My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-06-28_REVISION - M1981185
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1981185
>
2010-06-28_REVISION - M1981185
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:22:45 PM
Creation date
6/29/2010 12:55:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1981185
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
6/28/2010
Doc Name
Response to preliminary adequacy issues for AM-01
From
Wildcat Mining Corporation (Greenberg Traurig)
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM1
Email Name
WHE
SSS
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.
/
183
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
TABLE OF CONTENTS <br />Response to DRMS Adequacy Issues April 28, 2010 <br />May Day Mine and Mill Amended Permit Application M-1981-185 <br />Attachment 1 <br />As noted by La Plata County in their correspondence dated April 26, 2010, the <br />amended application for the May Day Mine does not secure motor vehicle access for the <br />site and does not include the water supply ponds within the permit boundary. These two <br />critical components of the proposed operation are apparently addressed under a different <br />permit application (Idaho Mine, M-2010-003). La Plata County has indicated that the <br />permit may be in direct contradiction with the requirements of Chapter 82 of the La Plata <br />County Code. Pursuant to C.R.S. 34-32-115(4)(c)(I), no part of the proposed mining <br />operation may be contrary to the laws or regulations of this state or the United States, <br />including but not limited to all federal, state, and local permits, licenses, and approvals, as <br />applicable to the specific operation. Please resolve the possible conflict with the La Plata <br />County Land Use Code. <br />There will be no attachments to provide with this submittal for inclusion as new permit language. <br />Attachment 2 <br />La Plata County also noted a potential for confusion resulting from the division of one <br />112 operation into two interdependent 110(2) operations. The operation proposed at <br />the May Day Mine appears to be dependent upon the plans proposed at the Idaho <br />Mine. If fact, AM-01 acknowledges the interrelatedness of the two operations by <br />describing various features as the "Mayday-Idaho Mining complex, "and the "Mayday- <br />Idaho mine diversion, " and the "Mayday- Idaho Wildcat Augmentation Ponds" (page <br />four of Exhibit C). Additional examples of interrelatedness include: <br />• Support facilities for the May Day Mine, which are proposed to be permitted under <br />the Idaho Mine, are described in Exhibit B, Attachment B-3, Attachment B-4, Exhibit <br />C, Attachment C-3, Figure E-2, and Figure E-6 of AM-01. <br />• The laboratory analyses of water, soil and rock samples, utilized to characterize the <br />May Day Mine, are identical to those utilized to characterize the Idaho Mine. <br />• The two sites utilize common sample locations for surface and ground water <br />monitoring. <br />• Figure X-X proposes to delineate a 200 foot buffer for the May Day Mine. Portions of <br />that buffer actually extend 1,400 feet from the permit boundary for the May Day <br />Mine and appear to have merged with the 200 foot buffer for the Idaho Mine. <br />June 28, 2010 Response To DRMS Adequacy Issues May Day Mine and Mill Amendment M-1981-185
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.