My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2004-09-09_REVISION - M1978056
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1978056
>
2004-09-09_REVISION - M1978056
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:51:51 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 5:03:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1978056
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
9/9/2004
Doc Name
3rd Adequacy Review Comments
From
DMG
To
Varra Companies Inc
Type & Sequence
AM1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
during each step of the process to verify progress made. The Division requests that VCI also <br />commit to submittal of a finalized Flood Contro]/Mitigation Plan in the form of a technical <br />revision to the permit within 365 days of Board approval of the amendment application. Also, <br />the Flood Contro]/Mifigation Plan must a) be acceptable to Weld County, US Army Corps of <br />Engineers, and FEMA, b) include plans, designs, and elevations for any flood control dike and/or <br />spillways to remain during final reclamation, c) include volumes of earth material to be added to <br />or removed from the existing dike, d) include designs, plans, and details for completing the <br />backfilling and grading and slope protection measures (riprap) that will be used to stabilize the <br />river and pit sides of the flood control dike, e) include an itemized cost estimate complete with <br />all tasks required to complete reclamation of the flood control dike, and f) specify the date by <br />which modifications to the dike will be complete. Please respond. <br />Page 2 (g): As a point of clarification, the Flood Contro]/Mitigation Plan will need to be <br />submitted as a technical revision to the permit rather than to this amendment. <br />Page 3 (20.A): Please specify the boundaries or exact field locations depicting the eastern portion <br />and western portions of the berm, and the number of lineaz feet for each portion. Also, please <br />specify the timing or date by which the eastern portion of the berm will be returned to its <br />approximate 1973 configuration. Finally, please clarify the 1973 elevation and configuration of <br />the eastern portion of the berm, and the source of such information. Please respond. <br />6.4.7 EXHIBIT G -Water Information <br />26. Office of the State Engineer -Approvals Required :VCI has verified that they have an <br />approved temporary substitute supply plan for the Durham Pit. However, the well permit as <br />required by the Office of the State Engineer (OSE) has not yet been approved. Based on review <br />comments from the Office of the State Engineer (see attached comments), it is the Division's <br />understanding that such well permit is required for the current de-watering activities at the <br />Durham Pit. In the absence of an OSE approved well permit it is likely that the Division will <br />require that the operator to cease and desist from any further de-watering activities at the Durham <br />Pit until such time that VCI can demonstrate written approval from the OSE for such activities. <br />Please respond with the status of VCI's application for a well permit. <br />27. Floodway Designation & Flood Control Dike -Compliance with Rule 3.1.6 : Varra <br />Companies, Inc. has provided a hydraulic evaluation that indicates certain locations of the flood <br />control dike have increased in height by 2 to 6 feet between 1995 and 2004, and that such <br />increase in dike height will result in a predicted rise of flood elevation of 0.3 feet for various <br />storm events. Please verify whether the current configuration of the flood control dike will or <br />will not adversely affect any adjacent property owners during a future flooding event, and does or <br />does not conflict with rules or regulations of the federal government, the state of Colorado or <br />with any local government pollution ordinances. Also, please identify if there any particular <br />trouble spots along the dike where future flood events would adversely affect any adjacent <br />structures, such as the Bliss Produce Company structures to the north. Please respond. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.