2012-10-17_REVISION - C1981019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�Co HISTORY October 2, 2012 Foster Kirby Archaeologist Office of Surface Mining Western Region Office 1999 Broadway, Suite 3320 Denver, Colorado 80202 -3050 Re: Colo�vyo Mine Proposed Collom Extension (CHS #62708) Dear Mr. Kirby: Thank you for your correspondence dated September 5, 2012 (received by our office on September 6, 2012) regarding the subject undertaking. We have enclosed a copy of our previous consultation letter to BLM (dated March 9, 2007) in order to document the current National Register eligibility status for sites recorded during the 2006 TRC Mariah survey. This letter provides the most recent determinations of eligibility for cultural resources located within this portion of the Colo\vyo permit area. During our review of this information, we noted a number of discrepancies between this letter and your management recommendations (for eligible and unevaluated sites; Attachment 7). For example, Site 51 \1F1316 was not included within this list and Sites 5MF969 and SMF6098 have incorrect eligibility findings. According to our records, each of these resources require additional information ( "need data ") prior to making a final determination for listing to the National Register of I Iistoric Places. We request that you provide our office more detailed documentation for the proposed mine expansion area of potential effects (APE) [36 CFR 800.4(x)(1)]. Furthermore, as the provided map (Attachment 2 inset) was taken from the 2006 Mariah report (and only shows the approxunate boundary for the proposed disturbance area) we are concerned that this information may not accurately reflect the current mining plans. As such, we request additional information regarding the nature, extent, and location of the current APE pursuant to 36 CFR 800.11. This documentation should also include adequate maps for previous cultural resource survey (tabulated information as presented in Attachment 7 has limited utility) as well as detailed management recommendations as to how historic properties [36 CFR 800.16(1)(1)] will be avoided. In the absence of this information, we are unable to provide comment regarding the effect of this undertaking on historic properties as requested. Please remember that the consultation process does involve other consulting parties such as local governments and Tribes, wluch as stipulated in 36 CFR 800.3 are required to be notified of the undertaking. Additional information provided by the local government, Tribes or other consulting parties may cause our office to re- evaluate our comments and reconunendations. This letter does not end the 30 -day review period provided to other consulting parties. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If we may be of further assistance, please contact Mark Tobias, Section 106 Compliance Manager, at (303) 866 -4674 or mark. tobias c state.co.us. S cercly, _ Li , dward C. Nichols State Historic Preservation Officer Enclosure