My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL38389
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL38389
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:58:10 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 9:38:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980143
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Name
FILE M-80-143 TEXAS CREEK GRAVEL PIT
From
CAP ALLEN ENGINEERING
To
MLRB
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
• • iii iiuiiiiiiiiiiii <br />Cap Allen Engineering <br />64 PTARMIGAN LP,NE - DURANGO. COLORADO 81301-6928 (303) 2470088 <br />David Shelton, Director <br />Mined Land Reclamation Hoard <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Ref: File M-RO-143; Texas Creek Gravel Pit <br />I have reviewed information provided me by Terry Sadler on the <br />above gravel operation. In particular, items on which an engineer <br />may be asked to comment are those of the physical adherence to <br />the mining and reclamation plan and the ability of the operator <br />to accomplish those plans. <br />The gravel pit at present is in the operation mode and estimates <br />must be made about the final status of the land for reclamation. <br />In order for me to comment fully, it would seem very obviously <br />necessary to have a plan of the site, showing operations, <br />intendec9 disturbed land, etc. This is in fact required by your <br />application procedure and described as Exhibit C. <br />There i:> no Exhibit C, or map, in the application available at <br />the La Plata County Clerks office. Your application process <br />states ghat an applicatiod will not' even be reviewed, mach less <br />approve(1, without all o€ tlhe required Exhibits. <br />Thus thE~ comments II makd here are based only on the very brief <br />narrative included lin dhe application and on actual site <br />information of topogdaphylprovided me and under my supervision. <br />The site as it exis$s togap is not being mined with a 1.5 H to 1 <br />V slope as Exhibit IB stlates. Because of the rapidly rising <br />backslope behind the mining face, as the amount of matezial <br />removed increases, the difficulty of retaining the proper slope <br />increases. It is unllikelyl that final slope reclamation, an item <br />which even the MLRB Imay hpve trowb$e.determiging without al map <br />and plan, will be malde im~ossible~tb any reasonably stable grade <br />due to property line roost aints and lack of overburden material. <br />The cost of reclaiming Ithis area, returning the topsoil and <br />reseeding, as a mini>sium, wlill probably exceed $5,000. <br />The recommendation of Bob Hawn, of the SCS (also in your <br />application) states that 3:1 is a recommended slope for <br />reclamation. <br />In addition, Hawn recommends that the area is to be protected <br />from vehicles, people and livestock until reclaimed, <br />obviously the 3:1 lslopelI recommended in the application is <br />impossible, given thelappa#ent progress of the work face. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.