Laserfiche WebLink
PERMIT#:M-1980-183 <br /> INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: TOD <br /> INSPECTION DATE: September 18,2014 <br /> day for approximately 2 to 3 hours per day. From the bottom of the pit, the water was being pumped into a <br /> pipeline that extends to a sump underneath a pu�np house that is located on the west side of the permit area, next <br /> to Brighton Road(see Figure 1). <br /> The following possible violations were found during the current inspection. <br /> 1) Failure to comply with the terms of the permit application for permit M-1980-183. <br /> a. The approved reclamation plan (Exhibit E of Amendment 1) mentions a pump station that will <br /> be constructed on the east side of the permit area (in the southeast corner of Mining Area II), but <br /> does not mention the pump station and pipelines that currently are in place inside the permit area <br /> on the west side of the site, moiie than one quarter-mile away from the approved location for a <br /> pump station (see Figure 1, b+w). This is a possible violation of C.R.S. 34-32.5-116(1). <br /> Although the unapproved pump station and pipelines may not be owned by the operator of Pit <br /> 29, they were being used by the Terator for conveying water pumped from the pit. <br /> b. The operator was pumping pit water westward, off-site and out of the permit area to the South <br /> Platte River via the previously mentioned pump station located on the west side of the site. This <br /> is a possible violation of C.R.S., 34-32.5-116(1). This off-site pumping contradicts Exhibit G <br /> (Water Information), approved in Amendment 1, which explains that pit water will be pumped <br /> only to adjacent reservoirs or pits inside the permit area. The operator relies on a CDPS <br /> stormwater discharge permit obt�ined in 2012 for authority to discharge pumped water to the <br /> South Platte River. The CDPS pe"it is not mentioned in the DRMS permit application. (DRMS <br /> is researching the applicability of the stormwater permit to the source(s) of water in the pit.) <br /> 2) The operator has failed to protect areas outside of the affected land from slides or damages occurring <br /> during the mining operation, as indica ed by the pipeline that extends outside the western permit <br /> boundary. This is a possible violation of C.R.S. 34-32.5-116(4)(i). The pipeline was being used by the <br /> Pit 29 mining operation for conveying pitlwater off-site. <br /> CONCLUSION <br /> The possible violations described above require a hearing before the Mined Land Reclamation Board; therefore, <br /> this matter will be scheduled for consideration by the Board. Official notice of the hearing will follow in <br /> separate correspondence addressed to Brannan Sand and Gravel Company, L.L.C. <br /> I� <br /> III <br /> Page 3 of 7 <br />