2004-08-19_REVISION - M2000158 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

II. ISSUES RAISED BY OBJECTORS: Issues raised by objecting parties aze listed below, along with the names of the objectors. The Division's response to objection issues follows. Issues are listed under the section of the Construction Materials Rules and Regulations to which theypertain. Issues that the Division believes aze not within the jurisdiction of the Division or Boazd aze listed after the issues listed under the sections to which they pertain. A. ISSUES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE DIVISION AND BOARD AND RAISED DURING THE INITIAL AMENDMENT TO APPLICATION PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Application Exhibit D- Mining Plan: 1. "The containment and disposal for mine and plant generated chemical and other mining by-products" (Bruce Rippe; July 13, 2004) 2. "The mining operation's wastewater and toxic by-products could greatly impact the agricultural land in this azea...Proper containment of the wastewater and toxic by-products is critical in the protection of groundwater and the environment." (Kristi Paut; July 13, 2004) Division of Minerals and Geology (DMG) Response- Gravel mines do not generate chemicals and the by-products aze fine material left when the gravel is processed. Platte Sand & Crrave] is required to obtain a Storm Water Management Plan and a SPCC pernrit from the Department of Public Health and the Environment. If any water is to be dischazged from the site, the Operator must obtain a dischazge permit (NPDES) from the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment. Irr regazd to oil and fuels stored on site, the Division relies on other agencies' standazds and design requirements for spill containment structures to prevent adverse environmental effects related to spills and/or release of oil and fuel products. Such agencies include the EPA, any agency of the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, the State Oil Inspector, and other appropriate Federal, State or local government agencies. Application Exhibit G -Water Information: 3. "My concerns aze the same they have been from the beginning of this project that there should be wet mining only. This property is adjacent to my west property line. Water for my home is supplied from my domestic well. If this project's proposed change from wet mining to a slurry wall for dry mining drops the water table and affects my domestic water supply I want the owners of pernrit #M-2000-158 held responsible for the replacement of my water supply." (Kathryn A. Hardin; July Il, 2004) 4. "As you know, in the original mining pernvt application approved on June 27, 2001, conditions to the approval were noted and stipulated. These stipulations called for installation of rechazge stmctures between the points of dewatering and our wells adjacent to the operation...Designand construction format was prepazed and accepted by my consultant, specifically Mr. Forrest Leaf, and my attorneys Kim R. Lawrence and T. Andrew Jones has input into the design and side agreements that were made. As you a]so know, Mr. Shazkey and his company agreed to make me whole in the event that the dewatering activities injured any of my irrigation wells. Also, agreement not to dewater more than one acre in the entire permit site at any given time was also agreed to. Furthermore, Platte Sand and Gravel agreed not to wnduct any dewatering activities until the rechazge structures were conshucted...My understanding is that this n_ew request, is construction of a slurry wall before any __ _ dewatering and dry mining activities are undertaken. Tne critical point to my objection is to ensure that previous stipulations ofresponsibility for potential aze maintained by the applicant." (Michael J. Ptasnik; July 12, 2004) 5. "In addition, it seems important to understand tine structure design and dewatering plans in detail and to be able to discuss these with independent consultants as we previously has been permitted this opportunity to, again,