My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE137714
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE137714
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:38:20 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 6:27:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999098
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/16/1999
Doc Name
TECHNICAL ADEQUACY REVIEW OF NEW 112 RECLAMATION PERMIT APPLICATION PN M-99-098 RIVERVIEW RESOURCES
From
DMG
To
CAMAS CO INC
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.
/
5
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
III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Depanmem of Natural Resourres <br />I J 1 J Sherman St., Room _' I S <br />Denver, Colorado.80203 <br />Phone: 1}0;1 856-3567 <br />FAS: 1303183_' 31011 <br />December 16. 1999 <br />Mr. Mike Refer <br />CAMAS Co. Inc. <br />7108-M South Alton Way <br />Englewood, CO 80112 <br />RE: Technical Adequacy Review of New 112 Reclamation Permit Application, <br />Permit No. #M-99-098, Riverview Resources <br />Dear Mr. Refer, <br />D I b'151 ON OF <br />MINERALS <br />GEOLOGY <br />R E C L A M A T I O N <br />MININ G•SAFETY <br />Bill Owens <br />Governor <br />Greg E. bvalcher <br />EaeCULVe DveUOr <br />nt~chael B Long <br />Division Director <br />This letter is being written address technical issues which must be resolved before the Division of <br />Minerals and Geology (DMG) can approve the new 112 application submitted by your company, <br />Permit No. #M-99-098, Riverview Resources Pit. Please address the following concerns prior to <br />the due date of January 12, 2000. <br />Exhibit D -Mining Plan <br />l) Is the planned asphalt plant to be temporary or permanent? If it is meant to be a permanent <br />structure, will this plant be left in place after reclamation is completed, or will it be <br />demolished? If temporary, what measures will be taken to prevent spills from the plant? <br />Please submit these details, in accordance with Rule 6.4.5(2) of the Construction Materials <br />Rules and Regulations. <br />2) Backfilling of slopes --- For backfilled slopes, please submit a backfilling plan that meets the <br />requirements of Rule 3.1.5(9) of the Construction Materials Rules and Regulations. Also. <br />please see question 4 of Tom Schreiner's review memo (Attachment ]). <br />3) What is the maximum length of shoreline which will be left exposed prior to backfilling? <br />Please specify, so we may accurately calculate the bond based on this estimate. This is in <br />accordance with Rule 6.4.5(2). <br />4) The siting of buildings and homes on the maps omits fencing, and the scale of 300' to an inch <br />makes it difficult to verify the 200-foot minimum distance from the mining limit to the <br />buildings, as well as the actual size of Rocky Road. Please re-submit the maps with a more <br />easily read scale, and include the residential fencing. Fences qualify as permanent structures <br />that must be included in geotechnicai stability analyses, in accordance with Rule 6.4.19 of the <br />Construction Materials Rules and Regulations. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.