My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-09-01_PERMIT FILE - M2009018 (9)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2009018
>
2009-09-01_PERMIT FILE - M2009018 (9)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:55:10 PM
Creation date
9/4/2009 7:07:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2009018
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
9/1/2009
Doc Name
Request for Continuance
From
Varra Companies, Inc.
To
DRMS
Email Name
MAC
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Since the cone of depression is most pronounced toward the south and west from the <br />permit boundary, contrary to expectations, the potential for subirrigation actually <br />diminishes since area elevation increases and resulting surface groundwater elevations <br />fall. This is obvious from the location and depth of measured top of groundwater from <br />known wells within the 1,000 foot extent shown relative to area cartography. <br />In summary, the potential for influences on subirriation vegetation appears <br />inconsequential since the area does not appear to support subirrigated crops, wetlands or <br />woody vegetation that relies upon it; or in a manner where the influence of anticipated <br />impacts estimated on the cone of depression would actually influence groundwater <br />elevations in a manner that affects surface vegetation as observed. The principal <br />influence on surface vegetation is more tied to area ditches, irrigation practices and direct <br />precipitation which will not be impacted by planned acitivities. <br />15. The Applicant has indicated the carrying capacity of the seep ditch is <br />approximately 897 cfs at four feet of depth. Please demonstrate that the upstream and <br />downstream user's ability to discharge into the seep ditch will not be impeded by <br />Applicant's dewatering activities. <br />Please refer to correspondence from Brad Jones, P.E. (Varra Companies, Inc.), of 12 <br />August 2009. <br />6.4.12 Exhibit L - Reclamation Costs <br />16. The Applicant has indicated all of the pits are to be extracted and <br />reclaimed in an unlined state. If groundwater will be permanently <br />exposed, then the Applicant must obtain a court approved augmentation <br />plan from the Office of the State Engineer. The Division is required to set <br />the financial warranty at a level which reflects the actual current cost of <br />fulfilling the conditions of the Reclamation Plan per Rule 4.2.1(1). <br />Therefore, without an augmentation plan in place the financial warranty <br />must be set at an amount which accounts for the exposed groundwater. <br />The Division has identified several options for determining the amount of <br />the financial warranty. The Applicant may choose one of the following <br />options to be included in the financial warranty calculations: <br />1. Backfill all of the pits to two feet above the groundwater <br />level. <br />2. Install a slurry wall or clay liner. <br />3. Provide the Division with a letter from the Office of the <br />State Engineer stating that an augmentation plan is not <br />required until final release and that a bond will not be <br />required in the interim. <br />If the Applicant obtains an augmentation plan prior to final release, then <br />the financial warranty will be adjusted accordingly. <br />Varra Companies, Inc. correspondence of 1 September 2009 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land 10 <br />Reclamation (Office) in reply to Office correspondence of 27 July 2009 - Heintzelman Project - <br />M2009-018.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.