My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-12-03_REVISION - M1977036
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977036
>
2009-12-03_REVISION - M1977036
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:20:38 PM
Creation date
12/4/2009 1:29:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977036
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
12/3/2009
Doc Name
Adequacy Review #2
From
DRMS
To
Tetra Tech
Type & Sequence
AM1
Email Name
JLE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
currently exists in the berm along 35 Avenue. Also, please provide and estimate for the <br />amount of topsoil that will need to be imported and a signed affidavit certifying the <br />material is clean and inert, as defined in Rule 1.1 (20). <br />J.) Please address item #26 from the first adequacy review: <br />26.) Since 140 acres of open ground water will remain after the site is reclaimed, <br />Lafarge must obtain a court approved augmentation plan from the Office of the <br />State Engineer. The Division is required to set the financial warranty at a level <br />which reflects the actual current cost of fulfilling the conditions of the <br />Reclamation Plan per Rule 4.2.1(1). Therefore, without an augmentation plan in <br />place the financial warranty must be set at an amount which accounts for the <br />exposed groundwater. The Division has identified several options for determining <br />the amount of the financial warranty. The Applicant must choose one of the <br />following options to be included in the financial warranty calculation: <br />1) Backfill all of the pits to two feet above the groundwater level. <br />2) Install a slurry wall or clay liner. <br />3) Provide the Division with documentation from SEO, which <br />demonstrates that the Applicant owns a sufficient amount of shares of <br />water to cover the evaporative losses from the exposed groundwater and <br />the said shares have been committed to the SEO should the financial <br />warranty forfeited and the permit revoked. <br />If the Applicant obtains an augmentation plan prior to final release, then the <br />financial warranty will be adjusted accordingly. <br />6.4.19 EXHIBIT S — Permanent Man -Made Structures <br />K.) The Division conducted a review of the Stability Analysis Report submitted with this <br />exhibit and found the proposed setbacks area adequate. However, in accordance with <br />Rule 6.4.19 the operator is still required to submit evidence that an attempt was made to <br />reach and agreement with Weld County for the Poudre Trial and the Fence. Enclosed <br />with the letter is a copy of the Divisions Findings. <br />This concludes the Division's second adequacy review of this application. Please <br />remember the decision date for the application is December 31 2009. As previously <br />mentioned if you are unable to provide satisfactory responses to any inadequacies prior to <br />this date, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of time to allow for <br />continued review of this application. If there are still unresolved issues when the <br />decision date arrives and no extension has been requested, the Division will deny the <br />application. If you have any questions, please contact me at (303) 866 -3567 ext. 8120. <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.