2019-10-22_REVISION - C1981041 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JAMES A.BECKWITH FONTANARI OBJECTIONS AND COMMENTS l SNOWCAP BOND APPLICATION SL-I I I PG. 16 Nor can Snowcap's Application be granted based on its assertions that there has not been material infringement on surface water rights, and that the inflow has equaled the discharge of mine water into the Colorado River. The existing evidence and the Annual Hydrologic Reports filed with DRMS refute those claims. In the period 1982-2000, Powderhorn reported as much as 325 GPM of inflow water, but also reported only 275 GPM of discharge. Since 2001, and in the absence of any inflow measuring gauges, Snowcap has inaccurately reported 275 GPM being discharged into the Colorado River when, in fact, there has only been 93 GPM being discharged. As successor to the Powderhorn permits and decreed ground water rights, Snowcap has entitlement to 42 acre feet of ground water per year, at the maximum inflow rate of 245 GPM, so long as Snowcap uses the water for coal- washing, dust control and fire suppression. Snowcap admits it has not used the mine water for these three uses in eighteen (18) years. Instead, Snowcap asserts it uses the water to irrigate revegetation, but doing so would kill the plants. Snowcap reports to DRMS a discharge rate higher than its permitted inflow. Accordingly, Application SL-11 must be denied. V. REQUESTS FOR INFORMAL CONFERENCE AND HEARING In accordance with Coal Rule 3.03.2(4), Fontanari requests an informal conference among DRMS, Snowcap, and Fontanari within thirty (30) days of these objections. In accordance with Coal Rule 3.03.2(5), Fontanari requests a public hearing. Specific grounds for the adjudicatory hearing will be provided by Fontanari if and when DRMS issues a Proposed Decision on this pending application. Respectfully submitted, James A. Beckwith cc: Ms. Kendra N. Beckwith (kbeckwith @ messnger.com) Mr. Tanner J. Walls (twalls @ messner.com)