My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-03-23_PERMIT FILE - M2008080
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2008080
>
2009-03-23_PERMIT FILE - M2008080
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:44:41 PM
Creation date
3/24/2009 12:35:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2008080
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
3/23/2009
Doc Name
Rationale for Recommendation fror Approval Over Objections
From
DRMS
To
Parties and Interested Persons
Email Name
MAC
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.
/
10
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
• Plumb Irrigation Company - The application is very vague when describing the <br />timing of the slurry wall construction. Given the proximity of the Plumb Ditch and <br />the obvious interaction of seepage from the canal and dewatering of an adjacent <br />gravel pit (25' away), there needs to be a firm deadline or definition of when the <br />wall will be installed. <br />Division Response <br />The questions raised by the above comments are related to C.R.S. 34-32.5-109(2)(a) <br />which states that a reclamation permit shall be effective for the life of the stated operation <br />if the operator complies with the conditions of such reclamation permit. In addition, Rule <br />6.4.4(a)(e) states in part that an Operator/Applicant shall not be required to meet specific <br />dates for initiation, or completion of mining in a phase as may be identified in the <br />timetable. <br />The Applicant has stated in the response to the Division's adequacy review that the slurry <br />wall will be installed prior to opening Phase 8. The Division has found the information <br />provided by the Applicant to meet the requirements of Rule 6.4.4(a)(e). Therefore the <br />Division is satisfied that the objections have been addressed. <br />5. Rule 6.4.5 Exhibit E - Reclamation Plan <br />The following objectors raised concerns about the proposed trees to be planted during <br />reclamation: <br />• Plumb Irrigation Company - The proposed reclamation plan includes planting trees <br />in sections along the Plumb Ditch. Tree planting on the ditch bank and easement is <br />not allowed. Tree roots will cause bank stability issues and take water from the <br />canal and hamper the ability to access the ditch for maintenance purposes. These <br />tree roots will penetrate the slurry wall. <br />Division Response <br />The questions raised by the above comments are related to Rule 6.4.5(2)(f)(iv) which <br />requires the Applicant to provide a description of the specific types of trees and shrubs to <br />be planted during reclamation. <br />The Applicant has revised the Reclamation Plan and will no longer be planting trees along <br />the Plumb Ditch. The Division is satisfied that the objection has been addressed. <br />6. Rule 6.4.19 Permanent Man-made Structures <br />The following objectors raised concerns about the proposed setback distances from the <br />edge of the pit to existing permanent man made structures: <br />• Plumb Irrigation Company - The bank stability analysis performed by Terracon is <br />insufficient to satisfy the concerns of the ditch company. The analysis was <br />completed from only one bore sample collected on the NE corner of the proposed <br />6
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.