Laserfiche WebLink
The lack of any information related to the BLM permitting process is not merely a cosmetic <br />issue. Rather, as part of any application, the BLM would be required to undertake a substantial review <br />of the mine plan, including conducting an in -depth study of all impacts associated with the mine under <br />the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Importantly, the BLM's review and study of the <br />proposal is likely to result in substantial additional information related to the mine plan, as well as <br />potentially significant changes to that plan. As a result, the public is put at an unfortunate and <br />inappropriate disadvantage by having to submit detailed comments on a mine plan that has not even <br />yet been submitted to BLM. DRMS should suspend its processing of the plan at least until the BLM <br />begins its review — and given the likelihood of changes through the BLM process, require the operator <br />to complete the BLM process prior to completing its submittal to DRMS. <br />The need for coordination between DRMS and BLM is the subject of a detailed Memorandum <br />of Understanding (MOU) between DRMS and BLM. Under Section IV., the MOU requires: <br />Within five (5) working days after an application/revision is filed with DMG, a complete copy <br />will be forwarded by DMG to the jurisdictional BLM office. <br />1. BLM will review the application to ensure that the proposed operation is in <br />conformance with the 43 CFR 3809 regulations and complete an Environmental <br />Assessment (EA), as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). <br />BLM will forward to DMG all correspondence and additions to the application that are <br />developed during the review and NEPA process. DMG may choose to be a cooperating <br />agency in the NEPA process. BLM will send DMG the EA and any stipulations, <br />conditions or modifications necessary to prevent undue and unnecessary degradation. <br />2. Within and consistent with authorities of the Colorado Mind Land Reclamation <br />Act, Section 34 -32 -101, et seq., C.R.S., modifications and stipulations contained in the <br />EA will then be incorporated into DMG's final permit approval. Any additions to the <br />application or correspondence that are developed during the review by DMG will be <br />forwarded to BLM. DMG and BLM will review and consult on the terms and <br />conditions of the proposed permit. A copy of the issued permit will be provided to <br />BLM. <br />3. DMG will deny or recommend denial of any permit application where BLM has <br />advised that the proposed operation would be in violation of Sec. 7 of the Endangered <br />Species Act or Sec. 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. <br />MOU Between BLM and DMG Approved December 11, 2002. <br />Thus, the MOU clearly anticipates and requires that the DRMS and BLM reviews are <br />conducted in a coordinated fashion. DRMS should not proceed with a detailed review and public <br />involvement of the mine plan prior to submittal, review, and preparation of an EA by BLM. To do <br />otherwise would result in a waste of DRMS staff time as well as confuse the public through changing <br />permit details and requirements. Indeed, the BLM review of the mine plan could change the plan <br />considerably, rendering initial DRMS and public review meaningless. DRMS should instead conduct <br />its review only on the terms as specified in the MOU — including participation by DRMS in the BLM <br />NEPA process. <br />2 <br />