My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2018-08-10_PERMIT FILE - M2017032
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2017032
>
2018-08-10_PERMIT FILE - M2017032
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2021 4:29:57 AM
Creation date
8/10/2018 4:46:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2017032
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
8/10/2018
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Environment, Inc.
To
DRMS
Email Name
AME
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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
Epvi* ropn) ept, l <br /> LARRY E.O'BRWN 7985 VANCE DRIVE,SUITE 205A <br /> FOUNDER ARVADA,COLORADO 80003 <br /> STEVAN L.O'BRIAN 303-423-7297 <br /> PRESIDENT FAX 303423-7599 <br /> August 10, 2018 <br /> Ms. Amy Eschberger <br /> Division of Reclamation, Mining & Safety <br /> 1313 Sherman St, Suite 215 RECEIVED <br /> Denver, CO 80203 R <br /> A <br /> Ali i ! . <br /> Dear Amy; <br /> DIVISION OF REGLIWATION, <br /> RE: Deep Cut, LLC - 22 West Pit MINING AND SAFETY <br /> M.L.R.B. Permit # M-2017-032 <br /> On behalf of our client Deep Cut LLC I will respond to your first <br /> adequacy review letter dated June 2, 2018 in the order and number <br /> format presented in that document. I apologize for taking so long to <br /> complete the response. I added each point of your letter starting <br /> with #1 to be addressed so when reviewing our responses, one does not <br /> have to keep referring back to your adequacy letter. <br /> 1) The revised mining plan and maps propose two "options", one of which (Option 1) would <br /> consist of expanding the pond westward and leaving the pre-law disturbed area to the <br /> northeast undisturbed, and the other (Option 2) would consist of expanding the pond <br /> westward and also eastward, mining through the pre-law disturbed area to the northeast. <br /> The Exhibit L—Reclamation Cost Map appears to be consistent with Option 1 in that this <br /> scenario does not include disturbing the pre-law area to the northeast. <br /> The maps are all mixed up and improperly labeled. I am sorry for the mixup it did not <br /> make it easier for you. I have revised both Mining Plan Maps and Reclamation Plan Maps <br /> so they represent the respective options. An explanation of the options in Exhibit D and <br /> Exhibit E have been added in a paragraph above the timetable in Exhibit D describing each <br /> option. <br /> Option 1 - Mines the area between the lakes, the north side of the old plant site, the pre- <br /> law area in the northwest corner and the pre-law dirt stockpile area. This is shown on <br /> Map Exhibit C-1 and Map Exhibit F-1. This is basically the Mining Plan and Reclamation <br /> Plan presented in the original submittal. <br /> Option 2 - Mines only the area between the lakes and the north side of the old plant site <br /> area including the 1.57 acres of pre-law disturbance area. This is shown on Map Exhibit <br /> C-2 (Option 2) and Map Exhibit F-2 (Option 2). The change here is that all of the above <br /> water areas that are not parking areas (old Plant Site Area) will be resoiled and seeded. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.