My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-10-16_REVISION - M1980244
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1980244
>
2008-10-16_REVISION - M1980244
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 5:52:20 PM
Creation date
10/20/2008 10:27:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980244
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
10/16/2008
Doc Name
Rationale for Recommendations Over Objections
From
DRMS
To
Parties to Cresson Project Amendment #9 Application.
Type & Sequence
AM9
Email Name
BMK
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.
/
8
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
6.4.5 Exhibit E -Reclamation plan. <br />6) The mine does not conduct adequate reclamation on site. (Mr. & Mrs. Fay, Carl Poch, Nancy & Lisa <br />McDonald, Dan Baader, Joan Harris and Lara Jeffery) <br />DBMS Response: <br />The above concerns are addressed by the requirements of C.R.S 34-32-116 and 34-32-117 and Rules 3 and 4. <br />The application is in compliance with C.R.S 34-32-116 and 34-32-117 of the Colorado Mined Land <br />Reclamation Act and Rule 3 and 4 of the Hard Rock/ Metal and Designated Mining Rules and Regulations <br />of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board. The above Rules and Act refer to reclamation plans, <br />environmental protection plans and warranties of performance. The reclamation plan and post mining land <br />uses are essentially the same as approved under Amendment # 8 in 2000. Under the rules and the act, all <br />operators conducting mining activity with in the State are required to post a financial warranty for all areas <br />they propose to affect, so the land can be returned to the approved post mining land use. CC&V opted to <br />post all the required warranty that will be needed to reclaim the land to the approved post mining land use. <br />When the current amendment is approved by the MLRB, the financial warranty for the site will be in excess <br />of $97,000,000.00 (97million dollars). This warranty will ensure proper reclamation of the site, which <br />includes the establishment of adequate vegetation cover of all affected areas with native and introduced <br />species including aspen tress, the complete detoxification and reclamation of the valley leach facility and all <br />affected ancillary disturbed areas. The warranty for the site will not be released until the operator meets all <br />the approved performance standards. <br />6.4.6 Exhibit G- Water Information. <br />7) The application does not sufficiently address Acid Mine Drainage issues. Particularly, while <br />application indicates buffering capacity of the geologic layer below the surface, the application should <br />demonstrate the long term impacts associated with the exposure of acid generating rocks in the pit and <br />mined lands, waste rock storage areas and the VLF. While the current outflows from the Carlton Tunnel <br />do not exceed State Standards for PH, any reclamation permit should require a comprehensive <br />demonstration that the Carlton Tunnel Discharge will not degrade or become acidic over time. The <br />application should include a long term monitoring plan at the Carlton Tunnel to ensure long term <br />protection of Four Mile Creek and the Arkansas River water shed. The application should fully <br />demonstrate protection from any potential acid mine drainage associated with backfilled open pits. ( Jeff <br />Parsons, Western Mining Action) <br />DRMS Response: <br />In considering information for amendments 6, 7, 8 and now 9, the Division evaluated the constituents that <br />are regulated in surface and ground water. The Division has responsibility to minimize impacts to the <br />hydrologic balance from any areas where it issues a permit. The information review included analyses of <br />rocks and waste from the project developed for CC&V, information in the files of Colorado Department of <br />Health and Environment (CDPHE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), public information, <br />and mineralogical reports with provided trace element interfaces. From a regulatory stand point, the <br />primary geochemical constituents of concern were found to be Weak Acid Dissociated cyanide (WAD) and <br />Acid Rock Drainage (ARD). ARD parameters of primary concern were determined to be Zinc and PH. <br />Elevated concentrations of Copper (Cu), Aluminum (Al), and Manganese (Mn) were found, though only in <br />rare cases.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.