My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2018-03-09_PERMIT FILE - M2017049 (29)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2017049
>
2018-03-09_PERMIT FILE - M2017049 (29)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2021 11:47:59 PM
Creation date
3/9/2018 3:38:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2017049
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
3/9/2018
Doc Name Note
PART 1 OF 3
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Transit Mix Concrete Co.
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
Application Materials
Email Name
TC1
ERR
ECS
WHE
AME
PSH
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.
/
170
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
- ,}? <br /> PNWL%%F` -MMKWQ . <br /> Transit Mix Concrete Co. <br /> minimizing the impacts to the watershed. All water entering the watershed will exit along Little Turkey <br /> Creek. The operation will not consume any water from the watershed. <br /> Objection: One cannot accurately predict the impacts of vegetation removal on sediment runoff <br /> volumes. <br /> Response:Similar to every other aspect of mining,there have been numerous studies, conducted by <br /> qualified professionals,that evaluate the impacts of changing surface conditions from vegetated to <br /> disturbed during mining and then back to vegetated during reclamation. These studies, primarily TR-55 <br /> and other methods required by EPCDCM, are used to quantify runoff volumes and rates based on the <br /> surface conditions at any point during the operation by using runoff coefficients specific to the <br /> vegetation cover type, soil conditions, and antecedent moisture conditions. Using these methods,the <br /> impacts of vegetation removal were calculated, and the sediment control structures were designed to <br /> control runoff from the 100-yr, 24-hr storm event during the period of maximum disturbance. <br /> Groundwater <br /> Responses to specific groundwater comments are addressed in the attached document from Hydro- <br /> logic Solutions. <br /> Objection: The quarry will negatively impact water wells. The wells likely depend on a system of <br /> fractures to recharge the aquifers. A 1996 earthquake caused several wells in the area to have drastic <br /> reduction in water production or to be abandoned. <br /> Response:The groundwater report in Exhibit G discusses in detail the groundwater systems in the area <br /> and quantifies the minimal mining impacts to those systems. Studies by State and federal agencies have <br /> demonstrated that blasting impacts to water wells are limited to wells located within approximately 500 <br /> feet of a blast(Berger, 1980 and ODOT, 2018). The closest well is approximately 1400 feet from the <br /> quarry area;therefore,there will be no impacts to any water wells by blasting activities. <br /> The energy from an earthquake is significantly greater than the energy created by a blast. According to <br /> an OSM study, a magnitude 1.0 earthquake (which cannot be felt by people) has the energy equivalent <br /> of 200,000 pounds of explosive per delay(Hawkins, 2000). This means a common earthquake in <br /> Colorado of magnitude 3.0 has the energy equivalent of 20,000,000 pounds of explosive per delay. <br /> Blasting reports from Transit Mix's other operations indicate that less than 1,000 pounds of explosive <br /> are used per delay. The blasting operations simply do not create the large amount of energy necessary <br /> to damage the nearby water wells. <br /> Objection: Removal of massive amounts of granite will most likely disrupt recharge of fractured rock <br /> wells. Minimal disturbance could be catastrophic and permanent for well owners both upstream and <br /> downstream as there is no alternative source of water. <br /> Response:The comment does not contain any evidence to support the claims. The groundwater <br /> assessment and impacts analysis included in Attachment G-2 of Exhibit G discusses in detail the <br /> Hitch Rack Ranch Quarry Response to Comments <br /> March 9,2018 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.