2010-04-08_REVISION - M1980178

• Permit No: M1980178
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 4/8/2010
• Doc Name: Second adequacy review
• From: DRMS
• To: Moores Mining, LLC
• Email Name: THM
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

ss 5 ,STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

April 8, 2010 APR 15 2010
Div*ion Gt R Lciamagon,
Mr. Leon Moores Minir g and Safety
Moores Mining, LLC
32906 Highway 141
COLORADO
D I V I S ION OF
RECLAMATION
MINING
SAFETY
Bill Ritter, Jr.
Governor
James B. Martin
Executive Director
Gateway, CO 81522 /
Re: Moores Mining, LLC, File No. M-1980-178 , Conversion Application, Second Adequacy Review, CN-
01.
Dear Mr. Moores:
The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety has continued to review the above referenced 112c Conversion
application. The project appears to be a straight forward request to convert the existing 110c to a 112c increasing
the disturbed acreage from 9.9 acres to 34.2 acres. A review of the response to the preliminary adequacy review
has revealed a few more clarifications and issues that need to be addressed.
1) Per Rule 1.6.5(2), within ten days after the last publication or as soon thereafter as proof has been obtained,
the applicant shall mail proof of publication required by Rule 1.6.2(1)(d) to this office. Proof of publication
may consist of either a copy of the last newspaper publication, to include the date published, or a notarized
statement from the news paper. An application may not be approved until such proof has been obtained.
- Response Adequate
2) The mine plan states "efforts to segregate any topsoil from the surface material above the sand and gravel
resource would be ineffective." Please provide more information to support this statement.
- The response submitted stated that the above statement has been removed. Please specify what amount
of growth medium will be salvaged to be used in place of topsoil. Also, what measures will be
implemented to protect the substitute growth medium until it is used for reclamation to meet the
requirements of Rule 3.1.9(1)?
3) On page 2 of the mine plan, it states "extraction of the sand and gravel resource will occur in two
approximate equal lifts to a point one foot above the underlying stony clay loam stratum." Please explain
what is meant by this statement.
- Response Adequate
4) Please specify the maximum proposed highwall dimensions specifically length and height.
- The response submitted states that the maximum dimensions for the highwall will be 50' high by 150'
in length. On average the width of a mining phase is approximately 500 feet wide. Does this mean that
only 1/3 of a phase will be worked at any one time? Also, according to the mine plan map, Exhibit C
Sheet 2, the side slopes appear to be mined to a 3H:1 V on both the north and south slopes, please clarify
Office of Office of
Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand )unction • Durango Active and Inactive Mines