Laserfiche WebLink
Mined land Reclamation Board/Div. Reclamation Mining and Safety <br /> March 12, 2020 <br /> Page 3 <br /> All through the application and letters to the county and soil conservation service it states the end <br /> use is pasture land and irrigated pastureland. Then goes on to show a drawing figure 10 a reclaimed <br /> gravel pit filled with water(53 acre pond).Also calculation tables for water consumption by evaporation on <br /> the pond surface. What is the end use going to be? <br /> Figure 10 shows the pond and 25 foot buffer and in the lower right corner the tailwater ditch. 25 <br /> foot buffet is not adequate. Gravel pits nearby have 35 foot buffers on the side's 100 foot buffers <br /> from the river and 200 foot in front along the frontage road. 200 foot buffers along the frontage <br /> allows for parking, buildings, picnic tables if a pond is the final use and access to the property <br /> without parking or crossing others property no matter the end use . 25 foot buffer is not enough to <br /> prevent back cutting of the pit wall from reaching the adjacent property if the pit is mined vertical <br /> right to the 25 foot buffer. When large underground streams of water come out of vertical pit walls <br /> they can slough the wall to a slope that could reach the adjacent property. Even when dirt is used to <br /> slope the vertical wall for reclaiming water can wash the dirt into the pit and still allow the pit wall <br /> to back cut into the buffer and potentially to the adjacent property. The tailwater ditch within the <br /> 25 foot buffer can saturate the pit wall enough to cause a slouching (caving) situation that could <br /> reach the adjacent property as well as be a serious safety problem if someone or equipment is in <br /> the bottom of the pit while mining and the pit wall caves- in.The 25 foot buffer has a soil pile with a <br /> 24 foot footprint that loads the vertical pit wall on top. This loading adds even more to the chances <br /> the saturated pit wall will fail resulting in a cave-in. <br /> The property title exceptions call for access and maintenance of the last chance ditch traversing the <br /> property. I believe this is the last chance ditch across the interstate on property that originally was <br /> part of this pit property. I don't believe the applicant's property has any Last Chance water or right <br /> of ways or laterals. Maybe fluctuating tail water from properties east of the pit property. And no <br /> water rights for irrigating any land.The construction of the interstate and drains were sometimes <br /> excavated like the sump on the applicant's pit property. <br /> Is there surface land for an oil and gas well pad mentioned in the exceptions? Can land for a well <br /> pad be provided for with a 53 acre pond as depicted in figure 10? <br /> 9.4 Effects to Wildlife: After reclamation the property will be converted back to irrigated pasture. <br /> Where is the Pond? Is the irrigated pasture the 25 foot buffer? <br /> 8.2.3 and 8.24 are about the fish in the area .These two address impacts to fish and both say there <br /> is no discharging to the Colorado River. Where does the water go if not to the Colorado River?Will <br /> the discharge water be tested or not for contaminants and silt/mud? <br /> I find it quite humorous in 8.3 and the discussion4.3: The wet lands on site will likely disappear in a <br /> reality short period of time following the onset of dewatering. Drilling logs show ground water near <br /> the surface. Where is the Army Corps. Of engineers? Wetlands on property that is claimed to be <br />