Laserfiche WebLink
groundwater users in the vicinity of the site. It does not appear that the Applicant has proposed any measures to <br />minimize these impacts other than to state that mitigation measures will be implemented if a complaint is received and a <br />trigger point is reached. The Division's opinion is that the predicted mounding and shadow effects resulting from the <br />presence of the slurry walls pose a number of problems stemming from impacts to the hydrologic balance. The <br />Division's opinion is that other measures can be incorporated into the plan that will minimize impacts to the hydrologic <br />balance related to the presence of the slurry walls, for example, installation of a French drain. <br />Rule 6.4.8 Exhibit H- Wildlife Information <br />16. The Division of Wildlife (DOW) commented on the site in a letter to the Division dated November 28, 2004. The <br />Division agrees with the Applicant's commitment to maintain setbacks of Z00 feet from the river as opposed to the <br />suggested setback, by DOW, of 200 feet from the existing tree line. The Construction Rules and Regulations do not <br />require a setback from existing trees on the site. <br />Rule 6.4.12 Exhibit L -Reclamation Costs <br />17. The Division accepts the Applicants proposal to bond in phases for the site and that a Technical Revision will be <br />submitted prior to the commencement of each phase indicating the engineering specifications for each slurry wall, or a <br />submittal of 100% bond for each slurry wall. <br />Because an objection was filed, this matter must be set for a heazing before the Mined Land Reclaznation Boazd. The <br />tentative date for the hearing is February 15 and 16, 2005. However, the Division will need to make a recommendation by <br />January 21, 2005. Please be advised that the L.G. Everist Fort Lupton Sand and Gravel Mine 112(c) Amendment (AM-O1) <br />Application may be deemed inadequate, and the application may be denied on January 21, 2005 unless the above mentioned <br />adequacy review items aze addressed to the satisfaction of the Division in a timely manner allowing for adequate time to <br />review the responses. If you feel more time is needed to complete your reply, the Division can grant an extension to the <br />recommendation date. This will be done upon receipt of a written waiver of your right to a recommendation by January 21, <br />2005, and request for additional time. This must be received no later than the deadline date. Also be aware that the <br />responses to the adequacy questions raised in this review may result in further comments by the Division, which may require <br />an additional response from the Applicant. <br />If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (303) 866-4935. <br />Sincerely, <br />~~~~~~ <br />~ ate Fickford <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />cc: Cazl Mount; DMG <br />Lynn Mayer, L.G. Everist, Inc. (via fax) <br />