My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC26555
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC26555
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:26:01 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 10:05:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980085
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
12/7/1998
Doc Name
Response to Inspection Report
From
Elam Construction Inc
To
DMG
Inspection Date
8/8/1998
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 />December 2, 1998 <br />Ms. Erica Crosby <br />• III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII • <br />~ `9~ <br />CONSTRUCTION, INC. <br />1225 South 7th Street <br />Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 <br />(970)242-5370• FAX:(970)245-7716 <br />Division of Minerals & Geology <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />RE: M-08-085, VAGNEUR GRAVEL PIT <br />Dear Ms. Crosby: <br />RECEIVED <br />DEC 0'7 1998 <br />~~w~s~cn of Minerals & Geology <br />In response to your Inspection Report dated August 8, 1998, the following is provided for <br />your consideration. <br />1. Enclosed you will find a copy of the Operation and Rehabilitation Plans that <br />were submitted to the division as part of our 1992 Technical Revision. Also <br />enclosed are copies of correspondence between the division, and Elam <br />Construction, Inc., which indicate that the Technical Revision was accepted. <br />We have included the bond calculations used in 1992 indicating that the <br />$105,000 is adequate. In light of the accompanying documentation, we feel <br />that an amendment to our application is not warranted at this time. <br />2. As requested in your report, we have conducted an investigation to determine <br />whether or not ground and surface water was contaminated as a result of oil <br />spillage at the asphalt plant. Our investigations revealed that the spills you <br />noted in your report were from the loading process for AC-]0, Liquid Asphalt <br />Cement. AC-10 is a key ingredient in the production of asphalt pavement. Tt <br />is delivered to the asphalt plant in a heated state and stored in a heated tank <br />until used in the production process. When AC-10 cools to below 120 degrees <br />F., it becomes solid. Because of the nature of the product, it only affects the <br />top 1 inch of the soil. Page 7 of the enclosed Material Safety Data Sheet <br />(MSDS) indicates that AC-10 is not considered a hazardous waste by Federal <br />regulations. Page 4 of the MSDS explains the process wthat we follow for the <br />disposal of any spilled material together with the top layer of soil beneath the <br />spill. The area where you identified the spilled material is at a location where <br />it will be excavated an additional 60 to 80 feet as part of the future mining <br />efforts. Exploration activities conducted in the past have shown that the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.