My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE49711
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE49711
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:54:36 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 2:09:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2005066
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
4/6/2006
Doc Name
Adequacy Response
From
Banks and Gesso LLC
To
DMG
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.
/
86
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
Ms. Erica Crosby <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />exercises. <br />April 5, 2006 <br />Page 10 of 21 <br />The May 2005 modeling indicated that the only impacts on the water table in the <br />vicinity of the slurry walled pits will be slight mound and shadow effects up- and <br />down-gradient of the slurry walls. These effects are predicted to range in magnitude <br />throughout the town area from 0.25- to 0.5-feet, either positive or negative <br />drawdown. <br />The Phase 1 modeling has indicated that, under the scenario whereby the Phase 2 <br />and 3 slurry wall is not in place, there will be an area of several feet of drawdown <br />immediately adjacent to the mined area but only approximately 0.5-feet or less <br />throughout the bulk of the area that would encompass the Phase 2 and 3 mining <br />areas that would later be slurry walled. Throughout the area comprising the town, <br />there is less than 0.5-feet of drawdown predicted. Immediately north and south of <br />the Phase 1 mine area there is predicted drawdowns of 1- to 2-feet that fall off <br />rapidly as one moves away from the mine area. <br />In the scenario whereby the Phase 2 and 3 slurry wall is installed prior to the <br />completion of the Phase 1 mining, there will be even less impact to the east and in <br />the vicinity of the town. In this case, there is essentially no drawdown from the <br />mined area, but rather slight mound and shadow effects from the slurry walls. <br />24. The Division received comments from the Office of the State Engineer (OSE) <br />regarding the proposed application. According to the OSE, before a well permit can <br />be approved the applicant must conduct a field location of the site and document the <br />locations of all wells within 600 feet of the permit area. The applicant must then <br />obtain a waiver of objection from all well owners with wells within 600 feet of the <br />permit area or request a hearing before the State Engineer. See the attached OSE <br />letter for further detail. Please commit to not exposing groundwater until a well <br />permit is obtained from the OSE. In addition, once the well permit is obtained a copy <br />must be submitted to the Division. <br />The applicant commits to not exposing groundwater until a Gravel Well Permit is <br />obtained from the Office of the State Engineer. Prior to permit approval, a field <br />location of the site will be conducted to document all wells within 600 of the permit <br />area. The applicant will obtain a waiver of objection from all well owners within 600 <br />feet or request a hearing before the State Engineer. <br />25. A more detailed review of the groundwater model will be forthcoming, and additional <br />questions may arise based on the review. <br />We received the follow-up Hydrology Review memo from Tom Schreiner, dated <br />January 12, 2006, and have responded to his questions later in this letter. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.