My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC28538
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC28538
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:32:00 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 10:16:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977223
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
9/15/1982
Doc Name
WILEY PIT FN 77-223
From
MLR
To
VALCO
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.
/
2
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
i~iiiiiiiiii~iu iii <br />STATE OF COLORApO giCRnRf~ U Ln"AM f,nv ~•~nm <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />D. Monte Pascoe, Executive Dvector ~ . _ , - <br />1VIINED LAND-RECLAMA'I'ION <br />423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Streel <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 <br />David C. Shelton <br />Director <br />September 15, 1982 <br />Mr. Thomas E. Brubaker <br />President <br />Valco, Inc. <br />P. O. BOx 550 <br />Rocky Ford, Colorado 81067 <br />RE: Rocky Ford South Pit - File No. 77-222 <br />Wiley Pit - File No. 77-223 <br />Lear Mr. Brubaker: <br />I have reviewed the annual reports, my inspection reports of last year and <br />the general status of each of the two operations captioned above. I have some <br />comments and suggestions that I feel should be responded to by you at your <br />earliest convenience. I am sorry that I did not respond to these reports <br />sooner (as I had indicated that I would), but feel that we can now consider <br />the possible solutions of any remaining problems. <br />Rocky Ford South Pit <br />I have enclosed a copy of my inspection report of November 10, 1981. The <br />problem of a lack of topsoil sufficient to provide at least 6" of topsoil <br />for use in reclamation has not been resolved. A response to my recommendation <br />no. 2 is still needed. If topsoil is to be imported rather than saved, a <br />detailed plan should be submitted that outlines the source of topsoil and <br />the extra processes and costs involved in its importation. I should add <br />that such a source should be justified to be reasonably secure since there <br />is ample topsoil available on site, and the Mined Laad Reclamation Act does <br />mandate the salvage of topsoil found on the affected land. This plan may <br />have to be approved by the Board as a technical revision to the permit. <br />A response to my recommendation no. 4 is also needed. A reclamation bond of <br />$5,800.00 does not appear adequate to reclaim the 29.79 acres of stages O <br />and 1. Your reclamation costs for the maximum disturbance should be <br />recalculated. I would prefer that you do these calculations rather than me. <br />I can then evaluate costs and respond accordingly. If topsoil is to be <br />imported, these costs should be included. If you feel that your plans <br />concerning maximum disturbance have changed from the original approved <br />permit, I suggest that you outline the new plans and submit them as a <br />technical revision or amendment to the permit. I will plan to schedule <br />this bond revision for the November 17-18, 1982 meeting of the Board. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.