Laserfiche WebLink
Jim Stark <br />-2- August 15, 2011 <br />8. The Applicant hired a consultant to review the T & E section of the permit and prepare <br />the appropriate report. The report should be available early next month. <br />9. The 45.2 acres of disturbed area shown on Table 4.3 -1 is correct. The 45.2 acres has <br />been reported on annual reclamation reports for years. <br />10. The Applicant is trying to sell the property and assign the DRMS permit to the new <br />owners. The Applicant is not is a position to commit to the reclamation of Pond A and <br />associated ditches at this time. <br />11. The DRMS' reclamation cost estimate is acceptable. <br />12. The new reclamation estimate is provided for incorporation into Exhibit 4.4 -1. <br />13. Enclosed is the bond instrument to be incorporated into Exhibit 2.11 -1. <br />14. The Applicant is trying to sell the property and assign the DRMS permit to the new <br />owners. The Applicant is not in a position to have the costly vegetation studies <br />performed for a phase III bond release. <br />15. Figure 4.7 -2 shows the area of the irrigated pasture. Irrigation for the 14.8 acre <br />irrigated pasture was to come from the Vulcan ditch. The Vulcan ditch has not been <br />operable for a number of years. It is estimated it will cost in the order of $500,000 to <br />repair the ditch. The Applicant does not believe additional irrigation is required since <br />page 4 -58i states "Restoration of the essential hydrologic function of the Alluvial Valley <br />Floor has been accomplished by restoring flood irrigation to the irrigated hayland <br />portion of the reclaimed area. Productivity of the hayland has been restored and is <br />documented in the vegetation study ". <br />16. The weed control plan on page 4 -60 was updated to provide a definitive schedule for <br />spaying in the spring and fall to control noxious weeds. <br />Sincerely, <br />J. Stover, P.E. <br />Consulting Engineer <br />Enclosures <br />