Laserfiche WebLink
Email Address* <br /> Enter a valid email address in this field to receive a confirmation e-mail. <br /> betty.benson@outlook.com <br /> Your Phone Number* <br /> Used only to follow up. <br /> 3035073025 <br /> Extension <br /> Alternate Phone Number <br /> Used only to follow up. <br /> Alternate Phone Extension <br /> Connection to Operation <br /> Select all that apply <br /> Land Owner of affected land ✓ Structure Owner within 200' of affected land <br /> Mineral Owner Nearby Resident <br /> Adjacent Land Owner Concerned Citizen <br /> Government Agency Other <br /> DESCRIPTION OF COMMENT OR OBJECTION <br /> You are providing a comment or objection to the public record of a permitting action currently under review by the Division of <br /> Reclamation, Mining and Safety.This form is not intended for reporting of possible violations or illegal activity. Please be as specific <br /> as possible. <br /> Comment/Objection Narrative <br /> There are so many reasons why allowing a mill to use cyanide to more easily extract any remaining gold from <br /> the mine waste piles at the Penn Mines is not a good idea. <br /> •Heavy truck traffic issues on the east side and on Hwy 24 <br /> •potential of exposing stable materials to the air when dug up and moved <br /> •impact to locals and tourists who enjoy using the East Side Mining District and the Mineral Belt Trail in our <br /> now recreation/tourist community. <br /> But there are others I would like to mention. <br /> In Rule 6.4.4, Exhibit D Mining Plan-CJK is requesting a change to double the amount of material processed <br /> per tear from the current permit.As such,the crusher will operate only during the day shift,with dust&sound <br /> volume controls.The plant will operate 350 days per year 3 shifts per day. <br /> We live in our home all the time.Any sounds coming from the mill that might be disruptive to residences will be <br /> noticable even if they only operate the crusher during the day. <br /> If cyanide makes its way to the Arkansas,what is the solution? If nearby wells become contaminated with <br /> cyanide,what is the solution?Would people using that well water recognize a different taste?Or would this only <br /> show up in a well test?Would those property owners need to truck in water?Or perhaps they just lose their <br /> homes?All so that the owners of CJK can profit? <br /> If this permit is approved by DRMS and then by the County Commissioners, nearby residences will need to test <br /> their wells regularly.What is"regularly"?Testing is expensive.The owners of CJK benefit,and the nearby <br /> neighbors have expenses, risks,and likely property value loss.While CJK has offered to pay for testing during <br /> the last application process,we could not seem to come to an agreement on the process.Would they test for <br /> cyanide,which is a different and separate test?Would they respect homeowner's property and arrange a <br /> date/time for testing?Would the reports be available to the well owners in a timely fashion? It seems a conflict <br /> of interest for them to be in charge of neighbor well testing. <br /> CYANIDE: Rule 6.4.4(pg. 5)also discusses the storage and use of cyanide and addresses potential toxicity <br /> issues for wildlife,water fowl&/or aquatic life <br />