Laserfiche WebLink
• , iii iiiiiiiiiiiu iii <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION oF.~o~o <br />Department of Natural Resources ~ <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 ~e ~g <br />Denver, CO 60203 ' ~ ' <br />303 866-3567 '~ .~` <br />Fa x: 303 632-6106 yeas <br />Roy Romer, <br />Governor <br />Fretl R Banta. <br />Division Director <br />DATE: July 27, 1990 <br />T0: Dan Hernandez <br />FROM: Steve Renner <br />RE: Castle Concrete Proposed Remedial Action Changes <br />Castle Concrete has proposed changing the Board approved remedial acl:ions for <br />Areas 2 and 3 at the Snyder Quarry. The Board has requested guidances as to <br />whether these changes are significant or not. <br />The proposed change at Area 2 is to simply add topsoil to the slide, and <br />revegetate it. These actions should not compromise the September, 1989 <br />stability analysis (CTL Thompson, 1989). Therefore, this change does. not <br />appear to be significant. <br />The new proposal for Area 3 indicates that material will be removed i'rom the <br />slope from approximately station 1 + 58.0 to the slope crest. However, the <br />proposal does not state what slope angle this regraded area would achieve. If <br />the material removal operation achieves a slope of 2.0:1 or flatter, the <br />original Board order would not be significantly changed. This is because the <br />overall slope would be slightly flater than 1.5:1, and would remain within the <br />parameters of the September, 1989 stability analysis. Any slope graeling which <br />results in an overall slope of 1.5:1 or steeper would significantly impact the <br />original Board order. <br />As the Castle Concrete proposal lacks specificity, a detailed proposal should <br />be submitted for review and approval prior to implementation. Castle. should <br />be very specific concerning proposed slope angles, and provide a cross section <br />which depicts the proposed reconfigured slope. <br />/1 ac <br />9046E <br />