Laserfiche WebLink
Our current application includes the siting of an augmentation pond within the permit boundaries. [Is is <br />affected land if it is not necessary for the mining operation ?] The pond is not necessary to operate the mine <br />and mill - we have sufficient water rights to support the operation. The pond is solely to provide a source for <br />augmenting the river if and when necessary. Frankly, it could just as easily be located off -site. If we remove <br />the augmentation pond from the application today and locate it outside the permit boundaries -will DRMS <br />view this as a potential deficiency if the Division of Water Resources says an augmentation pond somewhere <br />is required because we are using water in the mining operation? If the augmentation pond must be included in <br />the permit <br />a. Do we need to submit a detailed design for the structure. This is required for DWR but it is not <br />clear we need it for DRMS permit? <br />b. We are assuming the water rights stipulations adequately address the augmentation monitoring <br />requirements to meet DRMS requirements <br />c. We are assuming discharges from the augmentation pond (which is regulated by CDPHE) will <br />alleviate DRMS monitoring requirements. <br />We do not have a permanent USFS access permit for access or for an emergency access road. Does this have to <br />be permitted if it used for temporary access by Wildcat or other folks? Access would be only conducted in <br />accordance with USFS stipulations. Currently Wildcat has an entrance easement for the private portion of the <br />road leading to the USFS road easement and the access road at the base of the USFS easement. How do we <br />handle this situation? Do we permit these "temporary secondary access" areas or are they exempted? Is the <br />County exempted? What about the Fort Lewis Mesa Fire District? <br />When we prepare the new response (incorporating previous adequacy responses) , we are assuming that we <br />must bold and underline what has been replaced from the September 30th, 2010 mine permit application? <br />What is the new submittal schedule? We assume it will be July 11th, or later if our client agrees to extend to <br />the September meeting. <br />In light of the progress we made, it is my understanding will you be issuing some sort of resolution <br />letter outlining our current understanding and agreement of key technical areas such as <br />- the number of observation wells, depths, and locations; <br />- permit required surface and groundwater sampling and well testing protocols; <br />-pre construction geotechnical field work plans and when they can be initiated; and <br />- that we are removing the exploration pads and roads from our application. <br />Once again, thank you for your assistance <br />George M.L. Robinson <br />R Squared, Inc. <br />5555 DTC Parkway, Suite A -4000 <br />Greenwood Village, CO 80111 <br />303.832.7664 <br />303. 832.7469 (f) <br />cell 720.641.2534 <br />The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended <br />only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any <br />4 <br />