Laserfiche WebLink
Applicant's Response to Second Adequacy Le}ter <br />Grand River Park Project, DRMS File M-2006-046 <br />January 2, 2007 <br />Page 24 <br />sufficient water to maintain soil moisture in the root zone of affected trees or <br />understory. The on-site stand of cottonwoods may be preserved by any <br />mitigation measures deemed appropriate, otherwise this stand will serve as a <br />control group for comparative purposes when stress is detected in the off-site <br />stand. Should water-related stress persist in the off-site stand of cottonwoods for <br />more than two monitoring periods, the operator will cease dewatering operations <br />to conduct further study and propose any appropriate amendments to the <br />Groundwater Monitoring and Water Management Plans. <br />29. In response to the Division's initial comment regarding Exhibit S, the <br />applicant provided Revised Exhibit C-2: Mining Plan Map 200-Foot Setback <br />Scenario to serve as the operative Mining Plan until all structure agreement or <br />engineering analyses can be obtained in order to mine closer than 200 feet from <br />the relevant structures. However, in order for the Division to make a favorable <br />decision on this permit application, the applicant will need to commit to a mine <br />plan that follows either the Maximum Recovery Scenario or the 200-Foot Setback <br />Scenario, !f the applicant chooses to commit to the Maximum Recovery <br />Scenario, either structure agreements from Xcel Energy, Roy McPherson, Antero <br />Resources, CDOT, and the Kancillas, or, failing to reach such agreements, an <br />engineering analysis demonstrating that such structures will not be damaged by <br />activities occurring at the mining operation will need to be submitted to the <br />Division as part of this application. Please respond. <br />Foilowing submittal the initial adequacy response, the applicant took appropriate <br />steps to enable its election of the Maximum Recovery Scenario, which will <br />therefore be the operative proposed mining plan under Exhibit C-2. <br />As noted by the Division, at the time of the September 6 adequacy submittal, <br />negotiation related to structure agreements remained outstanding for Xcel <br />Energy, the Rising Sun Ditch (intermittently represented by Roy McPherson), <br />Antero Resources, CDOT, and the Kancilia family. With this submittal, the <br />applicant is providing executed agreements, in accordance with Rule 6.4.19(a), <br />for Xcel Energy and Antero Resources. <br />Negotiations with the three remaining structure owners have not yielded an <br />agreement. On November 2, 2006, the Kancilia's, through their counsel, Thomas <br />W. Stuver, Esq. of Rifle, Colorado, informed the applicant's representative in <br />writing that they "will not agree to any setback less than 200 feet." Following <br />attempted contact with Roy McPherson as the presumed representative of the <br />Rising Sun Ditch, Mr. McPherson informed the applicant's representative that the <br />Rising Sun Ditch is an unincorporated association with no formal governance <br />structure, and he could not negotiate or execute agreements on behalf of the <br />ditch. CDOT has been contacted several times, but apparently personnel <br />