The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2.0 CorrespondenceCOLORADO Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Department of Nat ura; Resource, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 Denver, CO 80203 August 10, 2016 Garfield County Commissioners County Commissioner 109 8th Street, Suite 200 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601-3355 Re: Munger Canyon Mine (Permit No. C-1981-020) Technical Revision No. 27 (TR -27) Seal GW -5 and GW -6 Since both wells have been dry during all monitoring events. Dear Garfield County Commissioners: The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety hereby issues notice, in accordance with Title 34, Article 33, Section 116, Paragraph 4, of the Colorado Revised Statutes, that on August 10, 2016 an application to revise coal mining operations at the Munger Canyon Mine was considered complete for the purposes of filing. The revision was submitted by CAM Mining, LLC. All review and comment periods as provided in the Act and the Regulations initiate from this date of filing. Technical Revision TR -27 proposes the sealing of ground water monitoring wells GW -5 and GW - 6. The applicant is not proposing additional surface disturbance outside of the area currently approved for disturbance. The underground coal mining operation is on land located approximately 18 miles North of Loma, Colorado. The permit area is further described as follows: 18 miles North of Loma, Colorado in Munger Canyon (mine site) and 1/2 mile east of Loma (rail loadout site) The above-mentioned tracts of land are shown on the following USGS 7 5 minute Quadrangle map(s): Howard Canyon, Garvey Canyon, Mack. The applicant is required to publish notice in a local newspaper that this application has been deemed complete. At the time of publication of this notice, the applicant is additionally required to 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver, CO 80203 P 303.866.3567 F 303.832.8106 http://mining.state.co.us John W. Hickenlooper, Governor 1 Robert W. Randall, Executive Director 1 Virginia Brannon, Director place a copy of this application at the Mesa County Clerk and Recorder, 200 S. Spruce Street, Grand Junction, CO 81501, and at the Division office. For additional information or to provide written comments, contact the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety, Room 215, 1313 Sherman Street, Denver, Colorado 80203, (303) 866-3567. In order for us to comply with regulatory time frames, we request that comments be submitted within fifteen (15) days of this letter. If no comments are received by then, we will proceed on the assumption that you have no concerns with, or objections to, the applicant's proposal. Sincerely, Zach T. Trujillo Environmental Protection Specialist Zach.trujillo@state.co.us C -TR -03F Page 1 of 3 David Pesnichak From: David Pesnichak Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 1:20 PM To: 'Tamme Bishop' Subject: RE: CAM Project Impact Statement Hi Tamme, Please see my comments in red, below. Thanks, Dave David Pesnichak Senior Planner Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: (970) 945-8212 Fax: (970)384-3470 Email: dpesnichak@garfield-county.com From: Tamme Bishop [mailto:tamme.jestover@bresnan.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 12:11 PM To: David Pesnichak Subject: Re: CAM Project Impact Statement David: I appreciate the comments and will work on addressing each one. CAM is conducting an EIS for the 15 -mile rail spur and it is not complete at this time. I have a couple of questions for you: 5.03.08 (1) If I understand correctly, even though the location of the proposed mine is a very remote location, a sound study must still must be conducted. Where in the proposed Conditional use permit boundary should it be performed? - You are correct that the code requires a sound study before this case can pass go. The sound study needs to be conducted at the periphery of the permit boundary. In addition, I am interested to see a larger map from the property indicating BLM boundaries, closest developments, natural features, etc. I am sure you need to do this same kind of work for the EIS as well. This may be a remote site, but the project will also have substantial impact. 200' is only regarding notification of neighboring property owners, not the limit to which Garfield County will look for impacts on the surrounding area. 5.03.08 D4 Is the property boundary in question the proposed CUP boundary shown on the proposed exhibits? - The boundary which the County is concerned with is the permit boundary itself. The noise generated by repair and maintenance activities should be included within the noise study and extrapolated from the permit boundaries. 5.03.08 D5 The mine will be on public lands, what response would Garfield County like to see other than N/A? - There is nothing inherently wrong with the requirement not being applicable, but an explanation of why the regulation is not applicable is necessary. The question that comes to mind is whether there is not going to be loading and unloading from vehicles all together or is this not applicable because all loading and unloading of vehicles is going to be conducted within the permit boundary. In this case, the permit boundary is synonymous with private property. What we do not want to see is loading or unloading on any public rights-of-way. 5.03.08 F N/A was used as the response because there are no residential properties within 200' of the proposed CUP boundary as shown on the submitted Exhibits and thus, it does not appear lighting would be a nuisance or concern for adjacent landowners. In addition, the location of the majority of the lighting will be in deeply incised canyons, which will be several hundred if not thousands of feet from the proposed conditional use permit 1/25/2007 Page 2 of 3 boundary. Are those sentences how CAM should respond? - What you have stated here is what I would like to see within the impact statement. In addition, there is currently no representation within the application regarding how deep these canyons are and how they could relate to sound, vibration and light protrusion. Remember, however that light protrusion onto neighboring properties is not the whole story, light pollution which is upward facing is also a concern. In other words, will people driving down the nearby public roads be able to see light beams up into the sky at night? Are there any neighbors who would be able to see the light in the night sky? Thank you. Tamme Bishop, EIT JE STOVER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2352 N. 7th Street, Suite B Grand Junction, CO 81506 970-245-4101 Original Message From: David Pesnichak To: tamme.jestoverna bresnan.net Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 10:44 AM Subject: RE: CAM Project Impact Statement Hi Tamme, Has the EA been completed on this project for the BLM permit? Per 5.03.07 (2) (A): "A plan for site rehabilitation must be approved by the County Commissioners before a permit for Conditional Use will be granted." A site rehabilitation plan was not submitted with the application. I will need to receive the site rehabilitation plan for review prior to the scheduling of a public hearing for this CUP. Thanks, Dave David Pesnichak Senior Planner Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: (970) 945-8212 Fax: (970)384-3470 Email: dpesnichak@garfield-county.com From: David Pesnichak Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 10:43 AM To: 'tamme.jestover@bresnan.net' Subject: RE: CAM Project Impact Statement Hi Tamme, Our legal staff was not able to make the meeting this morning and we have rescheduled for tomorrow morning. I will let you know some more information tomorrow, but below are some initial responses to the impact statement you submitted: 1/25/2007 Page 3 of 3 5.03.07 (A) — Address pollution of surface water and surface water run-off. 5.03.07 (B) — Address how far out the effects will emanate from the mining activity. 5.03.07 (C) — A wildlife report must be competed and submitted as apart of the application in order for this item to be scheduled for public hearing. 5.03.07 (E) — What are the neighboring land uses and how far away from the activity are these uses? Will the dust, noise, vibration, etc. reach and affect these uses/properties? 5.03.08 (1) — "Volume of sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth in the Colorado Revised Statutes at the time any new application is made." A site specific sound study must be completed prior to the scheduling of a public hearing. 5.03.08 (D) (4) — Why is this not applicable to this particular coal mining operation? 5.03.08 (D) (5) - Why is this not applicable to this particular coal mining operation? 5.03.08 (F) - Why is this not applicable to this particular coal mining operation? I will be back in touch with you tomorrow regards a couple more items once I have a chance to meet with our legal staff. Thanks, Dave David Pesnichak Senior Planner Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: (970) 945-8212 Fax: (970)384-3470 Email: dpesnichak@garfield-county.com From: David Pesnichak Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 12:44 PM To: tamme.jestover@bresnan.net' Subject: CAM Project Impact Statement Hi Tamme, I have received the draft impact statement you have forwarded along to our office. There are a few questions I have for our legal staff which I would like to address with them tomorrow morning so that I can give you a full and complete response. I will be back in touch with you early tomorrow afternoon. Thanks, Dave David Pesnichak Senior Planner Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Tel: (970) 945-8212 Fax: (970)384-3470 Email: dpesnichak@garfield-county.com 1/25/2007