2016-10-05_ENFORCEMENT - M2004031

Home Browse Search

Exhibit B balance in the surrounding area and failing to protect areas outside of the affected land from damage, and providing details regarding a hearing on this matter scheduled for March 25, 2015. The Operator met with the Division, but was unable to resolve the Division's concerns. 25. At the hearing, the Operator submitted a Groundwater Observation Data Sheet for monitoring well MW-2, indicating that the ground elevation remained unchanged at 5,041.59 feet, and that the water level rose from approximately 5,035 feet in 2004 to approximately 5,042 feet in 2006. 26. The Division reviewed groundwater monitoring data and found that three (3) groundwater monitoring wells located near the Complainant Property showed significant rises in alluvial groundwater levels after the Operator constructed the slurry wall around the Hazeltine Mine in 2005: (a) the water level in monitoring well MW-2 rose from approximately 5,035 feet in 2004 to approximately 5,042 feet in 2006; (b) the water level in monitoring well ARV-11A rose fi•om approximately 5,038 feet in 2004 to approximately 5,040.2 feet in 2006; and (c) the water level in monitoring well MW-11B rose from approximately 5,036 feet in 2004 to approximately 5,039 in 2005. 27. At the hearing, the Operator testified that the slurry wall causes the impoundment of one (1) to two (2) feet of additional groundwater. The Operator further testified that other factors that may contribute to the groundwater level, including (a) the flat gradient of the area, (b) the existence of wetlands on the Orr property prior to mining; (c) the grant of drainage from Fulton Ditch to Orr property by a prior owner; (d) rerouting of First Creek and the Bull Seep; (e) lawn irrigation and stormwater runoff from the Hazeltine Heights Subdivision; (f) the use of the Bull Seep as a waste way by the Fulton Ditch; and (g) the increased carrying capacity of the Fulton Ditch resulting from the ditch being lined with concrete in or about 2005 with underdrains. 28. Groundwater mounding created by the Operator's installation of the slurry wall around the perimeter of the Hazeltine Mine site was a cause of the flooding of the Complainant Property. CONCLUSIONS OF LANV 29. The Board has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials, Article 32.5 of Title 34, C.R.S. (2014) ("Act"). 30. Under section 34-32.5-116(4)(h), C.R.S., operators are required to minimize the disturbance to the prevailing hydrologic balance in the surrounding Aggregate Industries—WCR, Inc. M-2004-031 MV-2015-003 6 M-2004-031 Aggregate Industries Exhibit 13