My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2002-11-25_REVISION - M1977344 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977344
>
2002-11-25_REVISION - M1977344 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:47:28 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 12:15:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977344
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
11/25/2002
Doc Name
Adequacy Review
From
DMG
To
Holcim (US) Inc.
Type & Sequence
AM1
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.
/
7
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
d. The operator should provide detailed hydrologic information, including the anticipated maximum flow, for <br />the 100 yeaz - 24 hour precipitation event (saturated conditions). <br />e. Does the operator plan to construct drop structures/energy dissipaters at the outlet of the last component of <br />the constructed channel/creek? If so, provide plans and specifications for construction of the dissipaters. <br />f. Are there any current plans to construct erosion control structures in the last component of the revised <br />drainage? If not, why not? Significant precipitation events will increase runoff through the existing arroyo <br />(the drainage will need to convey all water from the upland watershed plus all of the newly introduced <br />runoff). The extra runoff may increase the chances [hat flood conditions will occur in the ravine, since <br />there isn't much room for the flow to spread out until it gets to the Arkansas River. Provide plans for <br />erosion control in this azea and specifications for any needed structures <br />Exhibit H -Wildlife Information <br />32. The Colorado Division of Wildlife in reviewing your application recommended alternatives to the diversion of <br />Beaz Creek for 7,155 feet based on impacts to wildlife and the cumulative impacts downstream. The DOW <br />believes that the diversion of the creek will result in the removal of all wetlands/riparian habitats, which will <br />severely impact the wildlife resource on and adjacent to the property. Beaz Creek provides excellent potential <br />habitat for Arkansas Darter (State Threatened) and Southern Red $elly Dace (State Endangered). The DOW <br />suggests [hat mining occur in increments, to allow proper reclamation of affected lands before moving on to the <br />next area. The DOW also suggests designating stream crossings for mining equipment and areas of impact to <br />minimize the influence of mining to Beaz Creek and the Arkansas River. The DOW suggests that reclamation <br />efforts provide the same form, function, and value that existed previous to mining operations. The DOW is not <br />in formal opposition to the proposed amendment. We suggest that Holcim contact Casey Cooley of the DOW <br />at 719-277-5200 and discuss with him what Holcim is proposing to mitigate the destruction of wetlands and <br />riparian habitat. Holcim, afrer talking with Mr. Cooley, may wan[ to consider revising the mining and <br />reclamation plans [o include the restoration of Bear Creek. Provide your response to the these DOW concerns <br />in this exhibit. <br />Exhibit L -Reclamation Costs <br />33 The regulations, at Rule 6 Section 4.12, requue that the application include all information necessazy to <br />calculate the costs of reclamation and that the information must be submitted and broken down into [he various <br />major phases of reclamation. The information provided by the operator/applicant must be sufficient to calculate <br />the cost of reclamation that would be incurred by the state, The Division will want to review reclamation cost <br />information based on the worst case situation, which will most likely exist when the topsoil and overburden aze <br />removed from the cut 2 and 3 areas. At that time, the pit in the northwest corner will most likely still be open <br />with vertical highwalls and it is the Division's understanding that the overburden from cuts 2 and 3 will be <br />located on the west side of Beaz Creek. Provide the information necessazy to complete backfill operations; site <br />grading [o approved reclamation slopes; topsoil replacement to the required depth and revegetation including <br />soil tillage operations, seed and seeding operations, fertilization, mulching and weed control in accordance with <br />your reclamation plan. Provide volumes of material remaining to be blasted plus blasflng costs to [educe <br />highwalls to 3h:ly slopes. Provide the volume of material to be hauled to pit backfdl sites and the haul <br />distances. Provide this same information for topsoil hauling and placement. For all structures in the permit azea <br />to be removed upon reclamation, provide enough information about their construction to calculate the cost of <br />removal. Please also provide disposal plans and disposal costs. Include information about dimensions and types <br />of materials structures aze constructed of. For concrete structures provide information on thickness of the <br />concrete and whether it is reinforced. Include the same information for building foundations and floors and <br />paved surfaces. Provide the lineaz feet of railroads to be removed from the permit azea. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.