My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-07-14_PERMIT FILE - M2016010
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2016010
>
2016-07-14_PERMIT FILE - M2016010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2021 10:56:20 AM
Creation date
7/21/2016 8:43:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2016010
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
7/14/2016
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Transit-Mix Concrete Co.
To
DRMS
Email Name
AME
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
190
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
Jerry Schnabel, Bob Stabo <br /> July 11, 2016 <br /> Page 9 <br /> Proposed Water Sources <br /> Comment: There has been some confusion regarding the proposed source of water for demands <br /> at the proposed quarry and neighboring well owners are concerned about the potential for Transit <br /> Mix to develop surface and/or ground water supplies at the site. <br /> Response: The proposed water source for all demands at the proposed quarry, based on the <br /> information reviewed for this effort and the February 18, 2016 memorandum, is water purchased <br /> from Colorado Springs Utilities or another water utility and trucked to the property. Based on <br /> information provided by Transit Mix, no surface water diversions or ground water wells will be <br /> developed at the quarry site to provide water for onsite demands. Accordingly, the local aquifer <br /> and stream system will not be developed or depleted. In fact,return flows from the trucked water <br /> may add some return flows or high water quality, which will be beneficial to local ground water <br /> supplies. <br /> Well Inventory <br /> Comment: Two responders commented that they questioned whether the well summary and <br /> location map presented in the February 18, 2016 memorandum was complete as they believe <br /> existing wells were not included in the summary. The CDRMS requested additional information <br /> regarding Permit No. 179279 which is a well completed in granite material located to the east of <br /> the north-south oriented high-angle thrust faults and information regarding the wells located to <br /> the west of the thrust faults. <br /> Response: The well inventory and location map included in the February 18, 2016 memorandum <br /> was based on the Division of Water Resources master well list of well information. The State's <br /> well list is comprehensive of all well permit activity including permits that are expired or canceled <br /> or wells that are abandoned or replaced. The well inventory and location mapping does not include <br /> any expired or canceled well permits nor any permits for wells that were abandoned or replaced as <br /> these are not valid well permits. The well inventory and location map also do not include wells <br /> that either do not have permits or are mis-located as reported in the State's database. <br /> One of the specific public comments indicates that one well within the Eagles Nest area, to the <br /> northwest of the proposed quarry area, was omitted. Although not specified, we believe that this <br /> comment references Permit No. 58506. This well was included in the research and analysis and <br /> the State's permit information indicates that the well permit was cancelled. Based on the review <br /> of that well permit information, it was concluded that there is not an existing well at the location <br /> of Permit No. 58506 and if there is, it is not operating under a valid well permit. An updated well <br /> location map(Figure 1)presenting the well believed to be in question(Permit No. 58506)has been <br /> attached for reference. <br /> Another respondent, Mr. Sheaves, presented a list of properties that includes approximately 160 <br /> properties within a 2-mile radius, 65 properties within a 1-mile radius, 8 properties within a 1/2- <br /> mile radius and 1 property within a 1200-foot radius of the proposed quarry area. Mr. Sheaves <br /> letter correctly identifies that not all of the identified properties have wells and it is a fair <br /> assumption that the properties will rely on wells if ever developed in the future. The research and <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.