ENFORCE24633 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i 6. OTHER FACTORS: 1. Since the Corrective Action Plan wea approved Gordon Morga:+, President of Castle Concrete, and Mark Heifner, Castle Concrete's reclamation consultant, have been heavily involved with the Queen's Canyon Quarry. Part of the several hundred hours they have spent involved actual meetings, but moat of this time involved planning tk~e final disposition of the Queen's Canyon Quarry and, to a leaser extent, the other two quarries. Because of these unusually intense time demands needed to complete these important negotiations, other reclamation projects at other operations had to be canceled for 1990. What little time was left was devoted to completing this work and other essential reclamation work at the Queen's Canyon Quarry and the Hobson Ranch Fit //1. Next spring it will be necessary to catch up on the work that had to be canceled this year simply because there was insufficient time to implement that work. It is Castle Concrete's position that the time spent in finding a solution to the Queen's Canyon Quarry situation that ie satisfactory to a majority of the public interested in that matter is time well spent. But the time requirements are so vast, severe prioritization of other work was required. The Snyder Quarry Corrective Action Plan was placed as a top priority, but time was so limited even it did not get entirely finished. If the major anoxstorm had not hit in early May, it is probable there would have been time to plant trees on at least those areas that were finished with topsoiling and in Willi~gms Canyon. 2. The originally proposed Corrective Action Plan presented a timetable that started major work on the project in early November 1~~89 (see letter of October 23, 1989 from Heifner to Banta). Ae a result of additional considerations, Board approval did not come until December- 13, 1989 and the order was not actually signed and sent until Januar;~ 16, 1990. Minor work began about November Q, 1989, but major work h+sd to be delayed, first until Board authorization was received, and then until late February, March, and April because of frozen ground conditions and weather. If major work had been able to begin in November 1989 the timetable proposed in October 1989 could have larg+3ly been met, although the May snowstorm might still have caused delays :_n the completion of certain aspects. Because timetables for reclamation work must be patterned around the seasons and not the calendar, stari:ing with major work several months after the originally proposed start dates caused a severe "bunching" of major earthwork operations. This "bunching" occurred during a time of the year when frozen ground is thawing and heavy, wet snowstorms are fairly common. Fall and early winter is the preferred to time to do the kind of work required becai+se the ground is dry and precipitation low. Aa a result of the additional considerations of provisions in the plan in November 1989, a timetable that could have been met and was adjusted as best as could be done at. the time of Board approval, became unvorkable in light of the fact tk+at Colorado Springs, since the beginning of 1990, has received approximately twice as much precipitation as normal, mainly since the: beginning of May 1990. Page 5 of 7 SNYDER CAP TIMETABLE ADJIISTMENT 6-20-90