My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2024-03-20_REVISION - M1990057 (22)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1990057
>
2024-03-20_REVISION - M1990057 (22)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/1/2024 1:32:26 PM
Creation date
3/20/2024 6:56:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1990057
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
3/20/2024
Doc Name
Comment/Objection
From
Brooke Fredlund
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
CN3
Email Name
LJW
LJW
Media Type
D
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
Comment/Objection Narrative* <br /> Water Focused Objection <br /> The impact on the upper Arkansas River basin and particularly the Leadville area is significant. Impacts include <br /> potential cyanide and other chemical contamination of surface and groundwater.The mill waste pile will be a <br /> potential source of water contamination risks forever,yet the mill plan does not address perpetual monitoring <br /> and management of the waste pile. High water consumption may reduce water availability in the Leadville area <br /> for residential and other uses.These water issues alone are so significant the mill should not be permitted to <br /> operate. <br /> Broad Objection <br /> I object to this application on numerous grounds: use of cyanide in processing tailings;disturbance of and <br /> transport of tailings from East Side of Leadville to Mill site; no foolproof method to guarantee no leakage of <br /> cyanide&other chemicals from proposed dry stack method of storage of processed materials;threat of leakage <br /> into water table of cyanide/other chemicals into groundwater,affecting wells,fishing/rafting industry, irrigation <br /> water;potential of environmental catastrophe from leakage of toxic substances(e.g.via air,water)resulting in <br /> extreme adverse effects to County residents,visitors and the tourist economies of Lake County and neighboring <br /> counties;destruction of wildlife habitats and death of animals,fish in Lake County and beyond along the length <br /> of the Arkansas River;health risks associated with airborne toxic particulates("fugitive dust'). <br /> Arkansas River Impact Objection <br /> Over the past several decades,countless hours of work and millions of dollars have been spent on repairing the <br /> devastating impacts of historic mining in Lake County on the Upper Arkansas River and its tributaries, <br /> particularly in the California Gulch watershed where the Leadville Mill and much of the targeted waste is <br /> located.As a result,the Upper Arkansas is now the longest continuous stretch of Gold Medal water in the <br /> nation. <br /> I would ask DRMS to consider if the risks of this project to the Leadville community and the surrounding <br /> environment are worth the benefits.Of particular note,we would ask DRMS to carefully consider the following: <br /> Does the CJK proposal adequately identify groundwater depth throughout the site or the preferential flow <br /> pathways/rates?In the instance of a spill, it would be necessary to have groundwater defined.Groundwater <br /> mapping would also play into a remediation plan in the instance of a spill.Those pathways must be identified <br /> and mitigated during an emergency to reduce impacts on drinking water supplies including wells in the area. <br /> Has CJK properly addressed concerns around the daily operations of the mill,such as mitigating impacts to <br /> wildlife and exposure to materials with elevated sodium-cyanide?This can include both terrestrial and aquatic <br /> wildlife/organisms. <br /> Has CJK properly addressed the disposal of processed waste throughout the life of the mine?Where will <br /> processed waste be disposed of or remediated to reduce impacts on human health and the environment?Does <br /> the life cycle of the proposed disposal plan fully mitigate the risks of its location in a highly sensitive <br /> environment? <br /> Does the CJK proposal address the risks to the community and the environment of disturbing the east side <br /> waste piles?The potential for release of toxic materials into the air,surface water,and groundwater must be <br /> addressed both during and after excavation.These waste piles have stabilized over time and disturbing them <br /> will increase the potential for erosion of freshly exposed surfaces by wind and water. <br /> Permit Number* <br /> Enter valid letter and then numbers,for example M1977999, M1999777UG or C1981201. <br /> M1990057 <br /> Permitting Action Type <br /> Select revision type or leave blank if comment pertains to a new permit application or NOI <br /> Permit Type <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.