My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1989-12-01_REVISION - M1988112
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1988112
>
1989-12-01_REVISION - M1988112
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2021 8:02:53 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:40:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1988112
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/1/1989
Doc Name
Objection
From
Joe Gallegos
To
MLRD
Type & Sequence
AM1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
<br />4) Also, on page 4 in the augmentation section plan paragraph .', <br />states that the groundwater source appears to be localized and <br />that it is judged that same form of dewatering will be necessary <br />to mine projer_t. The theory that the groundwater' is localized is <br />purely speculative and this must 6e proven without a doubt. If <br />this groundwater is not localized the dewatering procedure may <br />prove grave to the Vega wetlands and to domestic well users such <br />as myself. <br />5) Ors page S of the ai_~gmentation section plan the Rito Seco is <br />e;;pected to be depleted to a certain amount. This should not be <br />tolerated to any e;;tent of pristine waters in our state of <br />Colorado. This depletion could have detrimental effects to <br />aquatic life and other negative environmental effects to the Rito <br />Seco. <br />b) Also on page 5 in augmentation section plan, it is stated <br />that water balances will be maintained through the use of flow <br />devices. Who will monitor and assure downstream water users that <br />proper and unbiased monitoring will occur^ Has the State Engineer <br />agreed to do the monitoring and assure that there will be no <br />type of damage to the water right users^ The monitoring Host be <br />done and enforced by an unbiased entity not PMG. PMG are not good <br />neighbors and cannot be trusted. <br />7) On F'age b in the augmentation section of the amendments, it <br />gives mention of the Glover analysis worst-case scenario. E>;plain <br />this analysis and how HMG has come up with figures that estimate <br />stream depletions no greater than .1%. What are the envi•onmental <br />effects to Rito Seco if this estimate is greater than calculated? <br />8) Also on page b in the augmentation section of the amendments, <br />ii states that PMG judges that the Pre-Cambrian aquifer is <br />limited in areal e;:tent and that the aquifer system derives its <br />artesian pressure from topographical differentials. This is <br />speculative and must be proven without a doubt. Assure m~e that <br />this assumption is true and that this aquifer is not connected <br />to, nor is it a recharge zone, to the Vega wetlands and any <br />domestic well. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.