Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. O'Brian—Environment Inc. <br /> March 27 <br /> Page 5 of 6 <br /> If during the course of mining or reclamation complaints from a well owner are received by the permittee,the <br /> permittee will commence an evaluation and investigation, including providing replacement water to the well <br /> owner if necessary,within 48 hours. DRMS shall be notified within two business days of the complaint and the <br /> proposed initial steps for the evaluation of the complaint. A written report will be submitted to DRMS within 30 <br /> days detailing the information collected during the investigation of the complaint, and proposed mitigation <br /> activity,if required. Please make the appropriate edits to Exhibit G,and acknowledge the additional DBMS <br /> requirements listed above. <br /> EXHIBIT H-Wildlife Information Costs(Rule 6.4.8): Timely comments were received from Colorado Parks <br /> and Wildlife. This comment letter dated March 12,2020 has been forwarded to the permitting contact provided <br /> in the application via e-mail, and is also available for viewing through the imaged document data link provided at <br /> the end of this letter, or through the DRMS website. <br /> The primary topic of CPW concern is the proximity of the permit area to existing raptor nest(s)and habitat. CPW <br /> has provided suggested setbacks and date windows for activity restrictions in the comment letter. Please address <br /> how these suggestions will be implemented to minimize impacts to adjacent raptor nests and habitat. <br /> EXHIBIT L-Reclamation Costs(Rule 6.4.12): All information necessary to calculate the costs of reclamation <br /> must be submitted and broken down into the various major phases of reclamation. You must provide sufficient <br /> information to calculate the cost of reclamation that would be incurred by the state. <br /> As stated previously,the provided"snapshot"approach provided for bond calculation is not appropriate for this <br /> site. If the applicant wishes to use a phased bonding approach,they will be required to break down the bonding <br /> costs into rational"phases"of mining and site disturbance(ie West Side/East side,or by Phase if possible), and <br /> present the reclamation costs for those phases. Selecting an indeterminate point in the mining process will not be <br /> acceptable unless it can be demonstrated that that point represents the maximum reclamation liability for the site <br /> as a whole. Please adjust the cost for the reclamation accordingly. It would likely be most useful to break down <br /> the reclamation costs Phase as shown on the mining and reclamation plans <br /> DRMS also notes that no costs have been provided for design or installation of flood control structures in Phases <br /> 1 and 2 which are located within the flood plain as shown. Dewatering costs for areas to be wet mined,prior to <br /> backfilling should also be included. <br /> EXHIBIT M-Other Permits and Licenses(Rule 6.4.13): Is as Weld County Flood Hazard Development <br /> permit a separate document, or is that included within the county's Special Use Permit? <br /> EXHIBIT N-Source of Legal Right to Enter(Rule 6.4.14): Is the required surface use agreement in place at <br /> this time with Platte Valley Irrigation Company? <br /> EXHIBIT O-Owner(s) of Record of Affected Land(Surface Area)and Owners of Substance to be Mined <br /> (Rule 6.4.15): Adjacent surface owners Darrell McCrumb Trust and Carol Chavez Living Trust are shown on <br /> map(far SE corner),but not listed in text on map, or in Exhibit O. Please revise as needed. (For what it's worth, <br /> I really appreciate having all these surface/ROW owners listed in one location) <br />