My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE47335
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE47335
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:49:22 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 1:06:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2006078
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/13/2006
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response #2
From
Hart Environmental
To
DRMS
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.
/
11
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
Mr. Chris Rowe <br />December 12, 2006 <br />Page Three of Eight <br />Other than the Camenish residence, the residence nearest the proposed <br />borrow pit is located approximately 1,750 feet to the south, southeast. <br />Records of the SEO indicate that, other than the Idaho Creek Resources <br />sand and gravel pit, there are two registered wells in the general vicinity of <br />the proposed borrow site. Both wells are located east of the Godding Ditch <br />approximately 1,800 feet south, southeast from the southeast corner of the <br />proposed permit boundary. Indeed, one well is located south of Weld County <br />Road 20 '/: about 1000 feet east, southeast of the Idaho Creek Resources pit. <br />Finally, rule 6.4.7(2)(b) cited in the Division's original adequacy review letter <br />dated November 30, 2006 and in the December 8, 2006 request for additional <br />hydrologic information pertains to the Divisions specific exhibit <br />requirements for 112 Reclamation Permits. The Applicant is not required to <br />provide such information under the specific exhibit requirements for 111 <br />Special Operations Permits. The Applicant's original response to the <br />Divisions November 30, 2006 Adequacy Review letter is based on the <br />Divisions specific exhibit requirements of Rule 6.3.3(1). <br />6.3.4 EXHI$IT D -Reclamation Plan Response <br />The construction method used to seal the pit from the surrounding alluvium <br />involves the placement of a compacted backfill core azound the perimeter of the <br />excavated pit floor. This method is similaz in many ways to the conventional way <br />sand and gravel pits are reclaimed in that once mining is completed the perimeter <br />of the pit is backfilled using the overburden and topsoil that was set aside during <br />the process of preparing the pit for mining. While there may be no discernable <br />difference in the appearance of a conventionally reclaimed pit and a sealed pit <br />there are significant differences in the methods of construction. <br />In order to effectively seal a pit with compacted backfill the contact between the <br />sand and gravel alluvium and the pit floor, which in most instances is composed <br />of shale or clay stone, must by sealed. To accomplish this, a keyway, which is <br />typically a three foot deep by twelve-foot wide slot, is excavated in the pit floor <br />approximately five to ten feet from the sand and gravel pit high-wall. Once the <br />keyway is excavated azound the perimeter of the pit floor, the process of <br />backfilling begins using overburden that was stripped prior to mining. The <br />backfill is placed in compacted one to two foot lifts azound the perimeter of the <br />pit from the floor to the top of the pit. This compacted overburden and shale core <br />effectively seals the entire pit perimeter from the pit floor to the top of the pit <br />high-wall. After the compacted core is in place, the remaining pit slope is <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.