2009-05-18_REVISION - M1978349

• Permit No: M1978349
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 5/18/2009
• Doc Name: Additional review
• From: DRMS
• To: Banks and Gesso, LLC
• Type & Sequence: TR3
• Email Name: GRM
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
May 18, 2009
Alex Schatz
Banks and Gesso, LLC /
720 Kipling St. Suite 117
Lakewood, Colorado 80215
CW20
MAY 2 6 ?009
DivisiO(i OT R-ec"?nQti0*1'
NlipMg and Safety
COLORADO
D IV IS I ON OF
RECLAMATION
MINING
SAFETY
Bill Ritter, Jr.
Governor
Harris D. Sherman
Executive Director
Ronald W. Cattany
Division Director
Natural Resource Trustee
Re: Dick Casey Concrete Pit, Permit No. M-1978-349, Technical Revision, TR-03, Additional Review.
Dear Mr. Schatz,
The Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety (DRMS) has reviewed Banks and Gesso's (B&G)response
to the initial review of United / Old Castle's request for a technical revision to the above referenced
permitted site. Overall the response clarifies some issues noted in the initial review. There are a few
items that need to be clarified prior to approval.
B&G response Item #1 is noted. The database clearly shows that United/ Old Castle is the permitee.
The initial review letter reflected that Dick Casey Concrete was still the operator and requesting the TR.
It was a clerical error based on old associations.
Item #4 notes a temporary substitution supply plan is the best way to handle the permit situation. Staff
concurs and will request a copy of the approved plan if not covered by existing decrees. Presently the
information supplied to DRMS in both files notes approximately 23 acre feet in an approved
augmentation plan between the Casey Pit and the Chambers, M-1979-205. Chambers Pit currently has
an estimated 17 acres of potential lake surface, while the Casey Pit will have 21.9. This appears to be a
deficit of approximately 16 acre feet. If this is incorrect please clarify with documentation where the
TSSP and Augmentation Plans stand. If this is correct, then DRMS accepts Item #8 as assurance that no
groundwater will be exposed beyond losses already accounted for until a new TSSP or modification is in
place.
DRMS must make clear that no acreage reduction or full release request will be approved without the
approved Permanent Plan of Augmentation in place per Item #5.

Office of Office of
Mined Land Reclamation Denver - Grand Junction - Durango Active and Inactive Mines