PERMFILE100366 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

more detailed contours shown or the slope delineated and its gradient shown. The topography which is shown is the remnant of the original contours after superimposing final features, leaving only a the discontinuous pieces of the contour lines, most of which now are not labelled. For example, many of these lines run straight into the ponds Fish Ditch runs up and ove7a hill, roads are at the water's edge, Under this same concern is the lack of detail for road or rail crossings of creeks and ditches, regarding drainage patterns, filled areas, and topography. The stockpile area becomes an 1 I-acre block in the east end to be revegetated. It crosses a drainagevvay (which possibly includes a wetland) though the drainageway might not actually have been affected. Please clarify what effects it may have had, and exactly what reclamation activities will occur there. Exhibit G -Water Information The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers sent the Division a letter, dated September 25, 2000, in which it is stated that the site of mining operations contain waters of the United States, specifically the Rio Grande, and may contain wetlands also. Please clarify whether either of these are included in the permitted area. Water information, prepared on your behalf by Kirk Thompson of Agro Engineering, was submitted on September I S, 2000. This submittal describes a water augmentation plan whose outcome is pending in water court, for the future evaporative surface of the ponds. A figure of 100 acres is mentioned Avice in this submittal. Is that to be the maximum pond surface area? The submittal from Mr. Thompson also stated that a map was included which shows all applicable water features, though this map was not part of the submittal to the Division. The information that this map purported to show is required for this exhibit. Please provide it. The operation may not expose groundwater under the DMG permit until evidence of an approved augmentation plan is submitted to the Division, nor may the total pond surface exceed what water court ultimately approves. This Division must calculate the bond for all approved activities, for the eventuality of operator default and Board- ordered revocation of a permit. if the augmentation plan is not approved, an operator must retain sufficient material onsite to competely backfill all exposed water areas and post an adequate bond amount to cover those backfill costs. In a revocation scenario, the State does not want to become the entity which assumes an unapproved pond for which there is no augmentation plan, nor an inadequate bond to reclaim the site. (If there are questions about this, please contact me.) Fish Ditch is the only ditch which crosses the part of the permit azea to 6e excavated, with several unidentified ditches crossing other parts of the site. It is presumed [o be an unlined earthen ditch. Mining is not to encroach on this ditch, but will produce ponds on both sides of the ditch. Final pond banks may be up to a half-mile long on either side of the ditch. Fish Ditch is not proposed to be realigned, piped or lined, and any inlet of ditch water into the ponds is not shown or described. Because the floor elevation of Fish Ditch is difficult to determine from the maps, and because the water level in the ponds is not known, please describe whether the ditch water elevation will perch above that of the ponds. If the ditch is higher, will it percolate into the ponds, rendering the ditch useless as a conveyance? E.xhibi[ H -Wildlife Information Please forward the wildlife statement from CDOW when it is received. Exhibit 1 -Soils Information The submitted information includes six of the eight soils on the site. Please provide the remainder.