My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-07-15_PERMIT FILE - M2016002
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2016002
>
2016-07-15_PERMIT FILE - M2016002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:24:50 PM
Creation date
7/18/2016 7:59:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2016002
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
7/15/2016
Doc Name
Adequacy Review #2
From
DRMS
To
Donald J. Self
Email Name
TC1
WHE
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.
/
2
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
<br /> <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br /> <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver, CO 80203 P 303.866.3567 F 303.832.8106 http://mining.state.co.us <br />John W. Hickenlooper, Governor | Robert Randall, Executive Director | Virginia Brannon, Director <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />July 15, 2016 <br />Donald Self <br />P.O. Box 473 <br />Indian Hills, CO 80454 <br />Re: Double Eagle Claim, File No. M-2016-002, <br />Second Adequacy Review for New Permit Application <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Self: <br /> <br />The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division) received your responses to our June 12, <br />2016 Preliminary adequacy review on July 5, 2015. The decision date for this application is was <br />extended to July 20, 2016. Please be advised that if you are unable to satisfactorily address any <br />concerns identified in this second review before the decision date, it will be your responsibility to <br />request an extension of the review period. If there are outstanding issues that have not been <br />adequately addressed prior to the end of the review period, and no extension has been requested, the <br />Division will deny this application. <br /> <br />Please note the original comment number sequence has been retained for tracking purposes. <br /> <br />APPLICATION <br />1. Item 3, p. 1, Permitted Acreage: The Division accepts your stated 3 acre limit. The response is <br />adequate. <br /> <br />6.3 SPECIFIC EXHIBIT REQUIREMENTS – LIMITED IMPACT OPERATIONS <br />6.3.3 EXHIBIT C – Mining Plan <br />2. Pursuant to Rule 6.3.3(1)(a), The operation is now considered “Intermittent Status”. No <br />additional response is necessary. <br />3. Rule 6.3.3(1)(g). The Division accepts your commitment to bond for 650 feet of road inside the <br />claim boundary for a total of 0.12 acres. The response is adequate. <br />6.3.4 EXHIBIT D – Reclamation Plan <br />4. Rule 6.3.4(1). Requirements to satisfy Rule 3.1. The Division observed the following <br />discrepancies in your July 5th response letter: <br />a. Rule 3.1.5(7). Please describe the maximum anticipated side slopes. You responded with <br />2H:1V, but you listed the average depth as 10 feet and the average width as 20 feet. <br />Assuming there are two sides to the trench, that depth and width results in 1H:1V side <br />slopes. Based on your 1,000 CY backfill cost estimate in your response to Comment No.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.