My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE65948
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE65948
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:11:55 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 9:07:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2001046
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/13/2002
Doc Name
Preliminary Adequacy Review Response
From
DMG
To
Banks and Gesso LLC
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
~~~ <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />t 313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 866-3567 <br />FAX: (303) 832-8106 <br />Mazch 13, 2002 <br />Banks and Gesso, LLC <br />Attn: Tug Martin <br />720 Kipling Street, Suite 117 <br />Lakewood, Co 80215 <br />DIVISION OF <br />MINERALS <br />GEOLOGY <br />RECLAMATION <br />MINING•SAFETY <br />Bill Owens <br />Governor <br />Greg E. Walther <br />Executive Director <br />Michael B. long <br />RE: File No. M-2001-046; Nix Sand and Gravel Mine; Owens Brothers Concrete Division Director <br />Company; Preliminazy Adequacy Review Response <br />Deaz Mr. Martin: <br />The division received your adequacy responses to our letter of August 10, 2001 on <br />February 13, 2002. This response addressed many of the outstanding issues identified <br />during our initial adequacy review. However, there are still a few areas that will need to <br />be addressed in more detail in order for us to render a final decision on your application. <br />Following is a listing of the remaining items under the headings as they appeared in the <br />original adequacy letter. The new decision date for this application is March 29, 2002. If <br />you aze unable to adequately address concerns identified either in this letter or the <br />previous one, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of the decision date or <br />the application could be denied. <br />6.4.4 Exhibit D -Mining Plan <br />Several aspects of the mining plan have changed since the original submittal. The main <br />change is the method of mining going from dry mining the designated areas to wet <br />mining the azeas utilizing a suction dredge. This, coupled with a different mining <br />sequence, goes towazds mitigating the potential problem associated with de-watering the <br />pit. However, we aze still in the process of reviewing the reports submitted with your <br />responses. This will be covered in more detail under section 6.4.7. <br />The potential stability problem associated with vertical highwalls is being addressed by <br />now proposing to mine at 2H:1 V, which is the maximum slope allowed without a <br />stability analysis. This also addresses the potential problem of importing material to <br />backfill to a stable configuration once mining is completed. However, a new concern that <br />was identified is the production of approximately 1,000,000 cubic yards of overburden. <br />This should not present a problem for disposal since it will be a simple matter of <br />backfilling into the various mine areas as they are mined out. However, this material <br />does present a bonding liability problem as mining progresses as well as a storage or <br />location problem, especially as the mine is opened up. Once the operation moves on to <br />the second phase, there should be room in the previous phase to dispose of excess <br />material. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.