Laserfiche WebLink
DEC-19-00 TUE: 11;01 AM SRK_CONSULTING DEN <br />"'~'~ SRK Consulting <br />`;~. Engineers and Scientists <br />FAX N0. 303 985 9947 <br />P. 02/] 3 <br />Slellen Robertson ono Klnlen (U.S.), Irk. <br />7175 West Jetlenon Avenue <br />Sidle 3000 <br />Lakevrood, Colorado <br />80235 USA <br />6~mall: denvar®srk.com <br />URL: hI1P'~~rnxwsrk.com <br />Tal: 707.995.1777 <br />Fas: 707.995.9947 <br />DecemL•er 19, 2000 <br />SRK Project No. 54202 <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Attn.: Thmnas A Shreiner <br />ltl;; Longmont Distel Operation, AD1-3, Adequacy Letter Response, Permit No. M-89- <br />029 <br />Dear Mr. Shteincr: <br />SRK Consulting, on behalf of Camus Colorado, Inc. (Aggregate Industries) is providing this <br />respon=e to your adequacy revieav comments dated November 29, 2000 regarding the above <br />referenced amendment application. Each of the Division of Mining and Geology (DMG) <br />comments is addressed individually as follows: <br />6.4.7 Exhibit G -Water lntbnnation <br />1. Additional hydrulogic assessment avill be completed to evaluate groundwater inflow into <br />proposed mine areas to facilitate the final sizing of the flow control structures included in the <br />reclamation plan. Data will be collected and used from the current de-watering activities un <br />the Bigelow tract, and estimates oC alluvial aquifer permeability will be developed to <br />formulate an analytical and/or a numerical groundwater flow model. 'this model wtll be used <br />to xedict groundwater inflow into the areas to be reclaiuted and to estimate the influence on <br />aquifer water levels in the vicinity during mine de-watering activities. This analysis will be <br />completed and findings submitted to DMG by January 2~I, 2000. <br />2. Sa: the response to comment # 1. It should be noted that there has been no impact realized to <br />water supply wells installed in the alluvial aquifer from existing mine de-watering activities <br />in the vicinity. Also, note that the response to comment # 7 contains additional "water <br />information" as it pertains to pem7ittcd vicinity water supply wells. <br />6.4.10 Exhibit J-Vegetation Information <br />3. Lt response to DMG's request a Noxious Weed Control Plan is attached and to be included <br />within the subject amendment application. <br />G.4.1 i Exhibit L -Reclamation Costs <br />4. Tl.e total volume of soil listed in Table 13.1 (Reclamation Costs) is 1,191,713 cubic yards. <br />Ttlis volume includes volumes to re-grade pit highwalls and pit bottoms, as well as placement <br />of topsoil. As indicated in Note #3 on Table 13.1, the total volume does not include <br />placement of overburden into permanent stockpile :Incas. The placement of soil into <br />permanent stockpile areas is considered a mine operations cost. Therefore, the estimated <br />velumc of soil to be placed into the permanent stockpile areas (i.e., 665,337 cubic yards) is <br />net included in the volumes used to estimate reclamation costs in Table 13.1. However, this <br />', Grtmn ONmes ln. ~ Nonn American OKkes: <br />Auavaua ,Elko 775.753.4151 <br />INoahAmerica IFodCollins970.4078302 <br />I SnuWern Alrica Reno 775.92e.9900 <br />N.\GKncIl~Pmj ccp54202tUMGIicv RcspLe[.dnc I Saum America 1 Tucson 52o Sa4.0009 <br />~ Uniled Kingdom 1 Venwuver 604.9814198 <br />