The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20100416.tiff Varra Companies, Inc. Office of Special Projects 1431 East 16i°Street Greeley,Colorado 80631 Telephone(970)353-8310 Fax(970)353-4047 Friday 19 February 2010 Weld County Clerk to the Board 91510`" Street,3rd Floor Greeley,Colorado 80632 efin6--ainniJ 4iZoo9- cie Subject: Varra Companies,Inc. - Heintzelman Project- Regular Impact(112) Permit Application. Additional materials submitted to the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety (CRMS): 1) Two maps attending correspondence of 18 February 2010 showing planned groundwater monitoring wells located on the Northern and Southern portions of the project location. 2) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 2 December 2009—financial warranty determinations - in two parts. 3) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 3 December 2009—adequacy review -04 4) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 23 December 2009—adequacy review - 05 5) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 5 January 2010— financial warranty determinations—final 6) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 10 February 2010—adequacy review— 06 7) CGRS correspondence of 14 December 2009 8) CGRS correspondence of 14 January 2010 9) CGRS correspondence of 27 January 2010 Your signature below acknowledges receipt of the above referenced material, as attached. The material should be added to the above referenced Application,as originally submitted to the Weld County Clerk to the Board, and made accessible for public review. Received On ✓:0 Zfa /r4( , 2010 By: Office of the Weld County Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners ). lei/0 (/t? . /i,40 Varra Companies, Inc. Heintzelman Project RMS 112 Permit Application 1 2 February 2009 2010-0416 Varra Companies, Inc. Office of Special Projects 8120 Gage Street Frederick, Colorado 80516 Telephone(970)353-8310 Fax(970)353-4047 Wednesday 18 February 2010 Michael A. Cunningham, EPS Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation (the Office) Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety 1313 Sherman Street, #215 Denver, Colorado 80203 Subject: M-2009-018 —Heintzelman Project: Reply to Adequacy Review -06. Dear Michael: We trust you will find the following comments consistent with our conference of Tuesday 17 February 2010 with respect to your Adequacy Review -06: 1. The operator concurs with the options detailed by the Office in part 1 of its Adequacy comments. 2. The operator prefers to perform all required groundwater monitoring on-site. To that end, existing on-site wells and additional groundwater monitoring wells shown in the attached maps—referencing the Northern and Southern portions of the Heintzelman Project - will be utilized. The new groundwater monitoring well locations were determined by CGRS. Their rationale is as follows: a. The groundwater monitoring wells referenced in the included maps will be permanent and not removed by the extraction operations (for clarity—the established groundwater monitoring well [41200MH] in the Northern portion of the project area will at some point be excavated—but may be utilized while in service). b. The groundwater monitoring wells designated in the included maps are located so that as mining progresses, data can be utilized to compare predicted draw-downs to measured draw-downs at both close and distal proximity. c. The variations in draw-down as excavation approaches the various well locations in time and space will be invaluable data for future draw-down predictions. d. The groundwater monitoring wells are located in a manner to assure the necessary access for the duration necessary. 3. The operator concurs with the options detailed by the Office in part 3 of its Adequacy comments. Consistent with our conversation of 17 February 2010, the Office is open to any other solution as may reasonably present itself as a remedy to the concerns attendant to this item, were it evidenced it meets the standards of the Office, or the Office of the State Engineer— Division of Water Resources, or both. 4. Proof of placement with the Clerk to the Board of Weld County for this correspondents and related documents detailed under attachments, is included with this submittal. Varra Companies, Inc. Office of Special Projects 8120 Gage Street Frederick, Colorado 80516 Telephone(970) 353-8310 Fax(970)353-4047 We trust the stated information is consistent with your understanding and that the application now meets the standards for approval. Naturally, if you need further clarification or information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Co?`/ Varra Companies, Inc. Bradford Janes Professional Forester blj forester(c6,msn.com attachments: 1) Two maps attending correspondence of 18 February 2010 showing planned groundwater monitoring wells located on the Northern and Southern portions of the project location. 2) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 2 December 2009—financial warranty determinations - in two parts. 3) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 3 December 2009—adequacy review - 04 4) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 23 December 2009—adequacy review - 05 5) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 5 January 2010—financial warranty determinations—final 6) e-Mail delivered correspondence and cover of 10 February 2010—adequacy review— 06 7) CGRS correspondence of 14 December 2009 8) CGRS correspondence of 14 January 2010 9) CGRS correspondence of 27 January 2010 cc. Christopher L. Varra, President Varra Companies, Inc. Joby Adams, Principal Hydro-geologist C.G.R.S. Fort Collins, CO BLJ/blj. f' I . ...b — .x .. ,. - L ' �� _ / lN �� L /�.. �i 8 j 4 N. E Well •l. . t. west .s f.r .s ' t,1.2840 WCR� 7 ___ x ••ssi•le •n. c•m•lete• t. �- / ' •e•r• k 2, z ( L IEX 11 l WLL CREATE BAON 1HAT DIRECT C PREO'ITATI0H INTERNALLY TOW '. THE BASN, W ILE UPLAND OVERLAND fL0 KILL BE 0 ROU :i. AROUND EXTRACTION A'�AS BY 'n EXIS G ROAD DRAINAGES.I"' AIM Cl DITOI S AND SEEPS O U 1 (❑❑❑ F. L V rrxl w-w pia ,, _,------- (IRKfLP Z Z OCE r r O it Cp z i---- : II i ' i _ z (///z ifirn."I_ ,c...-- ki, Monitoring Well completed in leazee "n center of ditch R 0—W to ,/--FZ' : (Ma7 EKIKsT LJ bedrock o jt - 7, ' W j Q N /- 1 I L i J i x / / = v lI " --_,/ i " -------Th /IWell .m•let •s W •/ -•St •9 ••99I•Ie O •e•r•ck B: SCALE: 1 INCH = 400 FEET I VARRA COMPANIES, INC. DATE: 17 February 2010 8120 GAGE STREET FREDERICK, COLORADO 80534 REVISION: TELEPHONE: (303) 666-6657 /a_ OP 1 PAGE: C 1 \__ j; 0 % C / /� ' �1& 2 & 1679$A ca X30 HEINTZELMAN / C [ins,, .7 / le )!ZELMAN 8 I / / ,, ceo • • k • / / _ � K / �i��•py� _ KE••-MCGEE AIL ANA GAS LINE i d a .--, >.. a -- — _ ,,,.+ .e FENCELME an �' a.b0`f\ 3131.1"suadu .f,by i..nv ua N 6i ;ia3 7 te'750 WCR 26 i' � �� w- S `. [81 • 5434a ca MAN -X` - - =SNIT so) SCALE: 1 INCH = 200 FEET VARRA COMPANIES, INC. DATE: 17 February 2010 8120 GAGE STREET , . . , FREDERICK. COLORADO 80534 REVISION: _ TELEPHONE: (303) 666-6657 - FI I I'.: PACE: 1 OF 1 Page I of I Bradford Janes From: "Cunningham, Michael" <Michael.Cunningham@state.co.us> To: "Bradford Janes" <bljforester@msn.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:30 PM Attach: Bond Calc.PDF Subject: Heintzelman Pit- Financial Warranty Calculation (Part 1) Brad, I have completed the Financial Warranty calculation for the Heintzelman Pit. The file attachment was too large to send in one email, so I have attached the first half in this message and the second half will follow in a second email. Please give me a call once you guys have a chance to review and discuss. "Thanks, Michael Cunningham Environmental Protection Specialist Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Department of Natural Resources ph: 303-866-3567 x8116 fax: 303-832-8106 michael.cunningham(n>,state.co.us 2/17/2010 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION,MINING AND SAFETY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St.,Room 215 Denver,Colorado 80203 C O L Ol o N OF Phone:(303)866-3567 RECLAMATION FAX:(303)832-8106 MINING SAFETY Bill Ritter,Jr. December 2, 2009 Governor Harris D.Sherman Garrett Varra Executive Director Varra Companies Ronald W.Cattany P Division Director 8120 Gage Street Natural Resource Trustee Frederick, CO 80516 RE: I-Ieintzelman Project (Pit 116); DRMS File No. M-2009-018; Financial Warranty Calculation Dear Mr. Varra, The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety has completed the Financial Warranty calculation (copy enclosed) for the above referenced permit. Please review the enclosed figures as soon as possible and contact our office if any calculation errors are noted. If you have any questions, please contact me at (303)866-3567 x8116. Sincerely, Michael A. Cunni ham Environmental Protection Specialist Enclosure CC: Tony Waldron, DRMS Brad Janes, Varra Companies (via e-mail) Office of Office of Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand Junction • Durango Active and Inactive Min CIRCES Cost Estimating Software COST SUMMARY FORM PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Date : 02-Dec-2009 Permit or job no. : M-2009-018 Site:Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) User: MAC Abbreviation : none State:Colorado Filename: M018-000 County:Weld Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Permit or job action :Bond Estimate TASK LIST(DIRECT COSTS) FORM FLEET TASK DIRECT NO. TASK DESCRIPTION USED SIZE HOURS COST 001 -Grading Pit Walls in Tract A dozer 2 144.08 $82,642 __ ------.._.._-----------------__ ------.._..._— 1 3,434.08 $24,107 002 -Dewateting Tract A _-- - pumping ...-_.._._---._,,434.0_ --------- ..----..—....--------_------- scraperl 003 -Replacing ri 2 20.12 $15,350 Topsoil p __-• 004 -Revegetation of Disturbed Areas revege 1 16.00 $15,319 005 -Equipment Mobilization/Demobilization mobilize 1 9.20 $7,619 __...___ .- 1 0.10 $20,528 006 -Replacement Pump — — pumping --.-—-- _-- --.....--- .7-- ----- SUBTOTALS: 3,623.58 $165,565 •includes inflation factor adjustment of: NA % TOTAL DIRECT COST•_ $165,565 .ni.M1ii.:i:i:t.::`•.�:.:::;!ii INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD AND PROFIT- Liability insurance: 2.02 %of direct total = $3,344 Performance bond : 1-05 _%of direct total= $1,738 Job superintendent: 332.40 hrs"...$/hr.- $52.10 total= $17,318 Profit: 10.00 %of direct total= $16,556 •net working hours comprising job — TOTAL 0&P= $38,957 LEGAL-ENGINEERING-PROJECT MANAGEMENT- CONTRACT AMOUNT(direct+O&P)_ $204,522 Financial warranty processing(legal/related costs) : 0.00 total$ NA total= $0 Engineering work and/or contract/bid preparation : NA NA NA total= NA Reclamation management and/or administration : 5.00 %of cntr. NA total = $10,226 CONTINGENCY- NA* NA total= ___ NA ........--.--....__....---_._.-_.�-_....--.--...---..—__ ...-.___-.— TOTAL INDIRECT COST= $49,184 contingencies accounted for at task level TOTAL BOND AMOUNT(direct+indirect)= $214,749 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software BULLDOZER WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 001 State :Colorado Permit/job# :M-2009-018 Date 09/17/2009 County Weld Abbreviation :none User : MAC Site :Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename:M018-001 Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Permit or other job action Bond Estimate Task description :Grading Pit Walls in Tract A HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Basic machine :Cat D10R- 10U(2005) Horsepower: 570 Blade type :Universal Attachment no. 1 :ROPS Cab _ Shift basis : 1 per day Attachment no. 2 :NA Data source : (CRG) Utilization % Cost Breakdown : Ownership cost/hour: $78.80 NA Operating cost/hour: $169.45 100 Ripper op. cost/hour: $0.00 NA Operator cost/hour . $38.54 NA Total unit cost/hour: $286.79 Total fleet cost/hour : $573.58 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Initial Swell Loose volume : 93.333 LCY factor : NA volume : 93,333 LCY Source of estimated volume :Preliminary Adequacy Review Resonse (Page 17) Source of estimated swell factor:NA HOURLY PRODUCTION Job Condition Correction Factors Source Operator skill : 0.75 (avg.) . ..___._._ Average push distance : 50 feet Material consistency 0.90 (Cat HB) Unadjusted hourly production • 3,057.9 LCY/hr Dozing method 1.00 (gen.) Visibility : 1.00 (avg.) Material consistency description : Job efficiency : 0.83 (lshift/day) Compacted fill or embankment Spoil pile 0.80 (fnd-rt) Push gradient 0.30 (Cat HB) Average push gradient : 30.00 % (pos) Altitude 1.00 (Cat HB) Average site altitude 4,830 feet Material weight 0_79 (Cat HB) Blade type : 1.00 (S/SU/U) Material weight : 2,900 lbs/LCY Net correction : 0.11 Weight description Decomposed rock-50%Rock, 50%Earth Adjusted unit production : 323.89 LCY/hr Adjusted fleet production : 647.78 LCY/hr JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size : 2 Dozer(s) Total job time : 144.08 Hours Unit cost : $0.885 /LCY Total job cost : $82,642 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software PUMPING WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task no. : 002 State :Colorado Permit/job no. :M-2009-018 Date : 11/25/2009 County Weld Abbreviation none User MAC Site :Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename :M018-002 Agency or organization name Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description :Dewatering Tract A HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Data Description Quantity Source Pump :Centrifugal pump-200M, 10 in. 1 (user) Suction hose :NA 0 NA Discharge hose :NA 0 NA Labor:NA 0 NA Cost Breakdown : Job Utilization : Ownership cost/hour: $0.00 NA Job shift basis : 3 per day Operating cost/hour: $7.02 100 % Horsepower: 70 Operator cost/hour: $0.00 NA Weight(UST) : 1.95 Total cost/hour: $7.02 Total fleet cost/hour: $7.02 PUMPING QUANTITIES Initial pond Conversion Final pond volume : 916,049,700.00 gallons factor: 1.0000 volume : 916,049,700 gallons Total pond inflow surface Unit inflow rate in Total pond inflow volume area : NA sq. ft. gph/sq. ft. : NA per hour: 0.00 gph Source of volume estimate :Exhibit L-Reclamation Costs PUMPING TIME Maximum pump capacity : 70 gph/pump Adjusted pumping capacity : -__ 300.000 gph Estimated suction head : 0 feet Initial unadjusted pumping time 3,053.50 hours Estimated discharge head 15 feet Inflow during initial pumping : 0 gallons Total head : 15 feet Net unadjusted pumping time : 3,053.50 hours CPB pump capacity : 300,000 gph/pump Altitude adjustment factor: 1.0309 (3%rule) Site altitude : 4,800 feet Pump efficiency factor : 1.0909 (55 min./hr.) Inflow as% of pond volume : NA % Total adjusted pumping time : 3,434.08 hours JOB TIME AND COST Total job time : 3434.08 hours Unit cost : $0.000026 per gallon Total job cost : $24,107 sheet 1 of 2 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software SCRAPER TEAM WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Task# : 003 State :Colorado Permit/job#:M-2009-018 Date 09/16/2009 County:Weld Abbreviation :none User: MAC Site :Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename :M018-003 Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description :Replacing Topsoil HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Shift basis : 1 per day Equipment Description Scraper work team-Scraper:Cat 637G -Push dozer:NA Support equipment-Load area :NA -Dump area :NA Road maintenance-Motor grader:NA -Water truck :Water Tanker, 2,500 Gal. Cost Breakdown : Scraper Work Team Support Equipment Road Maintenance Equipment Scraper Dozer Load area Dump area Grader Water truck Import data filename : scraper2 NA NA NA NA misctruk % Utilization-machine : 100 NA NA NA NA 50 -Ripper attachment: NA NA NA NA NA NA Ownerhip cost/hour: $95.86 NA NA NA NA $7.87 Operating cost/hour: $218.11 NA NA NA NA $11.03 Ripper op. cost/hour: NA NA NA NA NA NA Operator cost/hour $38.72 NA NA NA NA $38.70 Unit subtotals : $352.69 NA NA NA NA $57.59 Number of units 2 0 0 0 0 1 Group subtotals : Work : $705.38 Support: $0.00 Maintenance : $57.59 Total work team cost/hour: $76Z97 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Initial Swell Loose volume : 18,215 LCY factor : NA volume : 18,215 LCY Source of quantity take-off:Exhibit L-Reclamation Costs(Page 4) Source of estimated swell factor NA Page 1 of 1 Bradford Janes From: "Cunningham, Michael" <Michael.Cunningham@state.co.us> To: "Bradford Janes" <bljforester@msn.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:35 PM Attach: Bond Calc2.PDF Subject: Heintzelman Pit Financial Warranty Calculation (Part 2) I lere's the second half. Michael Cunningham Environmental Protection Specialist Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Department of Natural Resources ph: 303-866-3567 x81 16 fax: 303-832-8106 michael.cunninkham(astate.co.us 2/1 7/2010 HOURLY PRODUCTION sheet 2 of 2 Hauling Capacity : Scraper Payload(weight) Basis: Scraper Bowl(volume) Basis : Material weight: 1,600 pounds/LCY Struck volume : 24.00 LGY Material description : Heaped volume : 34.00 LCY Top Soil Average volume : 29.00 LCY Rated payload : 75,000 pounds Adjusted capacity: 29.00 LCY"* Payload capacity: 46.88 LCY ""hourly production reflects volume per scraper pair on push-pull models Job Condition Corrections : Site altitude(ft.) : 4,830 Scraper Push dozer Source Scraper loading time* : 1.80 minutes Altitude adj. : 1.000 NA (Cat HB) Maneuver and spread time : 0-60 minutes Job efficiency : 0-830 — NA (Cat HB) bad time per scraper pair on push-pull models Net correction : 0.830 I NA Travel time : Road condition description :Firm, smooth, rolling, dirt/!t. surfaced, watered, maintained Haul Route : Seg. # Haul distance(feet) Grade(%) Roll. res. (°/0) Total res. (%) Velocity(fpm) Travel time(min.)"" 1 600 0.00 3.00 3.00 2800 0.44 Haul time: 0.44 minutes Return route: 1 600 0.00 3.00 3.00 2949 0.35 travel time for each segment is adjusted for acceleration/deceleration. Return time : 0.35 minutes table velocities are max.attainable per total resistance shown,not average Total scraper team cycle time(load+ haul +maneuver and spread+return) : 3.19 minutes Unadjusted unit production/hour: 545.41 LCY/hour""" Adjusted for job conditions: 452.69 LCY/hour Optimal number of scrapers per push dozer: NA Selected number of scrapers: 2 scraper(s) Adjusted single scraper team (unit) hourly production : 905.38 LCY/hour Adjusted multiple scraper team (fleet) hourly production : 905.38 LCY/hour JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size : 1 Team(s) Total job time : 20.12 Hours Unit cost: $0.843 /LCY Total job cost: $15,350 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software REVEGETATION WORK sheet 1 of 2 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Agency/company name:Colorado Division O/Reclamation,Mining And Safety Task no. 004 State Colorado Permit/job no.:M-2009-018 Date 16-Sep-2009 County Weld Abbreviation:none User MAC Site name Heintzelman Pit(Project 116) Filename:M016-004 Permit or other job action Bond Estimate _ Task description:Revegetation of Disturbed Areas FERTILIZING DESCRIPTION(data source) UNITS/ACRE UNIT COST I UNIT COST/ACRE Materials -item no.1 :No fert16zer or amendments required -item no.2 item no.3:_ TOTAL FERTILIZER MATERIALS COST I ACRE: $0.00 Application -method no.l :No fertilizer appl/cat/on required method no.2 TOTAL FERTILIZER APPLICATION COST I ACRE: $0.00 TILLING method no 1 :Disc harrowing,6'deep(MEANS NCI) __. $11761 TOTAL TILLING COST I ACRE: $117.61 SEEDING RATE-PLS NATIVE OR WARM/COOL SEEDS COST Seed Mix COMMON NAME-VARIETY SCIENTIFIC NAME LBS/ACRE INTRODUCED SEASON PER SO.FT. PLS/ACRE GRASSES,RUSHES and SEDGES: *NOTE.Table values on drill seed basis.Totals are doubled if any seeding method other than drill seeding is used Switchgrass-Blackwell Panicum virgafum 0.90 Native Warm 8.0 $6.31 Sideoals Grama-Vaughn Bouteloua cumpendula 1 80 Native Warm 5 9 $18,73 Sheep Fescue-Cover Festuca ovine 0 40 Native Cool 6.2 $4.84 Indian Ricegrass-Native Oryzopsis hymenoldes 1 90 Native Cool 6 2 $52.72 Blue Grama-Covington Bouteloua graalrs 020 Native Warm 33 $3 64 Little Bluesfem-Pasture Schrzachydum scopadus 070 Native Warm 4.2 $13 73 Kentucky Bluegrass-Ginger Poa pratensis __ 0 05 Introduced Cool 2.5 $0 13 Tall Wheatgrass-Jose gropyron a/ongatum 1 10 Introduced Cool 2.0 $4 75 Smooth Brome-Manchar Bromus inermrs 0 10 Introduced Cool 0 3 $0 30 Alkali Sacaton Sporobolus airoldes 0.01 Native Warm 0.4 $0.09 Sand Dropseed Sporobolus cryptandrus ___ 001 Native Warm 12 $0.05 FORBS: sheet 2 of 2 Strawberry Clover(coated) Trifolium fragiferum 0.10 Introduced NA 0.7 $1.41 • SHRUBS AND TREES(seed): 'TOTAL SEEDS/SO.FT.: 40.8 'TOTAL POUNDS PLS I ACRE: 7.27 'TOTAL SEED MIX COST!ACRE: $106.71 Seed application -method Drill seeding{DMG survey data) TOTAL SEED APPLICATION COST!ACRE: $85.23 MULCHING and MISCELLANI*0U,* DESCRIPTION(data source) UNITS/ACRE UNIT COST!UNIT COST f ACRE— Materials -item no.1:WheatXWheafgrass 10.00 10 52.75 $27.50 -item no.2: -item no.3: -item no.4: _ __• TOTAL MULCH MATERIALS COST!ACRE: $27.50 Application -method no.1 :Power mutcher(MEANS 32 91 13.16 0700) 379.28 -method no.2 -method no.3: TOTAL MULCH APPLICATION COST!ACRE: $79.28 NURSERY STOCK PLANTING TYPE and SIZE MATERIAL PLANTING COST/FERT. TOTAL TOTAL COMMON NAME NO /ACRE (planting cost data source) COST/PLANT COST/PLANT PELLET COST/PLANT COST/ACRE No nursery stock required TOTAL NURSERY STOCK COST f ACRE: $0.00 JOB CAST No.of acres: 27.08 Cost/acre: $416.32 INITIAL JOB COST: $11,273.97 Estimated failure rate(percent): 50.00% Cost/acre*: $298.71 RESEEDING JOB COST: $4.044.55 •Selected replanting work items: S M TOTAL JOB COST: $15,319 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software EQUIPMENT MOBILIZATION / DEMOBILIZATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION sheet 1 of 2 Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Task# : 005 State :Colorado Permit/job# :M-2009-018 Date 11/25/2009 County:Weld Abbreviation none _ User: MAC Site :Heintze/man Project(Pit 116) Filename :M018-005 Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description :Equipment Mobilization/Demobilization EQUIPMENT TRANSPORT RIG COST Shift basis : 1 per day Cost data source : CRG Data Truck tractor description :Generic on-highway truck tractor, 6x4, diesel powered, 400 HP(2nd half, 2006) Truck trailer description :Generic folding gooseneck, drop deck equipment trailer(25T 50T and 100T) Available rig capacities: 0-25 Tons 26-50 Tons 51+Tons Cost Breakdown : Ownership cost/hour: $16.63 $18.37 $22.33 Operating cost/hour: $44.38 $46.13 $50.07 Operator cost/hour: $27.66 $27.66 $27.66 Helper cost/hour: $0.00 $25.39 $25.39 Total Unit Cost/hour: $88.67 $117.55 $125.45 NON-ROADABLE EQUIPMENT Machine Weight/unit Ownership Haul Rig Fleet Size Haul Trip Return Trip DOT permit Description (Tons) Cost/hr/unit Cost/hr/unit (No. units) Cost/hr/fleet Cost/hr/fleet Cost/fleet -Cat DI0R0R- f0U(200 05) 83.99 $76.61 $125.45 2 $404.12 $250.90 $0.00 -Cat 637G 57.38 $96.37 $125.45 2 $443.64 $250.90 $0.00 Subtotals : $847.75 $501.80 $0.00 ROADABLE EQUIPMENT sheet 2 of 2 Machine Total Fleet Size Haul Trip Return Trip Description Cost/hour/unit (No. units) Cost/hr/fleet Cost/hr/fleet -Water Tanker. 2.500 Gal. $45.35 1 $45.35 $45.35 _ .- - _. Subtotals: $45.35 $45.35 EQUIPMENT HAUL DISTANCE and TIME Nearest major city or town within project area region : _Longmont_ - Transportation Cycle Time : Non- Total one-way travel distance:_...___*t2:0 - miles Roadable Roadable Average travel speed : 40.0 mph Equipment Equipment Haul time(hours) = 0.30 0.30 Total non-roadable mob/demob cost*: $7,591.77 Return time (hours)= 0.30 0.30 'two round trips with haul rig Loading time(hours)__. -2:00_ NA Total roadable mob/demob cost** $27.21 Unloading time(hours)= 2.00 NA •.one round trip,no haul rig Subtotals= 4.60 0.60 JOB TIME AND COST Total job time : _9.20 hours Total job cost: $7,619 Page I of I Bradford Janes From: "Cunningham, Michael" <Michael.Cunningham@state.co.us> To: "Bradford Janes" <bljforester@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 3:08 PM Attach: Heintzelman-PAR-04.PDF Subject: Heintzelman Pit Brad, I am attaching some additional concerns that the Division has for the Heintzelman Pit. These issues along with the financial warranty calculation are all that remains to be addressed prior to approval. Regards, Michael Cunningham Environmental Protection Specialist Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Department of Natural Resources ph: 303-866-3567 x8116 fax: 303-232-8106 michael.cunningham(a?state.co.us 2/17/2010 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION,MINING AND SAFETY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St.,Room 215 Denver,Colorado 80203 D COLORADO I DIVISION Phone:(303)866-3567 RECLAMATION FAX:(303)832-8106 MINING SAFETY Rill Ritter,Jr. December 2, 2009 Governor Harris D.Sherman Brad Janes Executive Director Varra Companies, Inc. Ronald W.Cattany Division Director 8120 Gage St. Natural Resource Trustee Frederick, CO 80516 RE: l-leintzelman Project (Pit 116); DRMS File No. M-2009-018; Adequacy Review - 04 Dear Mr. Janes, The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division)has identified several other comments and questions that must be addressed prior to the Division's decision due date. Please be advised that if you are unable to satisfactorily address any concerns identified in this review before the decision date, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of the review period. If there are outstanding issues that have not been adequately addressed prior to the end of the review period, and no extension has been requested, the Division will deny this application. 6.4.7 Exhibit G — Water Information 1. The Applicant has indicated that the potential impacts to nearby wells from dewatering may be considerably delayed, and therefore, the collection of baseline data prior to dewatering is unnecessary. The Division does not concur with this assertion. The collection of baseline data not only serves to affirm the groundwater model prediction, but also protects the Applicant in the event the Division receives complaints of impacted wells from dewatering activities. The Division requires the Applicant to collect five (5) quarters of baseline data elevations, on a monthly basis, from the proposed monitoring locations prior to dewatering the pits. 2. The Applicant has stated that if dewatering results in drawdown to the point adjacent wells cannot lift, then mitigation will occur. Rule 3.1.6(1) states that disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance of the affected land and of the surrounding area and to the quantity or quality of water in surface or groundwater systems both during and after the mining operation and during reclamation shall be minimized. Waiting until a well cannot lift to implement mitigation measures does not minimize impacts to the hydrologic balance. The trigger points should be established at a point where mitigation may take place before such a situation occurs. Office of Office of Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand Junction • Durango Active and Inactive Min, The Applicant's Dewatering Analysis indicated the water table will be depressed by approximately six feet, with seasonal groundwater fluctuations between one and three feet. Typically the trigger point is based off of three consecutive months of variation from baseline data. Please commit to notifying the Division within 48 hours in the event the monitoring wells show three consecutive months of deviation of thirty six inches or more from the baseline elevations. At such time, the Operator in consultation with the Division can further evaluate the data and determine if mitigation will be required. As previously mentioned, if you are unable to provide satisfactory responses to any inadequacies prior to January 5, 2010, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of time to allow for continued review of this application. If there are still unresolved issues when the decision date arrives and no extension has been requested, the application will be denied. If you have any questions, please contact me at(303)866-3567 x8116. Sincerely, Michael A. Cun ngham Environmental Protection Specialist Page I of I Bradford Janes From: "Cunningham, Michael" <Michael.Cunningham@state.co.us> To: "Bradford Janes" <bljforester@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 3:08 PM Attach: Heintzelman-PAR-04.PDF Subject: Heintzelman Pit Brad, I am attaching some additional concerns that the Division has for the Heintzelman Pit. These issues along with the financial warranty calculation arc all that remains to be addressed prior to approval. Regards, Michael Cunningham Environmental Protection Specialist Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Department of Natural Resources ph: 303-866-3567 x8116 fax: 303-832-8106 michacl.cunningham(atstate.co.us 2/17/2010 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St.,Room 215 nO Denver,Colorado 80203 Phone:(303)866-3567 FAX:(303)832-8106 Bill Ritter,Ir. December 2, 2009 Governor Harris D.Sherman Brad Janes Executive Director Varra Companies, Inc. Ronald W.Calmly Division Director 8120 Gage St. Natural Resource Trustee Frederick, CO 80516 RE: lieintzelman Project (Pit 116); DRMS File No. M-2009-018; Adequacy Review - 04 Dear Mr. Janes, The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division) has identified several other comments and questions that must be addressed prior to the Division's decision due date. Please be advised that if you are unable to satisfactorily address any concerns identified in this review before the decision date, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of the review period. If there are outstanding issues that have not been adequately addressed prior to the end of the review period, and no extension has been requested, the Division will deny this application. 6.4.7 Exhibit G—Water Information 1. The Applicant has indicated that the potential impacts to nearby wells from dewatering may be considerably delayed, and therefore, the collection of baseline data prior to dewatering is unnecessary. The Division does not concur with this assertion. The collection of baseline data not only serves to affirm the groundwater model prediction, but also protects the Applicant in the event the Division receives complaints of impacted wells from dewatering activities. The Division requires the Applicant to collect five (5) quarters of baseline data elevations, on a monthly basis, from the proposed monitoring locations prior to dewatering the pits. 2. The Applicant has stated that if dewatering results in drawdown to the point adjacent wells cannot lift, then mitigation will occur. Rule 3.1.6(1) states that disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance of the affected land and of the surrounding area and to the quantity or quality of water in surface or groundwater systems both during and after the mining operation and during reclamation shall be minimized. Waiting until a well cannot lift to implement mitigation measures does not minimize impacts to the hydrologic balance. The trigger points should be established at a point where mitigation may take place before such a situation occurs. Office of Office of Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand Junction • Durango Active and Inactive Min The Applicant's Dewatering Analysis indicated the water table will be depressed by approximately six feet, with seasonal groundwater fluctuations between one and three feet. Typically the trigger point is based off of three consecutive months of variation from baseline data. Please commit to notifying the Division within 48 hours in the event the monitoring wells show three consecutive months of deviation of thirty six inches or more from the baseline elevations. At such time, the Operator in consultation with the Division can further evaluate the data and determine if mitigation will be required. As previously mentioned, if you are unable to provide satisfactory responses to any inadequacies prior to January 5, 2010, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of time to allow for continued review of this application. If there are still unresolved issues when the decision date arrives and no extension has been requested, the application will be denied. If you have any questions, please contact me at(303)866-3567 x8116. Sincerely, Michael A. Cun ngham Environmental Protection Specialist Page I of I Bradford Janes From: "Cunningham, Michael" <Michael.Cunningham@state.co.us> To: <joby@cgrs.com> Cc: "Bradford Janes" <bljforester@msn.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 11:24 AM Attach: Heintzelman-PAR5.PDF Subject: Heintzelman -Adequacy Review#5 I lello,lohy, I have a few follow up comments to your response dated December 14, 2009. I will be out of the office until January 4, 2009. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Regards, Michael Cunningham Environmental Protection Specialist Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Department of Natural Resources ph: 303-566-3567 0116 fax: 303-832-5106 michael.cunningham(a?state.co.us 2/17/2010 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION,MINING AND SAFETY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St.,Room 215 Denver,Colorado 80203 C O L O R A D O DIVISION OF Phone: (303)866-3567 RECLAMATION FAX:(303)832-8106 MINING SAFETY Bill Ritter,Jr. December 23, 2009 Governor Harris D.Sherman Joby I.. Adams, P.G. Executive Director CGRS Environmental Services Ronald W.Cattany Division Director P.O. Box 1489 Natural Resource Trustee Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: Heintzelman Project (Pit 116); DRMS File No. M-2009-018; Adequacy Review - 05 Dear Mr. Adams, The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division) has identified several other comments and questions that must be addressed prior to the Division's decision due date. Please be advised that if you are unable to satisfactorily address any concerns identified in this review before the decision date, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of the review period. If there arc outstanding issues that have not been adequately addressed prior to the end of the review period, and no extension has been requested, the Division will deny this application. 6.4.7 Exhibit G —Water Information 1. In CGRS's response to the Division's Adequacy Review—04, it is stated that groundwater investigations have been conducted within the mine area since 2000. In order for the Division to waive the requirement for gathering 5 quarters of baseline data, the Applicant will need to submit all of the data which they are using to characterize the local groundwater hydrology. Upon submittal of such data, the Division will conduct an internal review to determine if the gathering of baseline data may be waived. 2. The Applicant has indicated that values for the Haley well will be updated as determined by actual field measurements. Please submit any additional data that has been gathered for the Haley well including: well depth, water level from surface, well construction specifications, depth of pump, etc. 3. The Applicant has proposed comparing field data to model predictions to determine if mitigation will be required. As a regulatory agency, the Division must have predetermined trigger points in place. If a trigger point is reached during dcwatering operations, the Division and the Operator can review the field data along with other influences to determine if mitigation is required. The trigger points may be adjusted in the future as field data are collected and compared to the model predictions. Office of Office of Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand Junction • Durango Active and Inactive Mir As previously mentioned, if you are unable to provide satisfactory responses to any inadequacies prior to January 5, 2010, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of time to allow for continued review of this application. If there are still unresolved issues when the decision date arrives and no extension has been requested, the application will be denied. I f you have any questions, please contact me at (303)866-3567 x8116. Sincere] Michael A. CunCun Ingham Environmental Protection Specialist CC: Brad Janes, Varra Companies Page 1 of 1 Bradford Janes From: "Cunningham, Michael" <Michael.Cunningham@state.co.us> To: <gcvarravci@aol.com> Cc: "Bradford Janes" <bljforester@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 1:40 PM Attach: Heintzelman-FW.PDF Subject: Heintzelman Financial Warranty Garrett, I have revised the financial warranty calculation for the I-leintzelman Pit. Please review and let me know if you have any questions. Michael Cunningham Environmental Protection Specialist Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Department of Natural Resources ph: 303-866-3567 x81 16 fax: 303-832-8106 michael.cunningham(ntstate.co.us 2/17/2010 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION,MINING AND SAFETY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St.,Room 215 COLORADO Denver,Colorado 80203 D t VISION OF Phone:(303)866-3567 RECLAMATION FAX:(303)832-8106 MINING —&— SAFETY Bill Ritter,Jr. January 5, 2010 Governor Garrett Varra Harris D.Sherman 8120 Gage Street Executive Director Frederick, CO 80516 Ronald W.Cattany Division Director Natural Resource Trustee RE: Heintzelman Project (Pit 116); DRMS File No. M-2009-018; Financial Warranty Calculation Dear Mr. Varra, At the request of Brad Janes, the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division) has revised the Financial Warranty calculation (copy enclosed) for the above referenced permit. The Division was able to reduce the costs for grading the pit walls in Tract A by changing the type of equipment used for grading. In addition, the cost for revegetation was reduced by eliminating mulching from the estimate. The cost for revegatation could be further reduced by changing the seed mix. However, the proposed seed mix is ideal and will ensure the greatest chance of successfully revegetating the site. It is unlikely the other costs associated with reclamation can he reduced without changing the Reclamation Plan. Please review the enclosed figures as soon as possible and contact our office if any calculation errors are noted. If you have any questions, please contact me at (303) 866-3567 x8116. Sincerely, Michael A. Cunningham Environmental Protection Specialist Enclosure CC: Brad Janes, Varra Companies (via e-mail) Office of Office of Denver • Grand function • Durango Active and Inactive Mi CIRCES Cost Estimating Software COST SUMMARY FORM PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Date : 05-Jan-2010 Permit or job no. : M-2009-018 Site :Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) User: MAC Abbreviation : none State :Colorado Filename : M018-000 _ County :Weld Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Permit or job action :Bond Estimate TASK LIST(DIRECT COSTS] FORM FLEET TASK DIRECT NO. TASK DESCRIPTION USED SIZE HOURS COST 001 -Grading Pit Walls in Tract A dozer 2 198.2 $78,602 002 -Dewatering Tract A pumping 1 3,434.0 $24,107 003 -Replacing Topsoil scraperl 2 20.1 $15,350 004 -Revegetation of Disturbed Areas revege 1 16.0 $11,134 005 -Equipment Mobilization/Demobilization mobilize 1 9.2 $7,619 006 -Replacement Pump pumping 1 0.1 $20,528 �- SUBTOTALS: 3,677.7 $157,340 'includes inflation factor adjustment of: NA % TOTAL DIRECT COST' $157,340 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD AND PROFIT- Liability insurance : 2.02 %of direct total = $3,178 Performance bond 1.05 %of direct total= $1,652 Job superintendent : 386.50 hrs`...$/hr. $52.10 total = $20,137 Profit : 10.00 %of direct total= $15,734 net working hours comprising job TOTAL 0&P= $40,701 LEGAL-ENGINEERING•PROJECT MANAGEMENT- CONTRACT AMOUNT(direct+0&P)_ _-$198,041 Financial warranty processing (legal/related costs) : 0.00 total$ NA total = $0 Engineering work and/or contract/bid preparation : NA NA NA total= NA Reclamation management and/or administration : 5,00 %of cntr NA total = $9,902 CONTINGENCY NA* NA total = NA 'contingencies accounted for at task level TOTAL INDIRECT COST= $50,603 TOTAL BOND AMOUNT(direct+ indirect)= $207,943 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software BULLDOZER WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 001 State :Colorado Permit/job# :M-2009-018 Date : 01/05/2010 County :Weld Abbreviation .none User : MAC Site :Heintzelmann Project(Pit 111 Filename :M018-001 Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description :Grading Pit Walls in Tract A HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Basic machine :Cat D9R-9U(2005) Horsepower: 405 Blade type :Universar Attachment no. 1 :ROPS Cab Shift basis : 1 per day Attachment no. 2 :NA Data source : (CRG) Utilization % Cost Breakdown : Ownership cost/hour: $58.16 NA Operating cost/hour: $101.59 100 Ripper op.cost/hour : $0.00 NA Operator cost/hour : $38.54 NA Total unit cost/hour: $198.29 Total fleet cost/hour: $396.57 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Initial ewe!! Loose volume : 93,333 LCY factor: NA volume : 93,333 LCY Source of estimated volume :Preliminary Adequacy Review Response(Page 17) Source of estimated swell factor:NA HOURLY PRODUCTION Job Condition Correction Factors Source Operator skill : 0.75 (avg.) Average push distance : 50 feet Material consistency: 0.90 (Cat HB) Unadjusted hourly production : 2,222.9 LCY/hr Dozing method : 1.00 (gen.) Visibility : 1.00 (avg.) Material consistency description : Job efficiency 0.83 (1shift/day) Compacted fill or embankment Spoil pile : 0.80 (fnd-rf) Push gradient : 0.30 (Cat HB) Average push gradient : 30.00 % (pos) Altitude : 1.00 (Cat HB) Average site altitude : 4,830 feet Material weight: 0.79 (Cat HB) Blade type : 1.00 (S/SU/U) Material weight: 2,900 lbs/LCY Net correction : 0.11 Weight description : Decomposed rock-50%Rock, 50%Earth Adjusted unit production : 235.45 LCY/hr Adjusted fleet production : 470.90 LCY/hr JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size : 2 Dozer(s) Total job time : 198.20 Hours Unit cost: $0.842 /LCY Total job cost: $78,602 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software PUMPING WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task no. : 002 State :Colorado Permit/job no. :M-2009-018 Date : 11/25/2009 County.Weld Abbreviation :none User MAC Site :Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename:MO18-002 Agency or organization name Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description :Dewatering Tract A HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Data Description Quantity Source Pump :Centrifugal pump-200M, 10 in. 1 (user) Suction hose :NA 0 NA Discharge hose :NA 0 NA Labor:NA 0 NA Cost Breakdown : Job Utilization : Ownership cost/hour: $0.00 NA Job shift basis: 3 per day Operating cost/hour: $7.02 100 % Horsepower: 70 Operator cost/hour: $0.00 NA Weight(UST) : 1.95 Total cost/hour : $7.02 , Total fleet cost/hour: $7.02 PUMPING QUANTITIES Initial pond Conversion Final pond volume : 916,049,700.00 gallons factor: 1.0000 volume : 916,049,700 gallons Total pond inflow surface Unit inflow rate in Total pond inflow volume area : NA sq.ft. gph/sq.ft. : NA per hour: 0.00 gph Source of volume estimate :Exhibit L-Reclamation Costs ............... ..............•PUMPING TIME Maximum pump capacity: 70 gph/pump Adjusted pumping capacity: 300,000 gph Estimated suction head : 0 feet Initial unadjusted pumping time 3,053.50 hours Estimated discharge head : 15 feet Inflow during initial pumping : 0 gallons Total head : 15 feet Net unadjusted pumping time : 3,053.50 hours CPB pump capacity 300,000 gph/pump Altitude adjustment factor: 1.0309 (3%rule) Site altitude : 4,800 feet Pump efficiency factor 1.0909 (55 min./hr.) Inflow as%of pond volume : NA % Total adjusted pumping time : 3,434.08 hours JOB TIME AND COST Total job time : 3434.08 hours Unit cost: $0.000026 per gallon Total job cost : $24,107 ......................................... ...: sheet 1 of 2 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software SCRAPER TEAM WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Task# : 003 State :Colorado PermiUjob#:M-2009-018 Date : 09/16/2009 County :Weld Abbreviation :none User: MAC Site :Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename :M018-003 Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description :Replacing Topsoil HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Shift basis : 1 per day Equipment Description Scraper work team-Scraper:Cat 637G -Push dozer:NA Support equipment-Load area :NA -Dump area :NA Road maintenance-Motor grader:NA -Water truck :Water Tanker, 2,500 Gal. - Cost Breakdown : Scraper Work Team Support Equipment I Road Maintenance Equipment Scraper Dozer Load area Dump area Grader Water truck Import data filename: scraper2 NA NA NA NA misctruk % Utilization-machine : 100 NA NA NA NA 50 -Ripper attachment: NA NA NA NA NA NA Ownerhip cost/hour: $95.86 NA NA NA NA $7.87 Operating cost/hour $218.11 NA NA NA NA $11.03 Ripper op. cost/hour: NA NA NA NA NA NA Operator cost/hour: $38.72 NA NA NA NA $38.70 Unit subtotals : $352.69 NA NA NA NA $57.59 Number of units : 2 0 0 0 0 1 Group subtotals: Work : $705.38 Support: $0.00 Maintenance : $57.59 Total work team cost/hour: $762.97 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Initial Swell Loose volume : 18,215 LCY factor: NA volume : 18,215 LCY Source of quantity take-off:Exhibit L-Reclamation Costs(Page 4) Source of estimated swell factor:NA HOURLY PRODUCTION sheet 2 of 2 Hauling Capacity: Scraper Payload (weight) Basis : Scraper Bowl (volume) Basis: Material weight : 1,600 pounds/LCY Struck volume : 24.00 LCY Material description : Heaped volume : 34.00 LCY Top Soil Average volume: 29.00 LCY Rated payload : 75,000 pounds Adjusted capacity : 29.00 LCY*** Payload capacity : 46.88 LCY "'hourly production reflects volume per scraper pair on push-pull models Cycle Time : Job Condition Corrections : Site altitude(ft.) : 4,830 Scraper Push dozer Source Scraper loading time" : 1.80 minutes Altitude adj. : 1.000 NA (Cat HB) Maneuver and spread time : 0.60 minutes Job efficiency : 0.830 NA (Cat FIB) 'load time per scraper pair on push-pull models I Net correction 0.830 I NA Travel time : Road condition description :Firm, smooth, rolling, dirt/It. surfaced, watered, maintained Haul Route : Seg. # Haul distance(feet) Grade(%) Roll. res. (%) Total res. (%) Velocity(fpm) Travel time(min.)** 1 600 0.00 3.00 3.00 2800 0.44 I L Haul time : 0.44 minutes Return route : 1 600 0.00 3.00 3.00 2949 0.35 4.travel time for each segment is adjusted for acceleration/deceleration. Return time : 0.35 minutes table velocities are max.attainable per total resistance shown,not average Total scraper team cycle time(load + haul +maneuver and spread +return) : 3.19 minutes Unadjusted unit production/hour: 545.41 LCY/hour*** Adjusted for job conditions : 452.69 LCY/hour Optimal number of scrapers per push dozer: NA Selected number of scrapers : 2 scraper(s) Adjusted single scraper team (unit) hourly production : 905.38 LCY/hour Adjusted multiple scraper team (fleet) hourly production : 905.38 LCY/hour JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size : 1 Team(s) Total job time : 20.12 Hours Unit cost : 50.843 /LCY Total job cost : $15,350 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software REVEGETATION WORK sheet 1 of PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Agency/company name:Colorado Division Of Reclamation Mining And Safety _ Task no.: 004 State Colorado Permit/job no. M-2009-018 Date: 05-Jan-2010 County:Weld Abbreviation:none User MAC Site name:Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename M018-004 Permit or other job action:Bond Estimate _ _ Task description:Revegetation of Disturbed Areas FERTILIZING DESCRIPTION(data source) UNITS/ACRE UNIT COST/UNIT COST/ACRE Materials -item no.1 :No fertilizer or amendments required -item no.2 TOTAL FERTILIZER MATERIALS COST/ACRE: $0.00 Application -method no. 1 :No fertilizer application required _ -method no.2 TOTAL FERTILIZER APPLICATION COST/ACRE: $0.00 TILLING method no 1 :Chisel plowing(DMG survey data) $8201 -method no.2 TOTAL TILLING COST/ACRE: $82.01 SEEDING RATE-PLS NATIVE OR WARM/COOL SEEDS COST Seed Mix COMMON NAME-VARIETY SCIENTIFIC NAME LBS/ACRE INTRODUCED SEASON PER SO.FT. PLS/ACRE GRASSES,RUSHES and SEDGES: *NOTE Table values on drill seed basis.Totals are doubled if any seeding method other than drill seeding is used. Swifchgrass-Blackwell Panicum virgafum 0.90 Native Warm 8.0 $6.31 Sldeoats Grams-Vaughn Bouteloua cudi ndula 1.80 Native Warm 59 $18.73 Sheep Fescue-Covar Festuca ovina 0 4o Native Cool 62 $4.84 Indian Ricegress-Native Oryzopsis hymenoltles 1.90 Native Cool 6.2 $52 72 Blue Grams-Covington Bouteloua gracilis 0.20 Native Warm 3.3 $3 64 Little Bluesfem-Pastum Schizachyrium scopedus 0 70 Native Warm 4.2 $13.73 Kentucky Bluegrass-Ginger Poa pratensrs 0.05 Introduced Cool 2.5 $0.13 Tall Wheatgrass-Jose Agropyron elongafum 1.10 Introduced Cool 2.0 $4 75 Smooth Brome-Manchar Bromus inemlls _ 0 10 Introduced Cool 0.3 $0.30 Alkali Sacaton Sporobolus evordes 0 01 Native Warm 0.4 $0.09 Sand Dropseed Sporobolus crypfantlms 0 01 Native Warm 12 $0.05 WheetxWheatgrass Regreen 1000 i na 0.0 $27.50 FORBS. sheet 2 0l: Strawberry Clover(coated) Trilolium Iragiferum 010 Introduced NA 0.7 $241 SHRUBS AND TREES(seed) 'TOTAL SEEDS/50.FT.: 40.8 'TOTAL POUNDS PLS/ACRE: 1727 'TOTAL SEED MI%COST/ACRE: $134.11 Seed application -method:Drill seeding(DMG survey data) TOTAL SEED APPLICATION COST I ACRE $85.73 MULCHING and MISCELLANEOUS DESCRIPTION(data source) UNITS/ACRE UNIT COST/UNIT COST/ACRE Materials -item no.1 :No mulch materials required -item no.2 -item no.3 -item no.4 TOTAL MULCH MATERIALS COST/ACRE: $0.00 ASQcation -method no.1 :No mulch application required _ -method no.2 -method no.3 TOTAL MULCH APPLICATION COST/ACRE: $0.00 NURSERY STOCK PLANTING TYPE and SIZE MATERIAL PLANTING COST/FERT. TOTAL TOTAL COMMON NAME NO./ACRE (planting cost data source) COST/PLANT COST/PLANT PELLET COST/PLANT COST/ACRE No nursery stock required _ -'-' — TOTAL NURSERY STOCK COST/ACRE: $0.00 JOB COST No of acres 27.08 Cost/acre $301.44 INITIAL JOB COST: $8,162.96 Estimated failure rate(percent): 50.00% Cost/acre': $219.43 RESEEDING JOB COST: $2,971.11 Selected replanting work items. S TOTAL JOB COST $11,134 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software EQUIPMENT MOBILIZATION / DEMOBILIZATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION sheet 1 of 2 Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Task#: 005 State :Colorado Permit/job#:M-2009-018 Date: 11/25/2009 County:Weld Abbreviation :none User: MAC Site :Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename :M018-005 Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description :Equipment Mobilization/Demobilization EQUIPMENT TRANSPORT RIG COST Shift basis : 1 per day Cost data source : CRG Data Truck tractor description :Generic on-highway truck tractor, 6x4, diesel powered, 400 HP(2nd half, 2006) Truck trailer description :Generic folding gooseneck, drop deck equipment trailer(25T, 50T, and 100T) --- --- ------ Available rig capacities: 0-25 Tons 26-50 Tons 51+Tons Cost Breakdown : Ownership cost/hour: $16.63 $18.37 $22.33 Operating cost/hour: $44.38 $46.13 $50.07 Operator cost/hour: $27.66 $27.66 $27.66 Helper cost/hour: $0.00 $25.39 $25.39 Total Unit Cost/hour: $88.67 $117.55 $125.45 NON-ROADABLE EQUIPMENT Machine Weight/unit Ownership Haul Rig Fleet Size Haul Trip Return Trip DOT permit Description (Tons) Cost/hr/unit Cost/hr/unit (No. units) Cost/hr/fleet Cost/hr/fleet Cost/fleet -Cat D 10R- 10U(2005) 83.99 $7661 $125.45 2 $404.12 $250.90 $0.00 -Cat 637G 57.38 $96.37 $125.45 2 $443.64 $250.90 $0.00 _ Subtotals : $847.75 $501.80 $0.00 ROADABLE EQUIPMENT sheet 2 of 2 Machine Total Fleet Size Haul Trip Return Trip Description Cost/hour/unit (No. units) Cost/hr/fleet Cost/hr/fleet -Water Tanker, 2,500 Gal. $4535 1 $45.35 $45.35 Subtotals : $45.35 $45.35 EQUIPMENT HAUL DISTANCE and TIME Nearest major city or town within project area region : Longmont Transportation Cycle Time : Non- Total one-way travel distance : 12.0 miles Roadable Roadable Average travel speed : 40.0 mph Equipment Equipment Haul time (hours)= 0.30 0.30 Total non-roadable mob/demob cost* : $7,591.77 Return time(hours)= 0.30 0.30 *two round trips with haul rig Loading time (hours)= 2.00 NA Total roadable mob/demob cost** : $27.21 Unloading time (hours) = 2.00 NA **one round trip,no haul rig Subtotals= 4.60 0.60 JOB TIME AND COST Total job time : 9.20 _ hours Total job cost : $7,619 Page 1 of 1 Bradford Janes From: "Cunningham, Michael" <Michael.Cunningham@state.co.us> To: "Bradford Janes" <bljforester@msn.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:09 PM Attach: Heintzelman PAR-06.PDF Subject: RE: status update? f. Brad Janes Brad, I have attached Adequacy Review-06 for the Heintzelman Pit, sorry for the delay. Michael From: Bradford Janes [mailto:bljforester@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1:45 PM To: Cunningham, Michael Cc: GCVARRAVCI; Dorothy Podel Subject: status update? f. Brad Janes Good Afternoon Michael. Haven't seen anything yet from your office regarding your final Heintzelman comments since our telephone conversations early last week - so I thought I should enquire to assure all is well. Please update me when you are able. Thanks and regards. Brad Varra Companies, Inc. Bradford Janes professional forester bljforester@msn.com desk: 970-353-8310 2/17/2010 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION,MINING AND SAFETY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St.,Room 215 Denver,Colorado 80203 C O L O R A D O DIVISION OF Phone:(303)866-3567 RECLAMATION FAR:(303)832-8106 MINING —&— SAFETY BIII Ritter,Jr. February 4, 2010 Governor James B.Martin Brad Janes Executive Director Varra Companies, Inc. 8120 Gage St. Frederick, CO 80516 RE: Heintzelman Project(Pit 116); DRMS File No. M-2009-018; Adequacy Review- 06 Dear Mr. Janes, The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division)has identified several other comments and questions that must be addressed prior to the Division's decision due date. Please be advised that if you are unable to satisfactorily address any concerns identified in this review before the decision date, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of the review period. If there are outstanding issues that have not been adequately addressed prior to the end of the review period,and no extension has been requested, the Division will deny this application. 6.4.7 Exhibit G—Water Information 1. The Division has received the water level data from the Varra Del Camino site, submitted by CGRS on January 27, 2010. The information provided to the Division did not contain enough data to properly characterize the local groundwater hydrology. Therefore, the Division cannot approve the Applicant's proposed trigger point. The Division has identified the following options in regard to satisfying this adequacy issue: a. Commit to not exposing groundwater until five quarters of baseline elevations from the proposed monitoring wells have been collected,to be measured on a monthly basis. The collected data shall be submitted to the Division as a Technical Revision, at which time the Division will review the data and establish dewatering trigger points. b. In lieu of collecting five quarters of baseline data,the Applicant may provide the Division with historic groundwater data, through a Technical Revision,which adequately characterizes the local hydrology. The Division would review the data and establish appropriate dewatering trigger points. c. The Applicant may also choose to obtain agreements between Varra Companies and well owners within the defined cone of depression, stating Varra Companies is to provide a form of compensation to the well owners in the event their wells are Office of Office of Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand junction • Durango Active and Inactive Mines impacted by dcwatering activities. The Division is primarily concerned with impacts to the Haley well; however, until the Applicant submits additional data for the remaining wells within the cone of depression, the Division would require agreements with all well owners in order to waive the requirement of collecting baseline elevations. The Applicant must submit the elevation of the well pumps and the screening intervals, in order for the Division to assess impacts to the wells. 2. The Applicant has stated groundwater levels will be measured in two monitoring wells owned by Varra Companies, Inc.,as well as in the Haley well and the two closest domestic wells. Please specify which two domestic wells will be used for groundwater monitoring and confirm that Varra Companies, Inc. has been granted access to the wells. The Division recommends drilling additional monitoring wells within the permit area. Monitoring wells are preferable to domestic wells in that they are easier to sample and access if they are located in the permit area. If possible monitoring wells should be located near the permit boundary and positioned between the pit and potentially impacted wells. If additional monitoring wells will be drilled, please specify the number of wells to be drilled and their location. 3. The Applicant has indicated that instead of obtaining a court approved augmentation plan prior to exposing groundwater, they would rather dedicate water rights to the Office of the State Engineer to account for the bonding liability of exposed groundwater. The Applicant may avoid any financial warranty implications associated with exposed groundwater by committing to one of the following options: a. Obtain a court approved augmentation plan prior to exposing groundwater. b. Obtain approval from the Division of Water Resources that acknowledges permanent compliance with SEO's requirements regarding exposed groundwater. Obtaining approval from the Division of Water Resources may require dedicating water rights to the eventual augmentation plan or providing proof that a final augmentation plan has been initiated by submittal of a court filing in the appropriate district water court. As previously mentioned, if you are unable to provide satisfactory responses to any inadequacies prior to March 5, 2010, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of time to allow for continued review of this application. If there are still unresolved issues when the decision date arrives and no extension has been requested, the application will be denied. If you have any questions, please contact me at(303)866-3567 x8116. Sincerely, /VVv Michael A. C ningham Environmental Protection Specialist CGENVIRONMENTAL I.RMU©M S December 14, 2009 Mr. Michael Cunningham Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety 1313 Sherman St., Room 215 Denver, Colorado 80203 RE: Varra Heintzelman Project Response to Division Letter DRMS File No. M-2009-018 CGRS No. 1-135-10807ab 5-1 080 7ab Dear Mr. Cunningham: This letter addresses your comments presented in our letter of December 2, 2009, to Mr. Brad Janes regarding dewatering operations at the proposed mine site referenced above. Item 1 - We concur that baseline data should be obtained prior to commencing dewatering activities to verify the dewatering analysis. Varra Companies has collected 3 months of data from wells adjacent to the proposed mining operations. Our firm has conducted groundwater investigation within the mine area since 2000 and is familiar with local groundwater hydrology. However, once dewatering commences it will be difficult to determine the effects of seasonal fluctuations compared to the induced drawdown. We recommend collecting monthly data from this point forward which will provide an adequate baseline for determining the influence of dewatering operations. As such we propose that the 5 quarters of water level data be waived in lieu of monthly data. Item 2 - It was the intent of our previous responses to emphasis that our numerical predictions will be the basis of mitigation if needed. As dewatering occurs and data are collected they will be compared to model predictions and decisions made from data comparisons. Transient model simulations will compare predicted drawdown to measured at early times in the mine life -these data will be used as a calibration tool if required. We then recommend that the model predictions be used to determine if mitigation will be required-this can be accomplished many months in advance of the steady state drawdown which will have the most influence on local groundwater hydrology. Other influences such as overuse of domestic should be taken into account when assessing mine dewatering operations. Varra Companies also intends to monitor the influence of drawdown on adjacent wells regardless of numerical predictions. Obviously this information will be shared with the well owners and the Division. P.O. Box 1489 Fort Collins, CO 80522 T 800-288-2657 F 970-493-7986 www.cgrs.com Mr.Michael Cunningham DRMS File M-2009-018 Page 2 of 2 If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 970-493- 7780. Sincerely. CGRS, Inc. Joby L. Adams, P.G. Principal/Hydrogeologist CGr ENVIRONMENTAL M MU©E% S January 14, 2010 Mr. Michael Cunningham Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety 1313 Sherman St., Room 215 Denver, Colorado 80203 RE: Varra Heintzelman Project Response to Division Letter DRMS File No. M-2009-018 CGRS No. 1-135-10807ab Dear Mr. Cunningham: This letter addresses your comments presented in our letter of December 23, 2009, regarding dewatering operations at the proposed mine site referenced above. Item 1 - We have enclosed water level data from the Varra Del Camino operations, which is located approximately 1.4 miles from the proposed operation. We have also provided hydrographs which depict seasonal water table fluctuations. A map depicting the well locations is provided as Attachment A. The wells and northern portion of the mine site are located approximately equal distance to the Saint Vrain Creek. Water level data collected by Varra Companies is provided in Attachment A as well. Item 2-Information regarding the Haley well was provided by the well owners. Item 3 - We propose that the trigger point be a measured water level of 4 feet below the predicted drawdown. This level provides accommodation for typical seasonal fluctuations (usually on the order of three feet) and one additional foot to account for other influences such as adjacent well usage, barometric fluctuations and so forth. At a point were the predicted drawdown is 6 feet if a drawdown of 10 feet is measured the Division will be contacted and an appropriate action plan generated based on available data. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 970-493- 7780. Sincerely, CGRS, Inc. P.O. Box 1489 Fort Collins, CO 80522 T 800-288-2657 F 970-493-7986 www.cgrs.com Mr.Michael Cunningham DRMS File M-2009-018 Page 2 of 2 Joby L. Adams, P.G. Principal/Hydrogeologist Page I of 2 Bradford Janes From: "Bradford Janes" <bljforester@msn.com> To: "Cunningham, Michael" <Michael.Cunningham@state.co.us> Cc: "Joby Adams" <Joby@CGRS.com>; "GCVARRAVCI" <GCVARRAVCI@aol.com>; "Dorothy Podel" <dpodel@varracompanies.com> pan ies.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 2:12 PM Attach: SKMBS C45010012708240.pdf Subject: Fw: CGRS Scan Michael Cunningham, EPS Colorado Office of Reclamation, Mining and Safety 1313 Sherman St., #215 Denver, CO 80203 Subject: Heintzelman Project - Varra Companies, Inc. - M2009-018 - adequacy reply by CGRS, attached. Good Afternoon Michael. I wanted to get the CGRS reply to your last adequacy letter to you right a way, especially given the calendar. We can continue one more time to my understanding to give a little more time to review, but I believe the first year expires in February. Fortunately, we have passed all the previous considerations, including approval of you latest warranty estimate; and approval of the CGRS reply is all that remains. I will perform a placement of the CGRS hard copies to Weld County and deliver the balance to your office on Friday. Please confirm where you think we are at this point, after you've had opportunity to review the submittal. Regardless, let me know if I can be of further assistance. Hope to speak with you soon. Best regards. Brad Janes. Varra Companies, Inc. Bradford Janes professional forester desk: 970-353-8310 Original Message From: Jobv Adams To: Bradford Janes ; Garrett Varra Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 8:34 AM Subject: FW: CGRS Scan Brad and Garrett: this is my response to the Division. If not changes please forward it to Mr. Cunningham. Regards, Joby Adams, P.G. Principal-Hydrogeologist CGRS, Inc. (970) 493-7780 2/1 7/20 1 0 Page 2 of 2 Direct 970-449-4032 Cell 970-420-6821 Fax: (970) 493-7986 email: Jobv@cors.com www.cgrs.com Original Message From: minolta@cors.com [mailto:minolta@cgrs.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 9:25 AM To: Joby Adams Subject: CGRS Scan Document scanned at Minolta C450 2/17/2010 C( ENVIRONMENTAL NIRWII©i S January 27, 2010 Mr. Michael Cunningham Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety 1313 Sherman St., Room 215 Denver, Colorado 80203 RE: Varra Heintzelman Project Response to Division Letter DRMS File No. M-2009-018 CGRS No. 1-135-10807ab Dear Mr. Cunningham: This letter addresses your comments presented in our letter of December 23, 2009, regarding dewatering operations at the proposed mine site referenced above. Item 1 - We have enclosed water level data from the Varra Del Camino operations, which is located approximately 1.4 miles from the proposed operation. We have also provided hydrographs which depict seasonal water table fluctuations. A map depicting the well locations is provided as Attachment A. Water level data collected by Varra Companies in August 2009 is depicted on the map as well. Item 2 - According to the well owners we understand the Haley well is approximately 40 feet in depth. CGRS inspected the well on January 26, 2010 and recorded the following information: > Well depth—Not measured due to submersible pump obstruction; > Well casing—Steel; > Depth to Water--6 feet below grade; > Depth to top of submersible pump-20 feet below grade. The screened interval could not be determined. Item 3 - We propose that the trigger point be a measured water level of 4 feet below the predicted drawdown. This level provides accommodation for typical seasonal fluctuations which has been measured to be on the order of four feet (see attached hydrographs). At a point were the predicted drawdown is 6 feet if a drawdown of 10 feet is measured the Division will be contacted and an appropriate action plan generated based on available data. P.O. Box 1489 Fort Collins, CO 80522 T 800-288-2657 F 970-493-7986 www.cgrs.com Mr.Michael Cunningham DIMS File M-2009-018 Page 2 of 2 If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 970-493- 7780. Sincerely, CGRS, Inc. Yku------ Jo.y . Adams, P.G. rincipal/Hydrogeologist ATTACHMENT A VICINITY MAP AND HYDROGRAPH 4;.- 1, r 1 P - A I i; _i a r . ^ U ihrud;r"il^,d . ii I JJ r' . ,I r a 1 a (T ...Or R,y, Ml- A i ' N M 9.1Y O �. N Q m. u e 'In c- u>, � tJ tJ O CJ c) Gl n n in iC) O o ( W O Ip �a A f Ni 0 n W r N N It n, U i # n a I . J En ... .. . .. �;., r = / `J m O < a i C ro g �.d. 1 CO CO 00 CO OD to 0 CO tto 0 I . Al W A VI Sep-01 iroodos Jan-02 May-02 Sep 02 Jan-03 May-03 x Sep-03 Q. } Jan-04I 0 3 a May-04 M n, Sep-04 , s I Jan-05 G C May-05 C Sep-OS 3 -4 Jan-06 May-06 N Sep-06 3 Jan-07 ! N May-07 W an 9q Sep-07 �� 9 Jan-08 re 3 `z May-08 u, Sep-08 Jan-09 May-09 Sep-09 is Jan-10 Hello