Laserfiche WebLink
€C€ <br />HISTORY <br />February 14, 2011 <br />Tom Kaldenbach <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />P?Celvzo <br />or, ?Oil <br />or <br />Re: West Elk Mine (Permit No. C-1980-007), Technical Revision Application No. 124 (TR-124), <br />Addition of Maximum Projected Areal Extent of Potential Mining (CHS #58500) <br />Dear Mr. Kaldenbach: <br />Thank you for participating in a conference call on February 8, 2011 regarding the subject technical <br />revision, along with Shina duVall of our office, and representatives of the Grand Mesa Uncompahgre <br />Gunnison National Forest and Office of Surface Mining. We met via conference call to discuss the <br />Section 106 responsibilities for the subject mine and individual undertakings that take place there, as <br />well as to clarify who is the lead Federal agency for the purposes of Section 106 consultation. , <br />Following the conference call, we received information from the Forest Service that the proposed <br />technical revision is located completely within the permit boundary. Our understanding is that the <br />Forest Service has previously consulted under Section 106 for the original permit boundary and <br />determined that no historic properties will be affected within the permit boundary, or as a result of any <br />subsidence that occurs within the lease area. As such, we concur that a finding of no historic <br />properties affected is appropriate for the proposed technical revision. <br />Regarding your comments in an email sent on Friday, February 11, 2011, please note that our office <br />does not issue "clearance" letters. Furthermore, the email is incorrect in stating the following, <br />"The National Historic and Preservation Act Section 106 compliance review process involves three steps <br />for this Technical Revision: <br />1) DRMS notifies the lead federal agency and the SHPO that an action is proposed (via <br />DRMS's completeness letters), <br />2) The lead federal agency (USFS or BLM) makes a recommendation to the SHPO, <br />3) The SHPO provides a clearance letter to DRMS (assuming all issues are resolved)." <br />Regarding item 1 above, the consultation occurs between the lead agency and the SHPO (as well as <br />other consulting parties, including Tribes). DRMS should notify the lead Federal agency that an <br />action is proposed and the lead agency consults directly with the SHPO. There are four steps <br />involved in the Section 106 process (36 CFR 800.3 through 36 CFR 800.8), which requires the lead <br />Federal agency to do the following: <br />CIVIC CENTER PLAZA 1560 BROADWAY SUITE 400 DENVER COLORADO 80202 www.historycolorado.org