Laserfiche WebLink
4. During the review period, the Division generated two adequacy review <br /> letters. The Applicant addressed all of the Division's adequacy issues to the <br /> Division's satisfaction. <br /> 5. On October 4, 2024, based on the applicable requirements of the <br /> Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials, <br /> Article 32.5 of Title 34, C.R.S. ("Act") and the Rules, the Division issued and served <br /> on all parties both a written recommendation for approval of the Permit Application <br /> over objection and a written rationale for that recommendation. <br /> 6. On October 24, 2024, the Board, through a prehearing officer, <br /> conducted a prehearing conference. The prehearing officer issued a draft <br /> prehearing order. Among other things, the draft prehearing order identified <br /> jurisdictional issues to be presented to the Board. At the hearing, the Board <br /> adopted the prehearing order without amendment. <br /> 7. At the hearing, the Division presented information about the <br /> Application, the mining plan, and the application process. The proposed operation <br /> will mine from east to west, with a sediment pond for washing materials and on-site <br /> processing in the pit, which will move across the pit as mining progresses. Stockpiles <br /> of mined materials will advance with the mining, and reclamation will occur <br /> concurrently. The Division described the financial warranty bonding process for the <br /> Application's phased mining plan. The initial bond will cover the first phase's <br /> excavation to within two feet above the groundwater line, and a substantial bond <br /> increase will follow when the process moved to the second mining phase of excavating <br /> below the water line and creating slurry walls for the post-mining water storage. <br /> Applicant will need to obtain additional permits before the proposed operation <br /> proceeds to the second phase of mining. <br /> 8. The Division also presented testimony regarding jurisdictional issues <br /> raised by the Objector. The Applicant has the legal right to enter and mine on the <br /> site and had provided the Division with a deed that included the mineral rights on <br /> the site. <br /> 9. Regarding minimizing disturbances to the hydrological balance, the <br /> Division presented testimony that the slurry wall would not cause a drop in <br /> groundwater level that would affect the Objector's property. Because the well on the <br /> Objector's property had been declared abandoned by a water court in 2013, and <br /> domestic use water is piped in, the proposed mining activities and slurry wall will not <br /> affect the Objector's access to water. Based on monitoring wells, the Applicant <br /> demonstrated that any change in groundwater would not affect the Ogilvy Ditch, <br /> with the highest proposed groundwater level being seventeen feet below the <br /> irrigation ditch. The mining plan includes dewatering ditches that will move water <br /> that collects in the pit to a settlement pond during mining. Once the water settles, it <br /> Ogilvy River Farm, LLC. <br /> Ogilvy River Farm Pit/M-2024-006 2 <br />