Laserfiche WebLink
PERMIT #: M- 2008 -017 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: TK <br />INSPECTION DATE: July 31, 2014 <br />French drains are installed outside the upgradient sides of some of the gravel pit slurry walls in the South Platte <br />River valley for the purpose of allowing mounded groundwater to drain around the pit to an area downgradient <br />from the pit. <br />Mr. Einspahr's pasture land slopes gently downward several feet to a central low area. Flooding of this pasture <br />was previously reported in 2012, according to the DRMS inspection report dated December 31, 2012. Mr. <br />Einspahr reported the flooding has significantly reduced the use of his pasture for livestock grazing. He also <br />described the current episode of flooding as having developed in the last few weeks, but the pasture has not <br />been completely dry anytime this summer. <br />Mr. Einspahr reported that approximately 2.5 inches of rain had fallen in the area the night before the <br />inspection. During the inspection, the flooded area appeared to be between one and two acres (see attached <br />photos). Maximum water depth appeared to be several feet in the lowest part of the pasture. Although some of <br />the water in the pasture would have come from the rain the night before, the surface drainage area that would <br />report to the flooded part of the pasture appeared too small for the 2.5 -inch rain to have provided much of the <br />water standing in the pasture. <br />The operator monitors alluvial groundwater levels in monitoring well MW -4, located near the northwest corner <br />of the Einspahr pasture (see attached letter from the operator's consultant, Applegate Group, Inc., dated <br />7/10/14). From December 2010 to March 2014, water levels in MW -4 rose from about 25 feet below the top of <br />the well's casing to 5 feet below the top of the casing. Based on the slope of the land from the well to the <br />flooded pasture, a depth of 6 feet in MW -4 would likely be close to the same elevation of the floodwater surface <br />in the Einspahr pasture. The similarity in elevations between alluvial groundwater in MW -4 and floodwater in <br />the pasture indicate alluvial groundwater is a plausible source of flooding in the Einsphar pasture. <br />The similarity in timing of flooding in the pasture (first reported in 2012), and the rise of the groundwater level <br />in MW -4 (beginning in late 2010), further supports a conclusion that alluvial groundwater is the main source of <br />flooding in the pasture. The completion of a slurry wall around Pit 29 in approximately 2009, and the <br />subsequent rise in water level in MW -4 next to the slurry wall, indicate groundwater mounding occurs next to <br />the slurry wall and is the underlying cause of flooding observed in the Einspahr pasture. <br />The slurry wall that surrounds Pit 29 (operated by Brannan), in conjunction with slurry that surrounds the <br />nearby Stagecoach Pit (operated by Albert Frei and Sons Inc.), can be expected to create a significant <br />constriction in alluvial groundwater flow where the two slurry walls are only about 200 feet apart at well MW -4 <br />(see yellow - colored lines which depict slurry walls on attached Figure 1, dated 10/28/10, from Applegate <br />Group's water monitoring report prepared for Brannan). Of the two pits, Pit 29 is likely the greater contributor <br />of Mr. Einspahr's flooding based on Pit 29's close proximity to the pasture. <br />Based on the observations made during this inspection, DRMS cites the mounding of groundwater on the <br />outside of Pit 29 as a problem, and requires as a corrective action that the operator of the pit submit to DRMS <br />by August 20, 2014 a groundwater mounding mitigation plan. The plan must be submitted as a Technical <br />Revision or Amendment to the permit and must include the following three items: <br />1. A detailed description of the measures the operator will take to reduce groundwater mounding outside <br />Pit 29 to a level that eliminates flooding on the Einspahr property, <br />2. A time schedule for implementing the plan, and <br />3. Enough information for DRMS to estimate the cost of implementing the plan (for establishing the <br />amount of required financial warranty). <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />