PERMFILE101304

• Permit No: M1989065
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 8/7/1989
• Doc Name: FN M-89-065 WINKLER LIGHT AGGRGATE QUARRY ADEQUACY LETTER
• From: MLRD
• To: TUTTLE APPLEGATE RINDAHL INC
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

~ sr~.-r~ of ~bLOr~o
Roy Romer, Governor
Q
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MINED.LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION
FRED R. BANTA, Dlnctor
DATE: August 7, 1989
-T0: Mr. Mike Applegate
FROM: Michael J. Boyd, Reclamation Specialis~~~
RE: File No. M-89-065; Winkler Light Aggregate Quarry
Adequacy Items
The following items must be addressed by the applicant in order to satisfy the
applicable requirements of C.R.S. 34-32-101 et seq. and the Mineral Ruies and
Regulations of the Mined Land Reclamation Board`
Mining Plan (Exhibit D)
1. The Mining Plan General Description makes reference to Figure D-1; O1G 8~2~
please submit this figure, as it was apparently omitted from the
application. (The text also refers to the Mining Plan Maps as
Exhibit D; the maps are correctly labeled Exhibit C.)
2. Mining is to be done in ten phases, each taking 10 to 25 years. Are
phases I-VIII going to be done in chronological order? What about ~ g/pt
phases in the cut stone quarry - it appears that work in this area is
expected to be concurrerrt with other mining operations. When will work
in this area begin? How long will it .continue? _ _
3. On page D-1, you indicate that "a maximum of 13 acres will be stripped
at arty one time.-" Z assume this 13 acres includes the 10 acres
referenced on the following page in the crushed stone operation area vk Ohl
plus 3 acres in the cut stone quarry_ The Table of Disturbance on
Page D-5 shows afar greater area lacking topsoil - 20 acres in the
crushed stone area and nine acres in the cut stone area. Also, this
Table shows a total disturbance of 79 acres, whereas page E-5 contains
a statement that "no more than 70 acres...(will) be disturbed at any
one time." Please explain these discrepancies.
Reclamation P]an (Exhibit E) -
1 The second sentence of the text in this section states that the "net F ~/z1
result of mining will be to lower the top of the mesa from 10 to 20 ,,
feet", the same depth as is indicated to be the thickness of the
rhyolite deposit on Page D-1. It appears from your reclamation cost
estimates, however, that the operator intends to redistribute only 18"
of overburden as opposed to the 4 to 16 feet presently existing on the
site. Please clarify this discrepancy.
215 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203-2273 Tel. [phone]