My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-08-18_REVISION - M2000154
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M2000154
>
2014-08-18_REVISION - M2000154
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 11:41:30 AM
Creation date
8/20/2014 7:31:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2000154
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/18/2014
Doc Name
FW Increase
From
Hankins Stone Company
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
SI1
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
Ll <br /> Hankins stone Co., Inc. <br /> Po box 164 <br /> Dove creek, co 81324 -3ff <br /> Colorado <br /> Division of Reclamation, A�'4 1 g2$t14 <br /> Mining and safety <br /> Department of Natural Resources <br /> 1313 Sherman St, Room 215 } ' <br /> Denver Co 80203 ��( "'yt.1r " cl{" ►Orj <br /> Attn: Kate A. Pickford <br /> Environmental Protection specialist <br /> August 18, 2014 <br /> RE: Hankins Stone Quarry #1, Permit No. M-2WD-154, Financial warranty Increase, <br /> Revision No. SI-1 <br /> Dear Ms. Pickford: <br /> we received your letter notifying us of an increase of S11,486.66 in the Financial <br /> warranty Bond. AS per our conversation, <br /> I believe the classification of stone from "Partly consolidated stockpile" in 2008 . <br /> to "Rock, well ripped or blasted 0.8" in 2014 <br /> to be inaccurate. The stone in the photo's we discussed are stone that still has <br /> value and use to us and is not considered overburden. <br /> I believe the classification from 2008, "Partly consolidated stockpile", is a more <br /> accurate description of our overburden. <br /> Also in Mr. Erickson's report from 2008, Task #002 the material consistency is <br /> listed at 1.10 with a unit cost of $.0352. The material consistency on your report <br /> from 2014 lists it as .800 with a unit cost of S.622 nearly double that number from <br /> 2008. Is there any way you <br /> could reconsider the classification of our overburden? I believe the volume listed <br /> is consistent with current overburden piles however the amount of time needed to <br /> reclaim, has risen from 33.37 hours in the 2008 report to 45.87 hours in 2014. I <br /> think the time should remain the same as 2008 based on the volume of overburden. <br /> Thank you for your time today in answering all my questions. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Glenda Hankins <br /> Hankins Stone company <br /> Ph: 970-677-2909 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.