Laserfiche WebLink
duration of Financial Warranties, taking into account the nature, extent, and duration of the <br />proposed mining operation, the magnitude, type and estimated cost of planned reclamation, and the <br />requirements of the Act. The Financial Warranty amount shall also include an amount equal to five <br />(5%) percent of the amount of the cost of reclamation to defray the administrative costs incurred by <br />the Office in conducting the reclamation. <br />Division Comment <br />During the permitting process within the Division, one of the prescribed tasks is Financial <br />Warranty calculation for the proposed permit. The calculated bond for the site, based upon the <br />above criteria is $35,425 for completion of tasks necessary to complete the reclamation plan. <br />Reclamation at the site consists of ripping some areas, grading, topsoiling, and revegetation. <br />2. Rule 6.4.7(1) Exhibit G -Water Information <br />The following objectors raised the concern of how the operation may impact surface water in <br />the Middle Fork of the South Platte River and groundwater quality and quantity at and <br />around the site: <br />• Linda Kukulski Miller (who has lost party status) -potential impacts to the water supply <br />of the Middle Fork of the South Platte River. <br />• Gregg Cassarini (who has lost party status) -giving credence to water quality and water <br />supply impacts during the permit application review. <br />• Curt Sayer -potential impacts to water quality of the aquifer supplying the homeowners <br />resulting from pollutants being disturbed in the river and water from the river recharging <br />the aquifer; maintaining the hydrologic balance as a result of water use at the site; <br />unauthorized pollutants entering the river; interruptions to the flow of the river. <br />• Fred H. Wisely -alluvial nature of the substrata may make the aquifer and the river <br />susceptible to pollutants entering the ground from the gravel site and from runoff; site is <br />located in the floodplain. <br />• Robert L. White -potential contamination of aquifer <br />• Kent Rolf -potential for pollution of aquifer. <br />DRMS Response <br />The question raised by the above comments is related to C.R.S. 34-32.5-116(7)(h) and to Rule 6.4.7 <br />(1) ofthe Construction Materials Rules and Regulations. The rule requires the applicant to state <br />expectations of the operation's direct effects to surface or groundwater systems. Rule 3.1.6 (1) also <br />applies. This rule requires that disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance of the affected land <br />and of the surrounding area and to the quantity and quality of water in surface and groundwater <br />systems both during and after the mining operation and during reclamation be minimized. <br />The Applicant has submitted a mining plan for the site that specifically states that groundwater will <br />not be exposed. The Operator plans to mine to a depth of 10 feet. During the adequacy review <br />process, the Operator stated that mining will occur to a depth of 10 feet or two feet above the <br />groundwater surface, whichever is shallower. Five wells were drilled on the site in order to identify <br />the groundwater level. Two of the wells were installed on separate occasions after the first three <br />