Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 7, Paragraph 1. <br /> <br />on the proiect? <br />The opposition used the Metcalf Pit as a hydrologically similar pit during the original hearing. <br />Now they assert that it is hydrologically different. The Metcalf Pit is located midway along the <br />slope of Spring Creek Mesa, a few hundred yards to the east of the Haldorson Mine. Staff sees <br />little difference between the two from a hydrological standpoint. The Haldorson Mine is within a <br />few hundred yards and in many cases closer to the rim of a several square mile mesa. There is <br />no known basis to the claim that mining from the rim down has lowered the water table as it was <br />mined. Mr. Lewicki and DMG staff has had discussions with the operator and a long time <br />employee with intimate knowledge of the site. Staff is comfortable with its own knowledge of the <br />site to back up the claim that there has never been any known seepage of groundwater from the <br />Metcalf highwalls. Groundwater was encountered at approximately 40 feet and just below an <br />irrigation lateral to the west/ northwest. <br />Page 9, Paragraph 1. <br />Mr. Lewicki's employment status is irrelevant. He has made no claim of personal observation <br />here, only a review of data supplied by his employer. As for the hole, staff was not on hand <br />during the digging and cannot comment one-way or the other as to the total depth or methods <br />used to excavate. <br />11, Paragraph 1. <br />DMG staff has inspected the United pit and noted some excavations to deeper depths than the <br />current 35-foot pit floor. However, the depth of these test holes was not noted. At 35 feet, at <br />the far end of groundwater table, would not the water table be at its peak? Staff has personal <br />knowledge that some larger loaders are more than capable of digging the noted test holes and <br />handling most boulders of any given size at this site. <br />Page 11, Paragraph 2. <br />Staff does not agree that the hydrology at these nearby sites is irrelevant for previously stated <br />reasons. Staff believes that the pits are geologically and, therefore, hydrologically similar to the <br />Haldorson Pit. <br />12, Paragraph 2. <br />Staff has not reviewed any qualitative or quantitative evidence to support or refute that there is a <br />direct recharge connection between the two ten•aces. <br />