Laserfiche WebLink
fti,~; <br />_ _ _ 5TA_TE OF__C__O_ LORA_DO_ <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Nalur~l flewurcn <br />1113 Sherman 51., Room 21 S C O L D I(A D O <br />[lrrneq CoIEUaJo 80201 r~ i v i c n u u r <br />Phate~ U03186fr3567 Al I` F R A I. S <br />-& <br />r~x; Iron e32~eron G E O L O G Y <br />EEC: ~'•A•i4 V-nInING <br />f •Ri••KIrbU <br />May 31, 2006 ~ eaio••rm <br />u,.Mn<. <br />Mr. Walter Eldridge x„fwic..up~ <br />Map Surveys Inc. ~ t.«m~~.o~r«r:w <br />P. O. Box 290 a~.. an ~•, r.,~f.,l,~ <br />Mesa, Colorado 81643 ""' " ""'" <br />~.,:,. .~~, a,-,.., ~.. ~.,,,~.. <br />RE. Upland Gravel, P rmit No. M-2001-088, Application for Conversion to 112c (CN-01),(Second <br />Adequacy Review~E-~ <br />Dear Mr Eldrdge' <br />DMG has completed review of your response to the preliminary adequacy review of your application for <br />conversion of the Upland Gravel 110c permit to a 112c permit. The application cannot be approved until the <br />following remaining issues are adequately addressed. Please submit a response to the following issues as <br />soon as possible, but no later than June 9. 2006 so the decision due date set for June 14, 2006 can be mat. <br />If you cannot respond by June 9, 2006, please submit a written request for extension of the decision date. If <br />your response, or an extension request, are not received by June 9, 2006 this application may he denied. <br />ADEQUACY ISSUES <br />Exhibit C -Pre-rnininq and Mining Plan Maps <br />1 Response acceptable. <br />2. Response acceptable. <br />3. Response acceptable. <br />4. Response acceptable. <br />5. Please be aware Ihat stormwater retention ponds must release any captured stormwater within <br />certain timetrames, per the requirements of the State Engineers Office -Division of Water <br />Resources. Please document that the proposed stormwater control features are in compliance <br />with those requirements or revise the plan accordingly. <br />6. Response acceptable. <br />Exhibit D -Mining Plan <br />7. Response acceptable. <br />8. During the December 12, 2005 inspection the operator representative stated that the two acre <br />processing area was very tight when stockpiles were added. If the processing area is to be <br />increased m size, this conversion can be used to address those changes. <br />-,~~. , ~ Ian,.. <br />