PERMFILE121738

• Permit No: M2001113
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 2/12/2002
• Doc Name: Preliminary Adequacy Review
• From: DMG
• To: American Concrete and Gravel LLC
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

~~

STATE OF COLORADO
~IVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman SL, Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
/February 12, 2002
Robert Gydesen
~inerican Concrete and Gravel, LLC
200 Industrial Park Road
Gunnison, CO 81230
Lb x..11 V 6..a ~ggpp~: ~`a Y/ pOprYrS%OOI J 0
~s 6ap ~~ ~16a~ C-.o®~ if 0 MrOera%S
OOd
r°" CO%PY
I~~..~ _zap.L[l.3
~8 ~'i~> Sea,~.tDtr-see R.,t~~_ , r,~.~
DIVISION OF
MINERALS
&,
GEOLOGY
F EC IAM ATION
MINING•SAFETY
Bill Owens
Governor
Greg E. Walther
Executive Director
Michael B. Long
Division Director
Re: Seahorse Ranch West Gravel Pit, File M-2001-113, New 112 Application, Preliminary Adequacy Review.
Dear Mr. Gydesen,
1 have reviewed the new 112 permit application named above, and have a number of questions and comments about
items in the exhibits. I have listed these. questions in the paragraphs below, which are arranged in the order of the
exhibit to which they pertain. I have cited the specific rule from the Construction Materials Rules and Regulations
wherever possible, to assist you in preparing your revision or clarification. Please respond to all items, and arrange
the responses in the same order to facilitate their review and inclusion in the application.
Exhibit A - Legal Description (Rule 6 4 1)
1. You have included two separate metes and bounds descriptions, one pertaining to gravel pits A and C combined,
and the other pertaining to gravel pit B. These would not necessarily merit comment here except that, upon
comparing these descriptions to the details shown on the maps in Exhibits C and F, it seems that the boundaries
described are not for the permitted area boundary, and it is not clear if they are for the affected area boundary or for
the waterline of the ponds. The legal description that is required to be included in this exhibit is for the affected
land, which must include all roads, pads, affected slopes, etc. Please either revise the boundary descriptions in this
exhibit to match the maps or revise the maps to match the boundary descriptions.
Exhibit C - Minin¢ Plan Man (Rule 6.4.3)
2. The map contains two symbols which are confusing: a dashed line (noted above as possibly depicting the top of
the pit slope or waterline of the ponds) and a solid line, which in places is labelled as the Gately property boundary.
In most places the solid line is outside the dashed line, though not always. This solid line is inside the dashed line
at the western point of gravel pit C. Along the northern boundary of gravel pit C, the two lines are contiguous.
Where the solid line does not extend along a labelled property line, it is not labelled as anything at all. There are
several "setbacks" added along the perimeter, which do not clearly explain if they denote the edge of the pond or
the affected area. You must include sufficient information to clearly delineate the 57-acre permitted area boundary,
and the affected area boundary, pursuant to Rule 6.2.1(2)(d).
3. There are two bridges shown. Please indicate their ownership, and which one(s) you plan to utilize.
4. There is an old railroad grade shown on the map. Please indicate the ownership, if any, of the old railroad grade.
5. Please clarify if the "Griffen #1 Ditch" noted on theExhibit C map is the same as the "Griffin Ditch #1"noted in
Exhibit D, the "Griffith Ditch #I"noted on the Exhibit F map, and the "Griffing No. 1 Ditch" described in the deed
in Exhibit G.