INSPEC03861 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• ~ STATE OF iii iuiiiiiiiiu iii COLORADO DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY Deparhnenl of Natural Resources I l 17 Sherman SL, Room 215 Denver, Coumd0 aU?03 DIVISION O F Phune: I3U t) Bbfi-3567 MINERAL S FAX I303)a72-8106 & GEOLOGY ' 0.ECLAM ATION MININ G•$AFETY fvtarch I. 1999 Bill Owens Mr. Llovd V. Barnhart eovernnr Barnhart Agency ereg E. w,lcner 71~ w 131h Etecuuve Director Pueblo, CO 31003 M¢hael B. Lang Dimsion Dveclor RE: Buena Vista Pit (Permit M-77-196) D ivision esttmate of cost of reclamation Dear Mr. Barnhart: Based on observations made during inspections of the Buena Vista Pit on 9/10/98 and ?/3/99, [he Division has re-evaluated the cast of reclaiming current disturbance at the site according to the approved reclamation plan. As the enclosed materials indicate, this tentative re-evaluation indicates that a total financial warranty of $34,700.00 is necessary to provide for reclamation of the Buena Vista Pit. The financial warranty posted for the pi[, at this time, totals $5,000.00. This letter is, therefore, notice to you, as agent in this matter for Hard Rock Paving and Redi-Mix, Inc., petmittee for the Buena Vista Pit (Permit M-77-196), that the currently posted financial warranty of $x,000.00 is considered insufficient [o complete reclamation of the pit. A [oral financial warranty of $34,700.00 or an amount acceptable to the Division must be posted within 60 days of the date of this letter or by May 2, 1999. The re-evaluation is tentative at this time and your comments, suggested revisions, etc., are invited in order that the cost estimate be as accurate as possible. In the event that no agreement can be reached that reduces the Division's estimate, a total of $34,700.00 must be posted by May 2, 1999. You acknowledged the insufficiency of the financial warranty in your letter to the Division of November 27, 1998 and provided an estimate of the reclamation cos[ at that time. The following discussion is intended to indicate the apparent reasons for the differences between your estimate and the Division's and to provide for a better understanding of the Division's procedure. TASK I (Backfilling highwalls that cannot be pushed down): In your estimate, you stated that backs{oping of highwalls would be done in conjunction with the minins. That obviously cannot be done in the eastern and northeastern portions of the pi[ where essentially vertical highwalls, ranging in height from ?0 to 30 feet, extend all the way to the permit area boundaries. The only way approved 2:1 slopes for the pit margins can be attained in these areas is by backfilling. The highwalls here cannot now be mined to 2:1 slopes nor can the highwalls be pushed down without extending disturbance outside of the permit area boundaries. As a result, the Division's estimate includes the cost of backfilling these highwall areas with material derived from across the pit where such material is available from within the permit area. Calculations are based on the use of a D8N dozer , an average push distance of 300 feel and approximately 700 feet (by the ntap) of essentially vertical highwall. TASK 2 (Push down accessible hi;hwall): Portions of the south mar_ins of the pit are already at roughly I:I slopes and can be further reduced without disturbance extending outside of permit area boundaries. Portions of the west and northwest margins of the pit are already essentially at 2' I slopes Consequently, I have based this calculation on approximately X00 fee[ of highwall now at or close to a I:'~, slope.