My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP05671
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP05671
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:36:28 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 11:08:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1994082
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
1/15/1999
Doc Name
1997 REVIEW LETTER (MEMO)
From
MDG
To
MIKE BOULAY
Permit Index Doc Type
ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORT
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
iii iiiiiiiuiiu iii <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Depanmenl ni Natural Resource <br />1313 Sherman 51., Room 215 <br />Denver. Colorado H0203 <br />Phony: 130 SI H66 356% <br />FAX:IlU3)H3?-BIU6 <br />DATE: January I5, 1999 ~I <br />TO: Mike Boulayw'/p,J~~ <br />FROM: Dan Mathews <br />RE: Yoast Mine 1997 Annual Reclamation Report <br />Permit No. C-94-082 <br />II~~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br />lames S Lochhearl <br />Eaecmrvr Director <br />nlichael B. Long <br />Division Director <br />I have reviewed the referenced report with respect to topsoil, revegetation, and wildlife requirements of the <br />approved permit. dated March 1998. The approved permit contains requirements that the Annual <br />Reclamation Report include certain specific information including an annual soil balance report, regraded <br />spoil sampling data, seed tags for all seedmixes used in a given year, quantitative vegetation sampling in <br />years 2, 4, and 7 following the year of seeding, and various wildlife monitoring requirements. <br />Soil Replacement <br />I. There were apparently no final graded areas available in 1997, so no spoil monitoring was <br />conducted. <br />2. Appropriate soil balance infonnation was submitted and appears to document compliance with <br />projections. <br />Reveeetation <br />3. The seedmix listed in the report as hahving been uszd in 199? does nol appeaz to be appropriate. <br />The mix is listed as Seed Mix # I, but i[ does not correspond to either Mix 1 A (Shrub grassland-Mine <br />Area) or Mix I B (Shrub grassland-Haul Road Corridor), as specified in the approved permit. This <br />discrepancy needs to be addressed, and measures taken to ensure that the appropriate seedmix is <br />used in the future! This same problem as noted in my previous review of the 1996 ARR (memo dated <br />2/12/98 from Dan Mathews [o Jim Burner <br />Wildlife <br />4. There appear to be two deficiencies with respect to wildlife monitoring/reporting. These <br />deficiencies were also noted in my memo of 2/12/98, with respect to 1995 and 1996 ARR's. Specifically, <br />the plan requires recording and reporting of big game and high interest species mortality related to mine <br />activities (roadkills, fence hang-ups, etc.). No information was reported in regard to this commitment. In <br />addition, plan requires an annual ground search each spring for any new sagegrouse or sharptail lek sites in <br />the study area. Documentation of such searches was no[ included in [he ARR. An explanation should be <br />provided, and measures need to be taken that such monitoring is conducted and documented in future <br />ARR's. <br />cc: Larry Routten, DMG <br />DanswordUn iscm ine\yoastarr. mem <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.