Laserfiche WebLink
ensure that no harm is done to the adjacent neighborhood wells." (Michael J. Ptasnik; July 12, 2004) <br />6. "The potential impacts from dry mining operations to adjacent landowners, domestic wells, irrigation wells, <br />irrigation ditches and alluvial groundwater use subirrigation." (Bruce Rippe; July 13, 2004) <br />7. "The amended reclamation plan with respect to environmental protection of surface water run-on, run-off, <br />discharge, goals and expectations." (Bruce Rippe; July 13, 2004) <br />8. "The presence of wetlands that necessitate mitigation and need fora 404 permit from the Corps of Engineers" <br />(Bruce Rippe; July 13, 2004) <br />9. "A cazeful, prudent review of the 100 yeaz flood plain analysis, mitigation and set back requirements for a dry <br />mining operation" (Bruce Rippe; July 13, 2004) <br />10. "An appropriate water augmentation plan from the reclaimed lake surface and water utilized in the day-to-day <br />operation of a dry mine" (Bruce Rippe; July 13, 2004) <br />11. "The appropriate lining of reclaimed pits for the proposed use of such pits for municipal water storage" (Bruce <br />Rippe; July 13, 2004) <br />12. "The question of appropriate rechazge structures and test wells to maintain the integrity of the amendment's <br />proposed slurry walls for protection of groundwater supplies" (Bruce Rippe; July 13, 2004) <br />/3. "...My questions and concerns with a slurry wall are: Who will install the wall? Who inspects the installation? <br />Will there be monitoring wells? Has there been an investigation at the actual wall location to establish the depth <br />of the wall for 3 ft. penetration into the shale? How do you test a slurry wall to know it has completely sealed out <br />all surrounding goundwater? Will the surrounding property owners have time to address concems after the <br />hearing as we do not have all the information? What happens to the current agreement with property owners?.." <br />(Stanley Odenbaugh; July 13, 2004) <br />14. "...I am greatly concerned about the possibility of alterations in the water table that could affect my agricultural <br />and domestic wells. Tom my knowledge, there is no protection offered to adjacent landowners for their wells." <br />(Kristi Plutt; July 13, 2004) <br />15. "The proposed use of land is listed as water storage and private wildlife habitat. A flood protection plan should <br />be instituted to protect adjacent residents since the site is within the 100-yeaz flood plain." (Kristi Plutt; July 13, <br />2004) <br />16. "Will the proposed slurry wall impact nearby wells and landowners?" (Town of Milliken; July 14, 2004) <br />Division of Minerals and Geology (DMG) Response- The questions raised by the above comments related to <br />Section 3.1.6 in the Constmction Materials Rules and Regulations, and which were identified at the Pre-hearing <br />Conference are: <br />a) Has the Applicant adequately considered potential impacts to the prevailing hydrologic balance <br />specifically, impacts from the slurry wall to the adjacent landowners, water supplies and the alluvial <br />ground water system? (Rule 3.1.6 and Rule 6.4.7) <br />b) Will the Applicant comply with applicable Colorado water laws and regulations govenung injury to <br />-_- . -existing water rights for neighboring water wells?-(Rule 3.1.6(1)(a)) -- -- - - -- <br />The applicant is required by law to minimize disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance of the affected land <br />and of the surrounding azea and to the quantity or quality of water in surface and groundwater systems both during <br />and after the mining operation and during reclamation (Rule 3.1.6). <br />4 <br />