expect from the mining activities proposed in these areas? Please explain. What about <br />impacts to the Molly Kathleen Tourist Mine located northwest of the North Cresson Mine? <br />D. All road alignments required under this amendment and interchange upgrades to County <br />Road 82, 821 and highway 67 will require a written approval from the County and CDOT. <br />Please provide the approval letters for our records, once obtained. <br />E. On Drawing C-5 (Conceptual Mining Phases), the only area being proposed as alternative <br />overburden storage area is the area designated as Squaw Gulch overburden storage <br />extension area by the year 2011. It is not clear from the maps or description what the <br />proposed final contours will be for this area. The currently approved final topography will <br />not allow the operator's over all elevation to exceed 10,600 feet. As noted in drawing C-4 <br />3