Laserfiche WebLink
Comment/Objection Narrative* <br /> NO! <br /> The application fails to demonstrate how the mine will control water pollution during mining and in the long-term <br /> post-mining.Given the history of water pollution problems,a more detailed analysis of how the mine will ensure <br /> future water quality protection is required under state law. <br /> The application does not demonstrate that the current treatment and monitoring systems,either in place or as <br /> proposed,will adequately protect ground and surface water during active mining. <br /> The application fails to provide sufficient details on the plans for the ore material to be mined, including where <br /> the ore from the mine will be processed, how it will be transported,and how it will be stored on site.There is not <br /> a sufficient transportation or storage plan for this application. <br /> The application lacks a sufficient description of the area's surface hydrology to enable the public to understand <br /> all of the drainages and bodies of water that might be affected by the mining operation. <br /> The application references a milling operation on site, but fails to provide sufficient information to review the <br /> impacts or reclamation requirements of a milling operation on site. <br /> The application must incorporate all aspects of the reclamation plan in the proposed financial assurance(bond) <br /> for full reclamation. <br /> The application does not mention the risk of wildfire ignition(from explosives used and stored on site or sparks <br /> from equipment)despite the mine being located at the highest risk level in the state for wildfire probability, <br /> severity,and post-fire impacts. <br /> The application does not provide sufficient information to protect property and the environment from wildfire. <br /> Additional points to consider: <br /> Interesting quotes from a mountain ear article referencing the town of Nederland's concerns about some of the <br /> application: <br /> "Town Administrator Jonathan Cain noted some of the questions the Town of Nederland had for GIR regarding <br /> the DMO application.These questions addressed GIR's planned emergency response and emergency <br /> notification systems;the procedural transparency they were going to provide;the impact on wildlife and on <br /> vulnerable populations;the"technical capacity"of their proposed operations;and the financial accountability <br /> and oversight they will provide." <br /> "Mayor Pro Tern Nichole Sterling asked about how GIR plans to mitigate the impacts to Nederland's noise and <br /> air quality,as well as to local property values. <br /> Cain answered that the application does not define how the mine will operate in terms of the amount of dust to <br /> expect from the milling process,or to the amount of transport to expect through Town." <br /> Permitting Action Comment/Objection is Regarding <br /> • New Permit Change to Existing Permit <br /> Permit Number* (?) <br /> Enter a valid permit number <br /> M1977410 <br /> County* <br /> Colorado County where the proposed operation is located <br /> Boulder <br /> Enter one county only <br /> Site Name <br /> Cross Gold Mine <br /> Perm ittee/Operator Name <br /> Grand Island Resources <br /> I <br />