Laserfiche WebLink
Comment/Objection Narrative* <br />I am submitting this objection regarding the Leadville Mill Permit application submitted by CJK. As an adjacent <br />landowner, I do not believe that an operation of this sort should under any circumstances be permitted in such <br />close proximity to residential dwellings or wells. <br />Of primary concern is the use of cyanide in the milling process. I understand that CJK has a planned system <br />that SHOULD keep all contaminants out of ground water. I understand that the risk of contamination is minimal. <br />But as a resident who's well sits 500 ft downgradient from the mill, and even more specifically a parent of <br />children who will be drinking from that well, I have to question if safety is ever guaranteed enough to make the <br />risk acceptable. No matter how good of a plan and process you have in place, accidents can and DO happen. <br />What amount of'risk' is acceptable when it comes to causing potential illness or death to children in the off <br />chance of a catastrophic disaster? As the 'experts' and the agency whose goal is public safety, I am asking <br />DRMS to be sure you are 100% sure of the safety of my family before approving this project. I also note that <br />CJK's plan incase of an accident or emergency spill, does not include any information as to when and how <br />neighboring residents will be notified. <br />Of secondary concern to me, is the barrier that will be at the property boundaries. Is fencing on only 2 sides of <br />the property acceptable and adequate? Can you adequately balance wildlife concerns with the safety of the <br />public in this particular location? <br />Before being processed in the mill, the mine dump material will be partially covered in a roofed, 3 sided <br />structure. As far as I can tell there is no proposed lining to keep the MDM from potentially leaching into the <br />ground. While the material coming from the Penn Mine Group is testing below levels for hazardous concerns, is <br />CJK allowed to bring in material from other sites if they so choose, that may not test at the same levels? <br />The overall process for closure appears to be to dump everything into the ECS and bury it. This includes <br />chunks of concrete from structures other than the mill building that will be demolished. I understand that burying <br />concrete is generally an acceptable practice and is not considered hazardous. I wonder if there is any concern <br />that this may affect the integrity of the HDPE liner? <br />As far as I can tell, CJK has yet to identify a water source for operation of the mill. The wells on the property are <br />currently only monitoring wells. Per the Lake County Sanitations minutes, the District has already denied CJK to <br />tap into its nearby water line. In order to use water from Parkville water district, they must rely on permission to <br />use the Lake County Sanitation Districts supply line. Water supply is of great concern not only for the citizens of <br />Lake County, but also for other areas of the state that are already supplied from our location. Considering the <br />large amount of needed water for this project, CJK should prove an adequate supply before being allowed to <br />move forward. <br />Again, as the Department of Mine Reclamation and Safety, I ask that you be sure you can 100% support this <br />project as safe for the surrounding public before you approve this application. <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 />County <br />Lake <br />Enter one county only <br />Site Name <br />