1997-04-20_REVISION - M1977493 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Letter to Bryce Romig -4- April 20 1997 117 (4) (b) (I) of the Act requires that the Division administration cost factor be equal to 5 percent of the sum of the estimated direct and indirect costs of reclamation. For example, in the summary table included in Section 3 .4 of the amendment (AM-003) application, the Colorado DMG Administration cost would be $163, 009 . 00 . 6 . It is indicated in Section 3 . 3 of the amendment (AM-003) application that the seed mix specified in the 1989 Climax permit amendment (AM-002) will be used for revegetation of disturbed areas. The Division understands that some changes in revegetation processes are under consideration by CMC, and that a technical revision may be submitted to incorporate these changes into the permit . However, two items related to the seed mix should be addresses under the pending amendment (AM-003) application: a) At the time of the consideration of the 1989 amendment (AM-002) to the Climax permit, the Division suggested that Yarrow be added to the seed mix. Information from the 1990 annual reclamation report indicates that this was done, i.e . , the percentage of Smooth Brome in the Climax seed mix was reduced from 15 'percent to 13 percent, and Yarrow was included as 2 percent of the mix. Is Yarrow currently a component of the Climax seed mix? b) A note in the 1994 annual reclamation report for the Climax Mine indicates that the seed mix application rate was adjusted upward to 100 pounds per acre from 50 pounds per acre. What is the application rate for the current Climax seed mix? 7 . Rule 3 . 1 . 12 (2) states that "The boundaries of the affected area will be marked by monuments or other markers that are clearly visible and adequate to delineate such boundaries. " Since marking the boundaries of the extensive and amorphous affected lands at the Climax Mine site would be impractical, the Division suggests that the provisions of Rule 3 . 1 . 12 (3) be employed. Rule 3 . 1 . 12 (3) states that the Division "may approve an alternate plan for identifying the boundaries of the affected land if the Operator includes such a plan in the permit application. " The Division suggests that an appropriate alternate plan would be to use physical landmarks to identify the boundaries of the affected land in the field with a provision for installation of markers or monuments in specific instances when site activities create the potential for transgression of affected land boundaries . In a related .matter, are the Climax private property boundaries marked? 8 . Since new maps will have to be prepared to respond to item #3 listed above, the Division will require that the maps meet the minimum requirements of Rule 6 . 2 . 1 (2) . However, the Division will provide an exemption to the map scale requirement of Rule 6 . 2 . 1 (2) (e) . The new maps should be prepared to the same 1 : 12000 scale as the maps previously provided.