My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-04-25_PERMIT FILE - M2008010
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2008010
>
2008-04-25_PERMIT FILE - M2008010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:28:34 PM
Creation date
5/9/2008 8:56:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2008010
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
4/25/2008
Doc Name
Adequacy Response
From
McStone Aggregates, LLC.
To
DRMS
Email Name
KAP
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.
/
24
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
Letter: Response to adequacy review, Permit Application M-2008-010 4!2512008 page 9 <br />in Section D-9. Surface Water Management (page 16) and shown on <br />Cross-sections (Figure E-4-1, page 24) and Map F-2 (page 26), is a <br />part of the existing terrain left in place and intended to keep a <br />functioning detention (not retention) and sediment basin to prevent <br />discharge of sediment from the site, especially during mining. The 20- <br />foot remnant "berm" on the property line is made up primarily of the <br />cobbly loam typical of the Collide complex soils and will allow the water <br />to filter through, rather than pond up as the District fears. Such <br />ponding is not permitted by the Division of Water Resources without <br />obtaining special permits or providing substitution for water consumed <br />by such ponds. <br />In the long term, although not explicitly addressed in the permit <br />application (except in the engineering evaluation report in Exhibit S), <br />the Noland Cedar Point Pit to the west (currently operated by Sky Ute <br />Sand and Gravel) has stated that they plan to amend or do a technical <br />revision to their mining and reclamation permit to allow mining out to <br />the property and permit boundary line between the Mud Creek and the <br />Cedar Point Pits, which would also allow similar mining on the part of <br />the Mud Creek Pit operator. It is the Mud Creek Pit Operator's intent to <br />modify the Mining Plan and Reclamation Plan to mine out the area.on <br />the east side of the joint boundary, rather than leave a ridge between <br />the two properties; although it is understood that a technical revision <br />might be required to do so. Unfortunately, since the current <br />reclamation plan for the Cedar Point Pit does include the ridge, this is <br />not possible at this time and so was not included in the application. <br />This would improve both mining and reclamation of both permits. (A <br />similar option is possible with the newly-permitting Simmons Pit <br />located to the east, where the two pits will be adjacent to each other in <br />the northeast corner of the Mud Creek Pit.) <br />As discussed on page 27, mining operations would remove an <br />estimated 40 acres of surface drainage from the Mud Creek <br />watershed, an estimated 0.42% reduction in the size of the basin, and <br />therefore not considered significant; however, the water would <br />continue to infiltrate and presumably (if sufficient) flow through the <br />remaining alluvium that makes up the alluvial aquifer associated with <br />Mud Creek. <br />11. Structures Engineering Evaluation and Geotechnical Stability: <br />Exhibit S, including the sealed and signed statement by Mr. Barton, (a <br />licensed professional engineer in the State of Colorado) was intended <br />to comply with Rule 6.4.19(b) and we do not believe that there is a <br />need to implement Rule 6.5. It is Mr. Barton's professional judgment <br />that the mining operation will NOT adversely affect the stability of any <br />significant, valuable and permanent man-made structure located within <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.