2019-01-30_REVISION - M2008078

• Permit No: M2008078
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 1/30/2019
• Doc Name: Adequacy Review Response #2
• From: Prowers Aggregate Operators
• To: DRMS
• Type & Sequence: AM1
• Email Name: AME
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

RE: Prowers Aggregate Operators, LLC. —West Farm Pit—Permit No. M-2008-078
112c Permit Amendment Application (Revision No. AM-01)
Adequacy Review No. 2 Response 1124119
-2-
4) The operator's response to item no. 32 proposes submitting groundwater measurement
data to the Division on an annual basis. The Division accepts this reporting frequency, and
recommends the groundwater data be submitted with the annual report. The operator's
response further commits to notifying the Division if groundwater levels change significantly
from historic seasonal levels. Please specify the length of time from learning of such a
change that the Division will be notified.
Response: The operator will notify the Division within 30 days if groundwater
levels change significantly from historic seasonal levels.
Exhibit L- Reclamation Costs (Rule 6.4.12):
5) The operator's reclamation cost estimate does not include revegetation costs for Parcel B
for which the operator proposes a post-mining agricultural use. Please add costs for
revegetating Parcel B in the reclamation cost estimate.
Response: Costs for revegetating Parcel B have been added to the reclamation
cost estimate. See the attached revised Reclamation Cost Summary Table and
Exhibit L Reclamation Bond Estimate Calculation.
6) The operator's reclamation cost estimate appears to cover a total disturbance of 272.58
acres. Therefore, the maximum disturbed area for this site will be set at this acreage
amount. Please be advised, prior to disturbing additional acreage or to changing the type of
disturbance on any portion of this acreage, the operator must first submit a Technical
Revision that includes a revised reclamation cost estimate.
Response: The operator acknowledges that prior to disturbing additional acreage
or changing the type of disturbance on any portion of this acreage, they must first
submit a Technical Revision that includes a revised reclamation cost estimate.
Exhibit S - Permanent Man-Made Structures (Rule 6.4.19):
7) The operator provided a copy of the structure agreement sent to Atchinson, Topeka, and
Santa Fe Railroad. However, the Division could not find a Certified Mail Receipt
demonstrating this agreement was mailed to the structure owner. There is a Certified Mail
Receipt submitted on which the name is illegible and the address reads 4200 Buckingham
Road, Suite 110, Fort Worth, TX 76155. This address is different than the one given on the
structure agreement, 108 E. Beech St., Lamar, CO 81052. Please clarify whether the
Certified Mail Receipt described above is for the Atchinson, Topeka, and Santa Fe
Railroad.
Response: Yes, the certified mail receipt described above is for the Atchinson,
Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad. Our initial attempt to deliver the agreement to the
railroad's local address in Lamar was returned because they would not sign for
the certified mail. We were directed by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad,
who is the successor to the Atchinson, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad, to send
the agreement to JLL in Fort Worth. JLL is the railroad's property manager. They
are the company who deals with all of the railroad's real estate and permit issues.
We left the local address on the agreement to identify the local office that is in
proximity to the project/gravel mine. See the attached certified mail receipt and
USPS tracking report.
v 305 Denver Avenue-Suite D•Fort Lupton CO 80621 •Ph: 303-857-6222•Fax:[phone]