My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE47175
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE47175
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:49:13 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 1:04:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2004078
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/26/2005
Doc Name
CDOT Objection Letter
From
Joe A. Intermill Jr.
To
DMG
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.
/
4
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
0~l28/2005 11:47 970834020404 JOE INTERMILL PAGE 02 <br />March 26, 2005 V <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman. St., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Atm: Erica Crosby <br />Re: CDOT Objection Letter Lupton Lakes Resources, DMG Permit App. No. M 2004-078 <br />Dear Ms. Crosby: <br />Danna Ortiz and Mark Reiner, both employees of Civil Resources, LLC, supplied us with a copy <br />of portions of the Permit Application for the Lupton Lakes Resource pit. Items included were <br />the Reclamation Plan, the Mining Plan, and various maps that were included in the Permit <br />Application. They also provided additional information concerning geology, geotechnical <br />conditions, drilling logs, easemems, material properties, and slope stability calculations justifying <br />the set back distances they are proposing for the reining excavation. <br />As stated iur the objection letter, our primary concern at that time was predicated on a lack of <br />information concerning the proposed mining operation. Ms. Ortiz and Mr. Reiner have been most <br />helpful in suppling information concernring the operation, <br />Conversations with DMG and Civil Resources have indicated that changes to the original <br />Application are being considered or have been made. However, to mitigate the possibility of <br />misunderstandings, the following comments have been predicated on the documents that we <br />currernly have. When revised documents are provided, the concerns can be readdressed <br />considering the changed conditions. <br />AREA. OF CONCERN: <br />EXIS'~ING EASEMENTS <br />• Information supplied concerning easements states that an existing oil well on the Adams <br />property has a 50 foot easement along US Idwy. 85. The maps locate the well and show a <br />gas line running westerly from the well to the property line. The map doesn't indicate <br />where the easement is located, Does the line turn north or south on an easement inside <br />the property line, or does it cross iurto the CDOT ROW? Will the proposed mining <br />operation cause the pipeline to be .relocated? If so, and if it crosses into CDOT ROW, <br />how will the relocation a$ect CDOT. If the easementt is in the a$'ected area, and if it is <br />]eft in place, will that increase the buffer between the excavation and the property line? <br />EXEIIBTT D-MI1~iING PLAN <br />Paragraph (a) states that dewatering trenches will be excavated down to ground water. <br />Test hole logs indicate that ground water was located at 15 feet to 25 feeh~ down into the <br />gravel. It is assumed that the trenches will be dug on the perimeter of the excavated area, <br />and if so will the back slopes be at the 0.5 to 1 shown in paragraph (b), or will the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.