Laserfiche WebLink
In summary, Allen has provided to DMG all required information concerning its <br />proposed water supply well, and it is undisputed that Allen is pursuing appropriate authorizations <br />from the State Engineer prior to constructing that well. Through that permitting process, the <br />State Engineer will consider the potential impacts of the proposed well on other water rights, <br />prior to granting Allen the necessazy approvals. See May 12, 20061etter from Gary Thompson <br />to Harold Simpson, State Engineer (Exhibit 64). <br />2. Proposed Groundwater Monitorine Condition. Objectors request a condition <br />requiring Allen to develop an expanded groundwater monitoring program. Objectors question <br />the adequacy of Allen's existing monitoring program, suggesting that sampling from the existing <br />monitoring wells on Allen's property may have been taken too early in the spring and too soon <br />after the wells were drilled. <br />Objectors' request is based on a misunderstanding of the facts. On May 1, 2006, Allen, <br />who is a licensed well driller, drilled three wells on its property to measure groundwater depths <br />(Exhibits 82 and 83, wells MHl, MH2 and MH3). Groundwater levels in each of those wells <br />have been measured bi-monthly, and groundwater levels have remained consistent (Exhibit 83). <br />Since then, Allen has drilled three additional wells on its property to measure groundwater <br />levels. !d. That data provides comprehensive documentation of groundwater levels beneath the <br />A]]en property. <br />Objectors assert that the groundwater level beneath Allen's property "is expected to be at <br />its highest level in mid-May to mid-July." Allen's ongoing monitoring program cleazly <br />encompasses that time frame, and documents groundwater levels during that period. Objectors' <br />request for yet more hydrologic studies is baseless. <br />