2004-04-26_REVISION - M1978056 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

decades. Bear in mind that the majority of the site was affected and the soils removed by the previous operator prior to our entry in 1999. We salvaged a soil resources in Area A -Active Extraction (refer to Exhibit C -Mining and Reclamation Plan Map) that compensated for the previous deficit of soil based resources. This advantage occurred by salvage of all available materials exhibiting soil like properties. The salvage and use of soil resources will continue to the extent indicated on the included Exhibit C - Pre•Mining and Mining Plan Map, which shows the extent of affected to unaffected lands evidencing potential soil resowces. I5. A copy of July 10 applicant's Exhibit E -Reclamation Plan does not include any provisions fora -ined pond. The appl'scant's Exhibit E -Reclamation Plan does not include any provisions for a lined pond. Please clarify whether the 7 acre and 125 acre reclaimed lakes will be lined or unlined as a part of final reclamation. (The conditions specified in the applicant's mining and reclamation plan need to be consistent with the conditions specified in the applicant's applications for required water permits from the Office of the State Engineer). We believe the Division has misread the referenced document. The approval is for an unlined pond, and we believe the Office of the State Engineer will support this understanding. 16. Please provide an approvable Flood Control/Mitigation Plan for the Durham Pit acceptable to Weld County, US Army Corps of Engineers, and FEMA. Such plan may include plans, designs, and elevations for any flood control berm and/or spillways to remain during final reclamation. It has not been determined by the regulating agencies that a violation of the floodway has occurred, or its significance of any impacts, if any. There is not a complete understanding of this issue and its resolution will take time. As previously stated, it is entirely possible that the effects of the previous operation, as observed by the County and DMG over the life of the operation as affected in the clear majority by the previous operator, may actually serve to protect lands lateral to it in the event of a flood. The elevations and state of the referenced area were not defined at the time of the original permit, and may never be fully determined. We have previously stated our commitment to work with the several authorities in the resolution of this matter. We have retained the services of a qualified engineering firm to aid in the resolution of this concern. It is a part of the whole of diverse landowner activity all along the stream segment that has occurred or been allowed, even by the city and county authorities. Once the facts aze in, if mitigation is necessary and definable, Varra Companies, Inc. will assert the necessary action to comply, as necessary. Chris Pauley, civil engineer for Anderson Consulting, has requested additional time for his evaluation due to continued difficulty in obtaining established information from FEMA and the Army Corps of Engineers (refer to Chris Pauley's correspondence of 30 Mazch 2004 requesting additional time to 28 May 2004 for completion of his initial evaluation. The information requested by the Division will be provided to the Division at the time of submittal of the completed report. Please refer to page 1 of this report as indicated (i1E) 17. The approved (original) reclamation plan specifies plantings of Russian Olive, Sunburst Locust, and American Plumb in groups of 3 to 5 and appropriate spacing for future growth. Please indicate whether these specifications will be incorporated into the Amendment application or whether they should be deleted from the reclamation plan and why. Please respond. Varra Companies, Inc. M1978-056 Durham Sand & Gravel Pit - 2003 Amendment - 9 Monday 26 Apri12004 reply to correspondence from the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology of 6 January 2004.