INSPEC45116

• Permit No: M1986015
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Date: 7/18/1997
• Doc Name: FAX MEMO TEMPORARY CESSATION AT PUEBLO EAST PIT TRANSIT MIX OF PUEBLO
• From: TOM SCHREINER
• To: MARK HEIFNER
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

07/18/1997 08:11 3837229067
Mark A. Heffner, Ptant Ecologist
37 East Colorado.Avrnue
Denver, CO 80210
~ [phone] (voice and Fax)
MARK HEIFNER
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
sss
lJ
vegtsadon ecology
Land reclamation planning
Visual impact analysis
bocumentary photography
PAGE 01
July 18, 1997
(Fax Memo - 1 page)
TO: TOM SCHREINER
FROM: MARK HEIFNER
RE: TEMPORARY CESSATION AT PUEBLO EAST PIT. TRANSIT MIX OF PUEBLO
Yesterday I discussed with Mark Klune and Jerry Hertnans of Transit Mix of Pueblo
your recent inspection report on this operation. I and they agree that temporary cessation is
probably in order. However, because of some details regarding the company's plans for this
site, the pure form of the temporary cessation would probably be more trouble for the
company and the Division than it would be worth.
The company is developing some long range plans for a vast amount of acreage east of
Pueblo and in a few years will probably move all operations there, as the Pueblo West pits will
be finished. Considering that the Pueblo East Pit will most likely be operated intermittently
until that tinte it seems that revising the permit in accordance with Rule 1.13.7 (Substitute for
Notice of Temporary Cessation) would be more suitable and easier administratively for
everybody. Therefore, on or before your August 15, 1997, deadline we will be submitting a
Technical Revision to allow this pattern of operation without constantly having to jump back
and forth between operation and temporary cessation. Under that process, the annual report
becomes the primary meditun for activating and deactivating "Temporary cessation." The
company does not desire to alter [he bonding but would rasher leave the "full operation bond"
in place. If this was a otte time inactivity period, the pure temporary cessation would certainly
be more appropriate, but considering that the pit will be intermittently active for the next few
years before going into near continuous activity when the company moves to the east side of
Pueblo, permit moditication with the Technical Revision allowed for in this rule seems more
relevant and applicable.