Laserfiche WebLink
ARCOSA <br /> evaluation that demonstrates that such structure shall not be damaged by activities occurring at the <br /> mining operation; or <br /> (c) Where such structure is a utility, the Applicant may supply a notarized letter, on utility letterhead,from <br /> the owners) of the utility that the mining and reclamation activities, as proposed, will have "no negative <br /> effect"on their utility. <br /> Please provide evidence(such as proof of delivery of certified letter to structure owners)that a notarized agreement <br /> between the structure owners and the applicant was pursued.Ifan agreement is unable to be reached a geotechnical <br /> assessment may be provided to demonstrate that the structures shall not be dammed. <br /> You must provide information sufficient to demonstrate that the stability of any structures located within two <br /> hundred(200)feet of the operation or affected land will not be adversely affected. <br /> Arcosa Response: Arcosa has updated the permit amendment application to address the Division's comments as <br /> described below. <br /> I) Exhibit C has been updated to show the affected lands boundary for the Boulder Lightweight facility, <br /> including the newly added processing area, along with a 200-foot offset with each of the permanent <br /> manmade structures within that 200-foot offset identified. <br /> 2) Exhibit S has been developed to include a list of identified permanent manmade structures within 200 feet <br /> of the affected lands boundary. For each structure we have included a copy of a notarized letter sent to the <br /> structure owner. We will continue to work with structure owners to secure a notarized agreement. Also, <br /> we are in communication with utilities regarding obtaining"no negative effect" letters. If agreements <br /> cannot be secured, an engineering evaluation to demonstrate that operations will not cause damage to <br /> structures will be completed. Please see Exhibit S in the attached permit amendment application for <br /> details. <br /> Division Comment:It was also noted that the amendment was submitted listing Arcosa LWB, LLC as the <br /> Applicant/Operator, not TRNLWB as the Division's records currently indicate. As we discussed on the phone <br /> yesterday, due to the name change you will be required to submit an approvable Succession of Operator revision <br /> to change the name of the Permittee or DRMS will not be able to approve this amendment. <br /> Arcosa Response: Arcosa submitted the Succession of Operator revision to modify the name of the operation on <br /> March 18, 2019. <br /> Division Comment: There also appears to be a significant discrepancy between the currently permitted acreage <br /> (181.21), the acreages listed in Item 3 of the application form (108.04 current, and 31 to be amended for a total of <br /> 139.04)and the acreage shown on the provided map (appears to be a total of 170). This issue will need to be <br /> resolved and corrected as needed. <br /> Arcosa Response: We believe the confusion in acreage stems from the difference between the affected lands <br /> boundary and the lease boundaries noted on the mine map that was provided with the January 2019 permit <br /> amendment application. Please see an updated Exhibit C,which shows the entire affected lands area, which <br /> totals 187 acres of permitted affected lands in the current permit with the addition of 33 acres of the process <br /> area for a total of 220 acres of affected lands to be included in the permit amendment. <br /> We appreciate the opportunity to provide this information to the Division. As noted above, a revised amendment <br />