My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV93070
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV93070
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:14:25 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:27:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980020
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
7/29/1981
Doc Name
BRALEY SAND & GRAVEL PIT 1 FN 80-20
From
MLR
To
BRALEY SAND AND GRAVEL INC
Type & Sequence
HR2
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.
/
3
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
• ~ • • <br />9raley Sand b Gravel, Inc. <br />July 29, 1981 <br />Page -2- <br />~. <br />2. }there will the topsoil be ~ockpiled when mining progresses <br />to the west into the area shown and marked overburden on your <br />C-3 map? <br />3. The ditch road is nQt indicated on your C-3 Afap. I assume it <br />aparallels the canal on t}he west. Is this correct? <br />4. [,That is the approximate depth, to water of the wells shown? <br />/ 5. The Exhibit C-3 Map shows stockpiled materials beneath the <br />'~ the telephone line, west of and outside the proposed permit area. <br />/ lJhat is the nature of these materials; i. e., are they products of <br />I the mining operation? If so, I do not find this area classified <br />as part of the affected area (KULE 1.1(2)). <br />Exhibit D - ?fining Plan <br />1. Your plan indicates that, at an absolute, mining will occur to <br />no less than five feet above the existing water table. What is the <br />anticipated seasonal fluctuation (in feet) of the water table? <br />2. Please salvage (not sale) the A and B horizons of the [opsoi] <br />for exclusive use on the affected area, as these horizons arc [he <br />most fertile grow[h mediums. <br />3. I do not understand te~ suggestion that topsoil above the bl.ufC <br />~. <br />could be pushed into the pit without the need to stockpile materials. <br />Why would this be done if there is sufficient topsoil present in the <br />proposed excavation areas'? Why affect more area than is needed? <br />4. ldhat measures have been taken and/or will be taken to direct <br />surface runoff away from the pit area (e.g., berms, diversion <br />ditches, etc.)? <br />5. Have you contacted the Denver Water Board regarding mining adjacent <br />to the canal? Uo they have any comments regarding seepage from the <br />canal to the pit as a result of this activity? <br />6. What is your best estimate of the times required to mine the <br />existing pit and phases 1-7, as shown on your Exhibit D Map. To <br />Help simplify this, you may want to show this in [abular form. <br />Exhibit F, - Reclamation Plan <br />1. Because your proposed end land use is Rangeland (agricultural use), <br />ho~.a about considering somewhat less steep final slopes (3:1, or 2`g:l)? <br />The probability of successful revegetation increases on gentler slopes. <br />(cont'd) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.