My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2018-07-02_PERMIT FILE - M2017013
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2017013
>
2018-07-02_PERMIT FILE - M2017013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2021 9:20:07 PM
Creation date
7/2/2018 10:33:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2017013
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
7/2/2018
Doc Name Note
RE: Comment Dated 6/8/2018
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response #2
From
Todd Creek Village
To
DRMS
Email Name
JLE
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.
/
123
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
A We do not anticipate needing a well permit, substitute water supply plan <br /> and/or an effluent discharge permit for this project. If any of these become <br /> necessary due to unforeseeable circumstances, we are prepared to immediately <br /> obtain any of the needed permits or plans for this project. There are a few <br /> relatively minor permits needed from Adams County (Grading & Drainage permit <br /> and a No export and Not for Sale Mining permit). The permit area excavation will <br /> not start until all permits are obtained. <br /> B. DRMS Response: On June 11, 2018 the Division received a comment letter <br /> from the Colorado Division of Water Resources (DWR). This letter was forwarded <br /> to you via e-mail. Given the site description and the mining plan, it does appear <br /> groundwater will be encountered during the operation. Per the DWR's comment <br /> letter if groundwater is exposed or used the applicant will need to obtain a well <br /> permit and a substitute water supply plan or decreed plan for augmentation. <br /> Based on your response, you indicated TCVMD will obtain the permits if they are <br /> necessary. Given this, please commit to not <br /> exposing groundwater until a well permit and a substitute water supply plan or <br /> decreed plan for Augmentation is obtained. <br /> C. TCVMD 2"1 Response:A substitute water supply plan for augmentation has <br /> been filed with the Colorado Division of Water Resources. TCVMD commits to <br /> not exposing groundwater until a well permit and substitute water supply plan for <br /> augmentation is obtained. <br /> Rule 6.3.12 ā Exhibit Lā Permanent Man-Made Structures <br /> Q. This exhibit included engineering evaluations for structures within 200 feet <br /> of the affected land owned by KID Kaufman Company, Inc. and ERN Limited <br /> Partnership Et Al. These evaluations assert that the structures will be stable <br /> given the 3H:1 V constructed slopes of the reservoir. Please provide <br /> documentation such as modeling to support this assertion. Enclosed is a Mined <br /> Land Reclamation Board approved policy regarding accepted factors of safety for <br /> slope stability/geotechnical analyses associated with mining operations. Or, if the <br /> entities described above have signed the structure damage agreements, you <br /> may submit those signed copies instead of the documentation and modeling. <br /> A. The permit area is within the water retention area of the Signal 1 Dam <br /> rehabilitation area. In short, the permit area will be underwater when the projects <br /> are complete. The Signal 1 Dam is considered a `High Hazard Dam"and <br /> therefore very complete soil and slope stability analysis have been completed in <br /> accordance with Department of Water Resources Dam Safety Division <br /> requirements. The soils in this area have been shown to be stable enough to <br /> support a "High Hazard Dam"directly on top of a 3:1 slope excavation. This <br /> slope stability analysis was run for steady seepage, end of construction, rapid- <br /> drawdown (soil drained, and soil undrained) and seismic scenarios. There was <br /> no setback from the 3:1 slope for the dam in these analysis'. Since both the KP <br /> Kaufman well and the ERN fence & road are located further away from the 3:1 <br /> slope than the dam was in the testing models, we request the DRMS accept the <br /> slope stability tests that were done by Earth Engineering Consultants as <br /> acceptable documentation of slope stability for this project. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.