REV11545

• Permit No: M1977210
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 8/3/1994
• Doc Name: MEMO SNYDER QUARRY FN M-77-210 ADEQUACY ISSUES AND TIMELINE
• From: DMG
• To: JIM PENDLETON
• Type & Sequence: AM4
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

* • iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Depanment of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman 51., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone [phone]
FAX: [phone]
M E M O R A N D U M
~~
~~~
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES
Roy Romer
TO: JIM PENDLETON /~ Governor
FROM: BOB OSWALD Ken Salazar
DATE: AUGUST 3, 1994 Execuine Duenor
RE: SNYDER UARRY FILE NO. M-77-210 ADE UACY ISSUES"' long
Q / / 4 Di ireClnr
TIMELINE
Per your request to keep you updated, here is a summary of what I
am focusing on as adequacy concerns, and a rough timeline of
completion of items by the decision date.
I. Adequacy concerns include:
* specifications of structures to be removed (and which
will remain), for bond calculation;
p~- * closure or elimination of mine portals or cave openings
which may remain at end of mining, and if any reclamation
activities will affect undisturbed/pre-law openings;
* better definition of amounts and types of woody species
in the base reclamation plan, and enhanced plan;
p~~ * treatment of "dump" areas (abandoned equipment, etc.),
ie., burial, salvage, removal;
U ~~* treatment of the access road, ie., reclamation, removal
of asphalt, repaving, and any associated maintenance or
drainage issues;
* and of course, the criteria for judging the success or
failure of the base vs enhanced reclamation plan, both in
an incremental sense and at final stages, and any adverse
interactions between the two plans.
The adequacy review is being conducted currently. No issues
have yet been communicated to the applicant.
II. Timeline of other items:
* surface hydrology review (extra document and supporting
drawings included with application), by Aug 12;
* bond calculations, pending sufficient information
returned by applicant as requested in the adequacy
letter, to be completed by Aug 19;
* adequacy review completed and letter sent to operator, by
Aug 12;
* review of
* / (pending
(j~Q $~4~g¢ review of
dmgcorr8.94/1
reclamation criteria, as submitted by operator,
timely return of requested items) by Aug 26;
comments submitted, by Aug 19.
GG ~ W1(i L