_REVISION - M1980244 ‎(31)‎

• Permit No: M1980244
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Name: Adequacy Response
• From: Cripple Creek & Victor Gold
• To: DMG
• Type & Sequence: AM8
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

.~.. ._ -..._ ~fu°:LL$V .~iL'- ti~i- .. ,ilU ws=: - ~9t$l ~__.d?~^.
27
and rate offlow of groundwater in these aquifers and fracture systems, The host granite and diatreme
are ident~ed and accepted by the Oivisian as the two major water bearing units in the area; the
direction of preferential flow in these units is described in Appendix 1, Volume 1'I. The applicant,
however, has ackrnowledged significant ground waterflawjram perched aquifers encountered by
pt'esent mining, presumably to the diatreme. Flow is also acknowledged in an "upper. and shallow.
ground water system within the stream colluvial and alluvia! sediments. "While any flow direction of
the ground water in perched aquifers located to the diatreme might be assumed ro be similar to that
described for the diatreme overall, the amendment narrative does not adequately describe the directions
of flow bjgroundwater in the colluvial-alluvial system. Elements of the colluvial-alluval system, ~
associated with the various streams draining from the diatreme, have the potential not only to be
adversely impacted by the mine but to convey the result of those impacts from the mine site within the
diatreme to areas outside.
CC&V should fully rail the re itirements oithis Rule ie indicate where within two miles of the
Response: CCTV cannot find any reference w "significant ground water flow from perched aquifers
encotihtered by present muting" within the documettttss submitted for Amendment No. 8. There is a
discussion that surface water flows are seldom continuous, bu[ usually infil[rate into the upper, and
shallow, ground water system within the stream colluvial and alluvial sediments. This discussion is in
reference w stream flaw in dry washes in response to sigttificam snowmelt or after heavy rainstorms.
While there may be a companetu of flow in the thin alluvial and colluvial sediments during beery
precipitation events, these deposits aze trot continuous within the drainage channels of between the
chamiels. As discussed in the text, the surface water flows appear and disappear within this thin layer in
response to the magnitude and duration of precipitation. T'he stream-related deposits da not transmit
much.water as is evidenced by the ephemeral flow characteristics of the streams. Alluvial aquifer flow,
if it exists, follows the active stream channel and does not transmit flow [atarally because sutFicient
thicltness and continuity of alluvium of coUuvium does not exist.
CCBtV's activities have not encountered nor are expected to involve alluvial ar colluvial "aquifers" that
extend off site. This is evident by virtue of the tack of off-site flaw to surface waters and the lack of any
continwous alluvial m' colluvial strata within the diatreme containing water.
D. Rule 6.4.20 (8) (e): The applkvnt is regxired to describe and illustrate tlu hydrageology of the area
where surface or ground water may be impacted by the Designated Mining Operation. The description
and illustration should include those geologic strata and fracture systems that have the potential ro
transmit ground water. As indicated ptt:viously in this review, the application acknowledges that
groundwater flow occurs in "an upper, and shallow ground water system within the scream colluvial
and alluvial sediments " The application, however, does not sttffeciently describe and illustrate the
elements ojthetolluvial-alluvial ground water bearing system and related fracture systems.
Response: As discttsset! in the previaua response. CC&V beUeves that the shallow alluvial and colluvial
• • sediments do trot constitute a ground water system. ~ Titers is no evidence of a contituous, water-bearing
systetn`.within these shallow sediments and CC&V has not encountered alluvia[ or colluvial aquifers
which extend off-site.
~~ ,