My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV99804
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV99804
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:23:38 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 12:30:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1985219
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
7/26/1992
Doc Name
PARKERSON CONST CO 31 ROAD GRAVEL PIT DEVRIES PIT & 32 ROAD GRAVEL PIT PARKERSON PIT
To
MLRB
Type & Sequence
CN1
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.
/
2
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
_ ~.. ~ M III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />999 <br />July 26, 1992 <br />Mined Land Reclamation Board <br />Mined Land Reclamation Division <br />Colorado Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />RE: Parkerson Construction Co., 31 Road Gravel Pit (Devries Pit) and 32 <br />Road Gravel Pit (Parkersoii Pit) <br />Dear Sirs: <br />As a resident that lives in the immediate vicinity of these projects and <br />one who must live with their impacts, I sm concerned that the existing <br />mines are not operating in compliance with permit conditions. These <br />conditions protect the health, welfare, and safety of everyone that lives <br />or travels near the projects. I object to permitting of the subject <br />project proposals until after issues of noncompliance with existing <br />permit conditions are resolved. <br />Please consider the following issues: <br />Reclamation: Where's the reclamation for the existing pits? How do we <br />know he has a workable reclamation plan? The applicant does not propose <br />to do this reclamation until after he has mined additional areas ~mder <br />the new permits. Furthermore, the applicant proposes to reclaim the pit <br />bottoms to agricultural land, something that has never been done in this <br />type of area before. Movement of salt from the Mancos shale to the <br />surface of the pit bottoms or to the Colorado River may become real <br />problems. From a land use point of view, it makes no sense to allow the <br />operator to create additional impacts before he demonstrates that his <br />reclamation plan works. <br />The operator states he needs the existing pits as staging areas for the <br />new projects. Presumably that is why he can't reclaim those areas. <br />However why does he need such large staging areas? He didn't have such <br />large staging areas for the existing mines. Does he have other plans for <br />these areas such as a concrete batch plant, etc? <br />MLRD 110 Permit Conditions: Both of the existing mines have impacted <br />large areas. Also I have witnessed large volumes of truck traffic moving <br />material out of those mines. What is the total surface acreage that has <br />been disturbed at each site? What is the total volume of material that <br />has been removed from each site? Mined Land Reclamation Division staff <br />should personally make the surface and depth measurements at each site to <br />answer those questions. <br />It is my understanding that the existing permits for each mine do not <br />allow for removal of topsoil and overburden. If so has any of this <br />material been removed? <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.