|
~~
<br />n ~' ,.~; r~ ~ '
<br />` ~
<br />sy:, M,'Ei~: ~'8 £ ~.~.>~098EC'['t)~~.SU'.# 31© j
<br />F ,
<br />:a
<br />• JF ~ '
<br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS SSC
<br />
<br />`
<br />THYs was a~ i4sp~tion of the-La Poudre Sand and Gravel Site conducted by Erica Crosby and
<br />Tom ~cElreXSjes, of the . Calarado Division of Minerals and Geology. Dana Moore of Tuttle
<br />A~rpiegat¢~ivas present representing the operator, flail Irwin construction Company. The purpose
<br />o€ tkte'inrpeation ctaas. ta'im;pect the area where :the slurry wall has been installed and,to
<br />', .meet with Clem [~cNaney regarding his concerns and objection to the La Poudre Sand and .Gravel
<br />L~exinit Amendment.
<br />'fhg permits amendment was filed in .aet~ctese to t
<br />During that inspection, -the t~perdtot' .in~tQated tY
<br />graves pits #4 and Mks to facilitdt:e `e Water stn
<br />construction of the rege.~voir to be:. a 'si~ni
<br />Therefore the eperator was Y<~xired. to q~ange` a ~,
<br />space, conservation and recreaCaon to'developed
<br />i ..~
<br />~~
<br />Division's inspection of May 14, 1999.
<br />a slurry wall had been constructed around
<br />e reservoir. The Divisib~ considers the
<br />'ant change' to the reclamation plan: ~
<br />tion 6£;the gostmining land use £ram open' .
<br />ter.reeources,.-'_
<br />I .. i,
<br />The amendtQeut was deemed •bpihplete for pgrposes of ; filing, Gn January 21„ 2000. The Division's
<br />~ ;~
<br />decision date date:.is.sc~driled
<br />'feir Agi3;1 20, 20~. 'The Divis~.on.reaeived one abjection ~o ",
<br />the' application from `C}ein-:MaNattap.'~oz-•>s"ebruary.'.a5, .2000. l'wo concerns ,are. noted in the
<br />letter; Che abstrnot3lGn;'o~, Lhe fiium3wagr;pZ,evatirtg;the' grqupd-around the McNdne}+ property and
<br />s: raising the water ;level: oa *1~e,'psccLxerty doe tq ao~+strumt~ti of the slurry wall. Clem claims i
<br />that. installation of .the. slsaxry wa7:1 ~$ aansed;the grouIIdtwa9ser to raise the water 2eve1 oy~ "
<br />the propettcy' atxd flood Qhe'~kility ~oellas•.. ~ i ', I
<br />Clem direpted the D~vis$orl.t<i the be~ilg.inskalledlon the west,~nd of the property, adjacent
<br />' to Weld County Road 13~ ac+d'The Pbudre liibet. .'She ~et'ms axe rougl'µy 3.feet high. C1~em stated ,
<br />that during. the'. 5priag 'qf_ 1999, L41e firms directed floodwater on to His property. In
<br />addition, the:~naCUral drait~ke swa~e~hes beeabTot:ked.by the ¢onstructign of the slxop area.' ;'v
<br />Clem.state8`that Hall-;swan iclsta~:,led'dF.culvert to ;'relieve some Of the drainage'w~oncerns, but
<br />was-not funetiional during-the £lo®d event.' ~ -
<br />In addition,. Clem stated that the CQnsbs~pctioa of the slurry wall. has raised the grouridwat~r
<br />table an his' psopertty. Hg' indi,CateB:~tf1~1 the water elewatiOn in'his well is higher than what 3
<br />it was prior to ins#alla`ti4R ®f' t3ia'~3uXry wall, b~t no ineasuremepts were taken' of the water , :F
<br />elevation is prior to the slurry wai7,..;xe also Stated that his basement is not currently
<br />flooded.
<br />Acco~"ding to:.the Slurry Wall Alignment:artd Details~Map, submitted under the peamit amendment, '
<br />'. 'the. southeast Horner of the ticNaney pCgperty is o~er 1,0`00 feet from the closest portion of
<br />the.slurry wall. Tm additiCaz,'a graunttwater fed ;pit fPit #11 is immediately south of the
<br />~MCNaneY ProP~tY-
<br />~ In the 'adec{uaty r~vieW leCte~, the t98,ui<S~pn required the operator to determine the hydrologic,
<br />~' '' impacts that may 10e expend with ih~:peaseAae of the.sly;ry wall. Upon submittal of the.
<br />additional information and tixe Qkst!OES ntptefl;durix~g t:tze site'inspection,.rthe Division
<br />+`~~ should be alale to evaluate the `
<br />}'•.. hydral4g~c impacls~ due to installation of the slurry wall.
<br />~~
<br />F
<br />• lI' J
<br />y `
<br />. i, i..}>1:~:. ~ ~_,:}'_.-~. °. m~i-'. ,~. .5 s~. 1i .~h~~i'e."F•o.:. J:.z:js E. .,.,.1, I.' x 1''Tr L}'.'~.t.. ....
<br />~..
<br />1 , +ll
<br />>J.:~/
<br />i!`
<br />
|