INSPEC12501 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Southwestern III I II I II I II IIII III Vegetation Analysis Ecological 999 Wetland Ecology Services Land Rehabilitation Planning Photodocumentation 37 East Colorado Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80210-3105 November 27, 2000 13031 722-9067 Fax 1303) 778-8937 FiECEIVE® NOV 2 8 2000 Mr. Berhan Keffelew Division of Minerals and Geology Room 215 1717 Sherman Street Denver, CO 80207 Division of Minerals and Geolegv RE: Response to item 2 in your inspection repon of Daniels Sand Pit H2; 10-18-00 inspection. Permit M-1973-007SG Dear Mr. Keffelew, On October 18, 2000, you performed an inspection of this operation and subsequently provided Transit Mix with your inspection report. Transit Mix asked me to examine your report and respond. This reponse is in regard to item /12 on Page 3 of your report. In that item you request a Technical Revision to address the a-ater treatment program being conducted on this progeny by Schlage Lock, that treatment being conducted under a Compliance Order on Consent between Schlage and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. In your request you ask that Transit Mix provide proof that the man-made structures will not be damaged by the mining operation. Enclosed please find a copy of the Access and Use Agreement between Transit Mix Concrete and the Schlage Lock Company. This agreement specifically addresses the activity about which you are concerned. I have highlighted several passages in this agreement which we believe adequately addresses this issue. In your inspection report you cite Rule 6.4.19 as the rule that provides the Division authority to require the information you requested be submitted. That rule states, `Where the mining operation will adversely affect the stability of any significant, valuable or permanent man-made struc[ure..." the applicant must provide certain information to show either that the damage will not occur or the owner of the structure will be properly compensated for any damage that does occur. This requirement has existed in one form or another since 1976, and even before, and therefore clearly applies to this permit. The enclosed agreement shows that damage will not occur because the structures must be removed prior to the mining occurring. Please allow me to point out the various passages in this agreement that demonstrate that concerns regarding the effects of the mining on this facility are unnecessary. In the section starting on page 1 and titled `Agreement" are several paragraphs that address the concern stated in you: inspection report. Paragraph 1 f. on page 2 provides Schlage Lock the right to install the treatment system on the Transit Mix property. Paragraph 2 states that this installation will not interfere with Transit Mix's use of the property. Because the amended permit had been issued several years before this agreement it was understood that use of the property meant mining the sand in Phase 4e. Paragraphs 1 e. and 5 address the issue of closure and state that it is the responsibility of Schlage Lock to reclaim the disturbances "as close to its original condition as practicable..." This reclamation activity includes any and all disturbances, whether surface or subsurface. Of course, this reclamation requirement only applies in the event the land is not mined under the current permit.