2009-06-30_PERMIT FILE - M2009018 ‎(8)‎

• Permit No: M2009018
• IBM Index Class Name: PERMIT FILE
• Doc Date: 6/30/2009
• Doc Name: Reply to Preliminary Adequacy Review
• From: Varra Companies, Inc.
• To: DRMS
• Email Name: MAC
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Varra Companies, Inc.
Office of Special Projects
8120 Crape Street Frederick, Colorado 80516 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
the large area and diverse information attempting to be portrayed at one time, some information
that may have been obvious from our perspective, may not have translated in the final map.
The relative position of landowner to significant structures is adequately portrayed on the aerial
image and attending legend; but simply may not be fully understood due to scale and lack of
object specific labeling that is impractical at the scale provided. To better meet the concerns of
the Office, we are providing an Addendum to Exhibit C-2: Extraction Map which shows the
location at a much larger scale. The information should be considered in respect to the different
scales and attending information provided in both the 1:100 and 1:200 scale Exhibit C-2:
Extraction Plan Map and the 1:400 scale Exhibit C-1: Existing Conditions Map; and attending
features indicated or otherwise shown in line work the map Legend and attending aerial image.
In order to gain scale, it must be understood that we had to divide the 1:100 scale Exhibit C-2:
Extraction Plan Map into two parts with a match line. The resulting image is larger and allows
for additional labeling and identification of structures, or a more close up image of the area of
interest, while still making visible on two sheets all significant features and structures in relation
to the project area and relative to a two hundred foot separation from the permit boundary.
While two hundred feet from the permit boundary, actual disturbance may be less than that
shown and it is therefore a relative marker and some judgment as to its applicability needs to be
applied as the consideration is for structures within 200 feet of the `affected land' and not the
permit boundary. In many instances, this limit is designated by the extraction boundary and not
the permit boundary.
The resulting close up should make more recognizable the area roads, fence lines, approximate
location buried and above ground utilities, oil and gas facilities, residential or other structures,
including agricultural structures and outbuildings, and other significant, valuable, man-made
structures in relation to their position with the project area. Some features are defined by line
work and described in the included Legend. Fencing with the permit boundary is identified.
Fencing exists on adjacent lands on the other side of shown county roads and is visible by the
change in vegetation seen in the aerial photograph. Area roads, fencing, utilities or other
permanent, significant and valuable manmade structures will not be affected by planned
extraction activity, as addressed further, below.
7. The Extraction Map illustrates the Project Boundary and the Area Mine Boundary.
Please clarify which of these boundaries corresponds to the permit boundary.
The Project Boundary is the Permit Boundary (Legend - Magenta Lines). The Extraction
Boundary shows the practical limits to extraction activity within the Permit Boundary. The Area
Mine Boundary (Legend - Red Lines) attempts to show the location of existing or lands
purchased and likely to be permitted in the future for mining relative to area parcels and the
project boundary. As requested later, a signed Exhibit CL Existing Conditions Map is included
reflecting the locations as clarified, above.
Varra Companies, Inc. correspondence of 30 June 2009 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 4
(Office) in reply to Office correspondence of 12 May 2009 - Hemtzelman Project - M2009-018.