Laserfiche WebLink
comment period pursuant to C.M.R. 1.6.6. In its May 25, 2005, letter the City again addressed its <br />water rights and water quality concerns and requested that conditions be imposed on any approved <br />application. The requested conditions included some of the same conditions that the City continues <br />to seek at this time and that may be satisfactorily addressed in stipulations 1 & 2 currently being <br />prepared by DMG and the Applicant: 1) requiring the Applicant to ensure that no injury will occur to <br />the City's water rights by providing, among other things, an estimate of all anticipated water <br />requirements pursuant to C.M.R. 6.4.7(3); 2) requiring the Applicant to submit a substitute water <br />supply plan pursuant to C.M.R. 3.1.6(1)(a); and 3) requiring the Applicant to develop a ground water <br />monitoring plan to ensure that ground water quality is undisturbed by the proposed mining operation, <br />pursuant to C.M.R. 3.1.7.(7). <br />It is important to note that the Applicant originally maintained the project would not expose <br />groundwater. The Applicant first acknowledged that the project would in fact expose groundwater in <br />its August 19, 2005, response to the Division's second adequacy review. See page 4 of the Lyman <br />Henn report, included as an attachment to Black Hawk's Exhibit 178. In response to the Applicant's <br />revised analysis, on September 15, 2005, the Office of the State Engineer issued a new Response to <br />Reclamation Permit Application Consideration with new conditions for approval. See Black Hawk's <br />Exhibit 193. Black Hawk's objections based on potential injury to its water rights were certainly <br />timely in light of the Applicant's shifting analysis of the effect of the application on the local <br />hydrology. <br />Second, even if the City had not timely objected to the Application on grounds over which <br />the Mined Land Reclamation Board (the "Boazd") has jurisdiction, it would not be proper for the <br />Boazd to reject the legitimate substantive concerns the City has raised about the Application on a <br />