Laserfiche WebLink
<br />TASK 2 (Spread topsoil): The Division's estimate here is based on an average of 3 inches of topsoil <br />being salvaged from the same 9.02 area, stockpiled in the same general area, the same push distance and the <br />same equipment. <br />TASK 3 (Rip roads, parking areas, stockpile locations): The applicant has indicated that the entire <br />9.99 acre permit area may be disturbed; so it has been assumed that approximately 0.97 acres of compacted <br />area will have to be ripped in order to revegetate it successfully. This will be accomplished by use of the <br />dozer and its ripper. <br />TASK ~3 (Reveg): The Division's estimate utilizes [he seed mix and quantities supplied with the <br />application together with Fertilizing and mulching of [he entire 9.99 disturbed permit area. <br />TASK ~ (~lob/Demob): The Division's estimate is based on a DS dozer and 3-shank ripper being <br />available in Pueblo, a distance of approximately 60 miles from the mine site. <br />INDIRECT COSTS: These are standard with all Division estimates. <br />EXHIBIT E (Rule 6.3.5 (2)): As mentioned earlier under the review of Exhibit C, there is no acceptable <br />mining plan map provided with the application. A copy of the mining plan map applicable to [he Huerfano <br />County Andreatta Pit (Permit M-91-006) which is north oC the proposed permit area has been submitted, but <br />this does not satisfy any of the requirements of this Rule for [his application. A map identified as Exhibit E-2 <br />was also submitted, but this map neither meets the requirements of the preceding Rules nor agrees with the <br />legal description of the permit area included under Exhibit A. <br />A Mining Plan map meeting the general requirements of Rule 6.2.1(2), and the specific <br />requirements of Rules 6.3.3, and 6.3.5(2) must be submitted for this application. <br />EXHIBIT E (Rule 6.3.5(3)(a)): The Reclamation Plan map supplied fails to meet the general requirements of <br />Rule 6.2.1(2)(a), (b), (c) or (e). It also does not meet the requirements of this Rule in that it fails to show the <br />~ gradient of all reclaimed slopes sufficient to describe post mine topography. <br />The applicant must supply a Reclamation Plan Map that meets the applicable requirements of Rules <br />6.2.1 and 6.3.5(a) as indicated above. <br />EXHIBCT F (Rule 6.3.6): As a result of the applicant's proposal [o retain all storm water on site, there may <br />J be a water rights issue involved. The applicant, however, does not indicate any intention to contact the Office <br />DY of the State Engineer in regard to this possibility. <br />The applicant should commit to contact the Office of the Stale Engineer in regard to water rights <br />issues involved if storm water is retained on site. <br />EXHIBIT L (Rule 6.3.12): The Division will accept the Exhibit provided as evidence that both the <br />Andreattas and Eileen Zubal were notified of the application as required by Rules l.ti.2 (e)(i) and (ii). The <br />Division will also accept the Exhibit provided as an agreement to compensate Ms. Zubal for any damage to <br />the fence, apparently hers, separating the Zubal and Andreatta properties. The Division, however, cannot <br />accept the Exhibit provided as evidence that the fence separating the proposed permit area from the <br />Q~ Huerfano Pit to the north is not within 200 feet of the proposed affected area and that the owner of this fence <br />(presumably [he Andreattas) will assume responsibility for [he maintenance of that fence as claimed under <br />Exhibit B. Consequently, Exhibit L, as submitted, does no[ completely meet [he requirements of this Rule <br />The applicant must fully meet the requirements of Rule 6.3.12 and either provide a notarized <br />agreement with [he owner of the fence between the proposed permit area and the Huerfano County pi[ [ha[ <br />~ ~ the landowner will not hold the applicant responsible for any damage [o that fence or a notarized agreement <br />between [he owner of the fence and [he applicant that the applicant will provide compensation for any <br />. ~ damage to the structure. Alternatively, the applicant may provide an appropriate engineering evaluation <br />[hat demonstrates that [his structure will not be damaged by activities occurring at [he mining operation, as <br />was claimed under Exhibit B. <br />