DRMS Comment Objection Intake - DEV 4/1/2025 ‎(53)‎

• Permit No: M1977410
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Date: 4/1/2025
• Doc Name: Comment/Objection
• From: Audrey Benedict
• To: DRMS
• Email Name: JPL
• Email Name: JPL
• Media Type: D

Your City
Ward
Your State
CO
Your Zip Code
Maximum of 10 digits. (Example)80202
80481
Email Address
Enter a valid email address in this field to receive a confirmation e-mail.
[e-mail]
Your Phone Number* (')
Used only to follow up.
3035890140
Extension
Alternate Phone Number(?)
Used only to follow up.
Alternate Phone Extension
Connection to Operation
Select all that apply
Land Owner of affected land Structure Owner within 200' of affected land
Mineral Owner Nearby Resident
Adjacent Land Owner Concerned Citizen
Government Agency Other
DESCRIPTION OF COMMENT OR OBJECTION
You are providing a comment or objection to the public record of a permitting action currently under review by the Division of
Reclamation, Mining and Safety.This form is not intended for reporting of possible violations or illegal activity. Please be as specific
as possible.
Comment/Objection Narrative*
I'm a 56-year mountain resident of BOCO and have degrees in both geology and biology. I understand the
Colorado Mineral Belt and the historic context of this mine. My principle objections to GRI's application are as
follows: (1)Since purchasing the mine in 2017,GRI's apparent incompetence and failure to upgrade the mine's
water treatment system prior to resuming mining activity on the 10 acre site resulted in excessive releases of
heavy metals following an underground tunnel collapse in 2021.Considering that this watershed provides a
significant portion of the City of Boulder's water supply via Barker Reservoir, it would seem ludicrous to even
consider a 200-acre expansion of the Cross Mine and a 50 year permit--a Superfund site in the making given
GRI's history to date. (2)At the very least,an independent mining engineer's evaluation of the mine's actual ore
potential,and an independent assessment of GRI's engineering and safety plans for existing and new tunnel
expansion should be required. (3)GRI's proven financial capacity to buildout the existing upgraded water
treatment system to serve even a 10-year permitted interval(much less 50 years worth of active mining activity
and acid mine runoff)seems doubtful. (4)To allow this level of environmental and geo-destructive activity in a
major city watershed and adjacent to the Indian Peaks Wilderness Areas seems ill advised by any measure.
GRI,a company that we know little about, has failed to hold public meetings in Boulder or in Nederland.That
level of disregard should be a red flag in itself. (5)Any environmental protection plans presented as part of
GRI's pending application should be legally binding without recourse, include a schedule of deadlines for
compliance,and REAL financial penalties for violations.