My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC18643
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC18643
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:19:54 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 9:26:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999005
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
1/22/2001
Doc Name
CHANGES TO & EXPLAMATION OF MONITORING INSPECTION REPORT DATED 12/22/2000 NORTH RIVER PIT FN M-1999-
From
DMG
To
ALL RITE PAVING & REDI-MIX INC
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.
/
3
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 />Your belief that "the azea with alleged wetlands was eliminated from the permit is no[ correct. The Division <br />never alleged that there were wetlands in the permit area. We only expressed concern that there might be and <br />asked All Rite Paving and Redi-Mix's consultant to address that concern. All Rite Paving eliminated the area <br />From the mining plan, not the permit area. The Division only mentioned in the June 2, 1999 Recommendation <br />letter that the possible jurisdictional wetlands had been removed by the applicant and the concern was <br />eliminated. <br />Problem Iyo. 5 -Overburden material has been used to construct a visual berm in [he permit area. Otero County <br />required this. <br />Your disagreement with [his problem is that [he material in the berm (raised roadbed) was used to repair Flood <br />damage on the property not included in the permit and adjacent neighbor's property per a request by Otero <br />County. <br />The berm is a raised roadbed (see 3 above) within the permit boundary. Since construction of the berm was <br />requested by Otero County and is not part of the training plan, this problem is deleted from the inspection report. <br />I recall that during the inspection I told you that if All Rite Paving and Redi-Mix, Inc. would provide evidence <br />for the file that Otero County made such a request then the Division would know that the berm was not a part of <br />your Mining Plan. Such a document would be used by future inspectors to determine that the construction was <br />not a mining related disturbance outside the affected land boundary. <br />The inspection revealed several items that were or appeazed to be construction activities within the permit area <br />that were not included in the approved mining plan. It would have been prudent for All Rite Paving and Redi- <br />Mix, Inc. to notify the Division of these activities before they were started and, in the case of problems t and 2, <br />to submit a Technical Revision to the permit prior to starting the activity. All Rite Paving should keep in mind <br />that, if more than one minor change to a permit is needed, the changes can be handled with one revision request. <br />The changes can often be requested quickly with a simple letter. <br />Problems 1 and 2 remain enforceable and problems 3, 4, and 5 aze deleted from the December 22, 1999 <br />inspection report. <br />Please call me at (303) 866-4922 if you have any questions <br />Sincerely, <br />Larry D. Oehler <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />cc: Jim Stevens, DMG <br />Ed Kite, All Rite Paving and Redi-Mix <br />\\DMG-S 1\M\ossV+HDUdo monitoring M-1999-005 1-19-Ol.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.