PERMFILE112570

• Permit No: M2000158
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 3/27/2001
• Doc Name: First Adequacy Review Responses
• From: ENVIRONMENT INC
• To: DMG
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

ENVIRONMEN T~ INC.
MARGH 26, 2001
PAGE B
for bond release. I do not believe the Urban Drainage
Technical review is applicable for this area. Urban Drainage
does not have any jurisdiction this far from Denver and the
document is supposed to be an advisory document. Be assured
PS&G does not want the river in the mined area anymore than
the Division does and will take the necessary precautions to
keep it out.
With that said, PSbG will commit to mining no closer than 400
feet of the river bank in the area where no armoring is done;
250 feet where armoring exists only on the river side of the
bank and 150 feet where armoring is placed on both banks. If
armoring is done on both banks the armoring will be done as
mining progresses in that reach. The FIRM map, Panel 705 of
1075, is attached. It was prepared in 1982 and shows only the
100 year floodplain area.
27. The operator will have approximately 22,000 cy of soil stored
on the site any one time. This was shown in Exhibit L -
Reclamation Costs and is enough growth medium to resoil the
areas disturbed under the bond. PS&G will commit to keeping
the piles aligned with the river (parallel to the flow) and
placing them as far from the river as practical. I have added
the Floodplain line from the FIRM map to the revised Mining
Plan Map. The FIRM map does not designate heavy flow areas so
one must assume it would be close to the river. A copy is
enclosed for your review and I placed the permit outline on it
for review purposes.
Rule 6.4.8 Exhibit H - ~Idlife Information
28. First I want to thank the Division of Wildlife (DOW) for the
comprehensive reports they have prepared. Their information
has been very helpful in determining the wildlife issues on
the site. However, the operator will not change the sloping
plan or the seedmix at this time. To facilitate this PS&G is
removing the words "wildlife habitat" from the permit so there
will be no confusion in the future. Originally, the area
along the river was designated wildlife habitat and was not to
be disturbed, while the reclaimed areas were the proposed
recreation areas.
29. As noted above the term "wildlife habitat" is removed from a
designated land use in this mine. Page 2 of the application
form shows the Primary End as "Recreation" so that is the
official primary end land use. Very few trees or shrubs will
be removed by mining. When planning this mine the actively
farmed were specifically chosen as mining areas to avoid
disturbing the old trees along the river. The operator
appreciates Dow's suggestions but chooses to keep the plan as
described in this permit application. No trees will be
replaced as part of the plan, BUT the landowners may wish to
plant additional vegetation along the lake perimeters in the