Laserfiche WebLink
Apr 12 10 09:58a Moores Mining <br />(970) 931-2805 p.2 <br />MOORES MINING, LLC <br />32986 Hwy 141 <br />Gateway. CO 81522 <br />(978) 931-2886 or (976) 931-2883 <br />April 11, 2010 RECEIVED <br />APR 12 2010 <br />c JUNuI- ,::LUO?Ta <br />Travis Marshall grq? OF <br />'APETY <br />Division of Reclamation Mining & Safety <br />Re: Moores Pit M-1980-178 <br />Travis, <br />We need to request an extension to address the new issues that have come to <br />be addressed and to allow time for review. A three-week extension probably will be <br />required to get our information to you and for you to review it. <br />After reviewing the items listed there are several items that I do not fully <br />understand, so we will have to get in touch to figure these out. Some of the items are <br />a breakdown in Tom and myself handing information back and forth, as in item 6 - <br />my intention was to open up an additional 10 acres above the 9.9 acres as we are <br />taking up almost all of the flat area in the present area for the crushing and product <br />stockpiling. So we cannot fully reclaim these areas until we have ample area to <br />move forward. So we will continue to reclaim all of the slopes as soon as mining <br />moves forward to allow this to happen. In response to Allen Sorenson's letter about <br />311:1V slopes, we have already made that a commitment in other parts of the permit <br />process, so whatever we have to do there is already a commitment by us. <br />On the highway 141 cut slope there is concern for the overburden and topsoil <br />stockpiling. It was our intent to only stockpile on the slope after reaching the 3H:1V <br />slope and using the material to push over the slopes as part of the reclamation <br />process. <br />With everyone's concern for the south slope it would probably be best to not <br />stockpile anything on the south side and just add it to the north side, at the base of <br />the 311:1 V slope and be used later to finish the reclamation as needed. <br />Allen also noted his concern about the retention ponds being above the <br />highway, it should be noted in the drawing of pond No. 1 that it is below highway <br />141 not above as depicted in his letter. Exhibit C pond details clearly show this fact. <br />We could deepen this pond to a little lower level if you feel this would be safer for <br />the different concerns as we still have a 7' drain culvert under the Highway 141 at a