My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE41920
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE41920
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:44:29 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 10:57:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2003037
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/20/2003
Doc Name
Perliminary Opinion-Groundwater Impacts
From
WestWater Associates Inc.
To
Mrs. Kay Wiesner
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
SEA-05-2003 FRI 0927 AM BAN~AND GE5S0 LLC FAX N0, 3174 8329 <br />P, 04 <br />• Page 3 September 4, 2003 <br />were drilled in early spring oP 2003, prior to initiation of Initiation, this data represents a point in time <br />measurement of the natural conditions in this area. <br />The groundwater level certainly changes throughout the year as well as from year to year, depending <br />on the prevailing climatic and irrigatlon conditions. Because of this, a pit that is dry in December may <br />became wet In July. The proposed plan indicates that ff water is encountered excavation will stop and a <br />two-foot layer of fill material will be placed over the area. This development plan virtually assures a dry <br />pit. <br />If at some point the applicant decides that it is feasible to mine below the groundwater level, a <br />monitoring system should be developed to gain an understanding of the water levels and gradients in <br />the area. At that time I would recommend that a set of groundwater observation piezometers be <br />installed and data routinely collected to monitor the location and fluctuation of the water surface. <br />As discussed above, even ff the pit is operated as a wet pit, with the appropriate augmentation plan, it <br />will have very litlle effect on down-gradient springs, ponds or drainages. The extent to which a pond <br />could alter the groundwater hydraulics respons(ble for transport of water through She aquifer would be <br />proportional to the amount of drawdown created by continuously pumping the ponds to a Level lower <br />than the prevailing surrounding level. It is hard to imagine pumping down a gravel pit pond by more <br />than a couple of feet resulting In a very small wee of depression in the worst-case scenario. In this <br />case, the wntlnued supply of groundwater flow to the nearby springs is more directly related to the <br />inflow and storage components of the hydrologic balance. <br />4. Storm water runoff <br />The State Engineers policy requires that Impounded storm water runoff be released to the stream <br />system within 72 hours of impoundment. Because of the historic agricultural nature of this site there are <br />no natural drainages. Storm water from the fields is collected by a system of wastewater ditches and <br />moves offsfte In this manner. For the proposed project, stone water directed toward the excavation <br />area and impounded will need to be pumped or gravity piped to a stream or wastewater ditch in order <br />to meet this requirement. <br />5. Water quality <br />Two possible water quality issues should be addressed. The first is sediment contamination from storm <br />water runoff released to a downstream ditch or steam channel. The nature of the proposed gravel <br />mine mandates that all surface flow toward the pit is confined within the pit. The impoundment of storm <br />water runoff in a detention pond is designed to allow rime for settling of sediments prior to release. <br />Tha second issue is confaminaton of surface and/or groundwater from chemicals such as petroleum <br />products used (n the operation. All pertinent State of Colorado health and environmental regulations <br />regarding the transport, use and storage of chemical and petroleum products should be strictly adhered <br />to. <br />6. Hydrologic Impacts <br />The previous discussion identifies issues and' hydrologic impacts of the proposed project. Those that <br />have received the most attention by project opponents and those that I feel are significant are <br />summarized here. <br />• The act of digging a pit and operating a dry mine will not impact downstream water rights or <br />flows to other springs, ponds or drainages. <br />• If at some point in the future the applicant modifies the applicatlon to allow ponds, I do not <br />foresee any significant impact on the fiowrate or volume to downstream water rights, etc., if <br />done according to plans and state regulations including; <br />o no pumping of pit water outside of the project area <br />o no rerouting of flow from one end of project to the other <br />o appropriate augmentation to account for evaporation and seepage losses <br />• The elimination of applied irrigation water may have a significant effect It should 6e noted <br />however, that this could occur with or without the proposed project. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.