Laserfiche WebLink
,_ <br />~ STATE QF COIJ~II IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION aF ~o~o <br />Department of Natural Resources Ne``9>g <br />1313 Sherman SI., Room 215 ~ ~ ~ <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />303 866-3567 i'ra~s ~+ <br />FA%:303 832-8106 <br />lloy Romer, <br />(3wemor <br />PAiohael B. Long, <br />Division Director <br />DATE: June 16, 1992 <br />T0: Berhan Keffelew pp~~ <br />FROM: Gregg R. Squire iC/d~ 5 <br />RE: Holnam Quarry, New Maps of Final Reclamation Contours (2-4-91> and <br />Reclamation Cost Estimates, File No. M-77-348 <br />I have attempted to estimate the reclamation costs associated with thi; permit <br />and have discovered that without additional information it cannot be d(me. In <br />addition it does not appear that the new plan will achieve the slope <br />commitments found on page 7, Exhibit E - Reclamation Plan of the original <br />permit application. The current approved plan calls for 2 to 1 or fla~:ter <br />slopes with the exception of portions of certain highwalls such as the east <br />highwall of the old A-band quarry. I do not believe that we should al ow <br />slopes steeper than 2H/1V for at least two reasons. First, slopes stef,per <br />than this may not be stable and are prone to high rates of erosion. SE~cond, <br />slopes steeper than this are difficult for cattle to utilize. Since tffe final <br />proposed land use is rangeland the area must be graded to slopes which are <br />suitable for the final use. <br />Specific comments which must be answered by the applicant prior to our <br />approval of the new proposed final contours follow. <br />1) Permit boundaries and prelaw areas must be clearly marked or all of <br />the maps. <br />2) We need a commitment from the operator that the proposed contours <br />will be achieved. The words "concept only" should be removed from <br />the final contour maps. <br />3) The final contour line intervals must be standardized, intervals <br />vary from 5, 15, 20 and 25 foot intervals on the currently provided <br />final contour maps. <br />4) The currently approved permit commits to 2H to 1V or flatter <br />slopes. It appears that many areas shown on the new maps will be <br />steeper than this. New final contours should be provided to meet <br />the 2H-1V requirements. Any highwall areas to be left which will <br />be steeper than 2H-1V should be marked on the new maps, and where <br />such highwalls will extend for more than one quarter of a mile <br />ramps of 2H-1V or less must be built to provide access across the <br />highwalls for livestock and wildlife. <br />