Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment Reclamation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gilpin County approves CRS LLC 10-41 permit for Russell Gulch reclamation project
Summary
The Gilpin County Board of County Commissioners voted 3-0 on April 22 to grant CRS LLC a 10-41 permit for the Russell Gulch reclamation project, approving staff-recommended conditions including DRMS permitting, haul-route disclosure, erosion controls and wildlife timing restrictions.
Gilpin County commissioners voted 3-0 on April 22 to grant CRS LLC a 10-41 permit to reclaim legacy mine tailings on a parcel with access to Virginia Canyon Road, approving conditions that require the company to secure a Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) permit, disclose haul routes, and implement erosion control and wildlife-protection measures.
The permit (Resolution 25-053) authorizes CRS LLC's mobile reclamation operation on roughly 0.8 acres of tailings. County planning attorney Tori Jarvis told commissioners the countys 10-41 rules implement the "areas and activities of state interest act" and that approval requires findings that the impact-based standards are met; staff recommended approval with specific conditions to address road impact, erosion control and wildlife disturbance.
Applicants said the operation uses a mobile, gravity-fed toll-mill circuit rather than chemical processing. Applicant Greg Smith said the process produces a benign byproduct similar to masonry sand and that concentrate and byproducts leave the site daily. Harold Lesser, who described himself as a third-generation miner and the developer of the processing approach, said the system is "completely nontoxic" and that "there's 0 chance for any type of contaminant happening," noting DRMS and EPA review and laboratory testing protocols.
Public comment raised local environmental concerns. Bill Merline, a nearby co-owner, asked who will monitor revegetation, seed sourcing and invasive-weed control and warned that felled trees could attract mountain pine beetles. The applicants replied they were amenable to conditions requiring removal or expedited handling of felled trees to reduce beetle risk, would provide seed-source details on request and could contract local weed specialists and the county extension agent for periodic inspection.
Staff and applicants gave technical details during questioning: applicants estimated about 80—90 trees had been felled during road installation (about 50—60 stockpiled), said they expect four to five haul trucks per day for byproduct removal, and requested a two-year permit though they estimated about 15 months of active work. Applicants said the operation is 0-liquid-discharge, uses daily grab samples submitted to Hazen Laboratories with TCLP testing, and would maintain a 7,500-gallon freshwater tank and pumps on-site for fire mitigation. Commissioners discussed dust, road repair (a condition will require the applicant to pay for documented extraordinary damage), wildlife timing (avoid dawn/dusk operations when feasible), and haul-route coordination with Central City and county public works.
Commissioner [mover] made the motion to adopt Resolution 25-053 as presented and staff noted small edits recommended by attorney Jarvis would be incorporated into the final signed resolution. The motion passed 3-0.
The permit remains subject to the listed conditions, the DRMS permit process, and the applicants' compliance with haul-route coordination and county road-repair procedures. Commissioners said they will file the corrected resolution for signatures with the clerk.
