Laserfiche WebLink
€CI <br />HISTORY <br />July 28, 2015 <br />Robert D. 'tuber <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />RECENED <br />AUG 032015 <br />Division of &eclama ion, <br />Mining <br />Re: Colowyo Coal Mine (Permit No. C-1981-019), Technical Revision No. 106 ('I'R-106), Collom Access/Haul Road <br />Realignment (HC #67752) <br />Dear Mr. Zuber: <br />Thank you for your correspondences dated July 3, 2015 (received by our office on July 13, 2015) regarding the above <br />referenced technical revision. We received engineering reaps showing the proposed route realignment on July 22, <br />2015. <br />After review of the documentation, we are unable to provide comment on project effect and request additional <br />information regarding how site 5MF1652 will be avoided by the proposed realignment of the haul road/Collom <br />access. Our records indicate that this site is potentially eligible for listing to the National Register of Historic Places <br />and is located in close -proximity to the proposed haul road alignment. How will this site be avoided by the proposed <br />road construction as well as during supplemental maintenance and operation activities? Please remember that <br />Section 106 of the National I listoric Preservation Act (Section 106) requires that the lead federal agency consider <br />reasonably foreseeable effects that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance or be cumulative. <br />It is also worth noting that site 5MF1652 is one of 15 archaeological sites slated for baseline recordation pursuant to <br />the terms outlined in Exhibit 5, Item 3-1. While this documentation is required prior to the commencement of any <br />ground disturbing activities within the Collom area, completing this documentation now may well facilitate your <br />current engineering design and review process. This site provides a worthwhile case study as it is recommended <br />eligible principally for its subsurface data potential. It is due to this fact, that the cultural resources contractor in its <br />2006 report titled "A Class III Cultural Resource Inventory for the Colowyo Coal Company's Collom Mine Project, <br />Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties, Colorado" recommended testing to determine its "extent and integrity of any <br />possible buried cultural material" (p. 331). Without first completing this testing program, we question how you can <br />effectively develop avoidance measures. We look forward to hearing your thoughts on this issue. <br />Our final comment, intended to improve our future consultation, is to request that you submit documentation to our <br />office pursuant to the standards as outlined by 36 CFR part 800, the implementing regulations of Section 106 (see <br />specifically 36 CFR 800.11). The consultation process does involve other consulting parties including local <br />governments and Tribes, which as stipulated in 36 CFR 800.3 are required to be notified of the undertaking. <br />Additional information provided by these consulting parties may cause our office to re-evaluate our comments and <br />recommendations. <br />We thank you for the opportunity to comment If we may be of further assistance, please contact Mark Tobias, <br />Section 106 Compliance Manager, at (303) 866-4674 or mark.tobias(a)state caul. <br />Sincerely, <br />Edward C. Nichols <br />State Historic Preservation Officer <br />