Laserfiche WebLink
<br />overall recharge area towards the Arkansas River and our selective excavation within [his alluvium, there <br />is no way we will cause injury to an existing well user." Vast amounts of groundwater Flow through <br />aquifers in all the major drainage basins (the Colorado, South Platte, etc). And yet, there are instances <br />where a mining activity will adversely affect well users. Just because there is a vast amount of <br />groundwater flowing toward the Arkansas River doesn't mean you cannot cause injury to an existing <br />well user. Your proposed excavation methods within the alluvium is one reason the Division feels the <br />probability of adversely affecting well users is extremely small. The welt users are upgradient from your <br />operation and you propose to operate a dry pit; which will not expose groundwater; which, therefore, <br />will not require dewa[ering of the pi[; which, therein, will not draw down the water level in the aquifer. <br />You reference a dry pit operation with your statements "We expect our excavation/mining will encounter <br />groundwater at a depth of approximately 20 to 25 feet. We will not mine in a mud pit and will refrain <br />from encountering this overall groundwater system." Plus near the end of your response you state that <br />"Our mining excavation will cease in depth upon encountering any groundwater." Basically, I interpret <br />these statements to mean that you will not expose groundwater during your mining operation (except, <br />possibly, in the wash ponds). Is my interpretation correct or not. <br />Exhibit E -Rule 6.4.5 -You were asked to provide a detailed narrative describing the existing structures <br />(dimensions,etc), their current use, whether they will be removed when mining ceases or, if you plan to <br />leave the buildings, the proposed future use. If the buildings are not going to be removed, you must <br />submit adequate documentation that [he strucmres conform to local building and zoning codes. You <br />minimally described the shop building. However, the approved building permit you submitted contains <br />all the required information. In addition, the building permit adequately demonstrates that the structure <br />conforms to local building and zoning codes since the County approved it.You state that the "long term <br />plan is to retain" the structure which, I assume, means you will not remove the structure at the end of <br />mining operations. You did not describe the current use, or proposed future use, of the shop building. <br />Please provide a description of the current use and proposed future use of the shop building. <br />You describe the "former Koppers building" as a "long standing masonry structure." Which, you state, <br />will be "a future office for us." You said you will provide the Division with a building permit and <br />certificate of occupancy within five years. Since the approved building permit will provide sufficient <br />information to satisfy the Act the Division will accept your commitment to submit the documents. The <br />Division is aware [hat the building is currently vacant so there is no current use. <br />You made no effort to comply with the Act and/or the Mineral Ruies and Regulations regarding the other <br />structures within the existing permit area or the proposed expanded permit area. You are aware there are <br />other stntctures at this site. There are stem walled aggregate bins north of the shop, weigh scales east of <br />the shop, a concrete batch plant south of the shop, the 100,000 gallon water storage tank, a portable <br />building and a railroad car storage area. You need to comply with Rule 6.4.5 in regard to these <br />strucmres as well as any other structure that may not have been mentioned. Your description of a <br />structure does not have to be 100 % exact. For instance, a structure could be identified as a bolted steel <br />metal building, 24' by 24' by 12' high, setting on a concrete foundation 24' by 24' by 12" thick with N4 <br />rebar reinforcement. This description would be adequate. <br />You were asked to describe in more detail the type(s) of reclamation you propose to achieve in the <br />reclamation of the affected land, why each was chosen, the amount of acreage accorded to each, and a <br />general discussion of methods of reclamation as related to the mechanics of earthmoving. Your <br />description of reclamation in the industrial area, except for earthmoving activities, is adequate. <br />However, you did not describe how you intend to reclaim the recreation area. Nor did you describe how <br />many acres you propose to allocate for recreation. The question i have regarding earthmoving in the <br />proposed industrial area is how do you intend [o replace growth medium on the highwalls? Also, if i[ is <br />necessary to revegetate the low sloped pi[ floors (and/or the creosote site), how will you replace the <br />