2009-10-30_REVISION - M1980146

• Permit No: M1980146
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 10/30/2009
• Doc Name: Adequacy responses
• From: Wasteline Inc.
• To: DRMS
• Type & Sequence: AM4
• Email Name: RCO
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

• ed
Coco
f?e?d_maea
WASS'TELUNIE INIC,
P.O. Box 3471 Rapid City, SD 57709-3471 [phone]
PO Box 88 Cortez, CO 81321-0088 [phone] CELL [phone]
E-mail: WASTELINE6(a)aol.com or ol.com

NUV U
Div*OR of Rec1t?sil10",29 October 2009
Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety Mining and Safety
ATTN: Mr. Bob Oswald
691 CR 233, Suite A-2 A`P G7gVAc J V C d tJSG S
Durango, CO 81301
SUBJECT: 112 PERMIT AMENDMENT #4 APPLICATION, FILE NO. M-1980-146
Dear sir:
As requested in your letter of 23 SEP 2009, the following adequacy issues are addressed. If
required, a copy of this letter will be placed with the La Plata County Clerk and Recorders
Office, together with the rest of the application or to replace pages as needed. The comments are
addressed in the same order as your letter.
Exhibit C, Pre-mining and Mining Plan Maps, Rule 6.4.3.
1. The new office and scale have been added, as requested. We are not aware of any
other permanent and significant structures which were not shown. The maps as
submitted were prepared before the new office and scale were installed, which is why
they are not shown.
2. We believe that the correct permit number. M-1980-146, was already shown on the
five maps which together make up Exhibit C. We were not able to find any errors or
omissions.
3. We have added additional notes and labels to make it clear which are the existing and
proposed permit boundaries, and which are the boundaries of the affected lands
(current and proposed). The new permit boundary was marked on all maps.
4. All five of the maps were signed by me as the engineer, in accordance with Rule
6.2.1.(2)(b), and I do not know why the signatures did not show up on your copy; I
have double checked to make sure that the signatures are present, legible, and print
out from the Adobe PDF file. I am unaware of a requirement for the maps to be
sealed.
5. All five of the maps are to the same scale, as identified on Map C-l, and we have
added both a graphical scale and specified the scale (instead of just referencing the
scale), for the sake of clarity.
6. As requested, we have labeled major storm water controls on Map C-1. If necessary,
a separate map could be prepared with this information, as a part of Exhibit G, if you
wish.
Exhibit F, Reclamation Maps, Rule 6.4.6.
1. Map F-8 shows the permanent roads/trails as presently designated, and also shows
larger permanent storm water control structures, as well as notes addressing such.
Additional notes have been added to the revision of the map. Driveways, parking
areas, and other tertiary roads are not shown, as the final design of the areas
designated as businesses, industrial, and houses cannot be done at this time, since it