My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2003-03-25_REVISION - M2001085 (4)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M2001085
>
2003-03-25_REVISION - M2001085 (4)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:13:57 PM
Creation date
9/28/2010 11:26:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2001085
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
3/25/2003
Doc Name
Response to Adequacy Review
From
Scott Keen
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
AM1
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.
/
4
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
River channel, however, the shadow (downstream) effect will be minimal (one foot or less) <br />and will not likely be detectable at 50 to 100 feet from the outside edge of the reservoir. <br />Records of the State Engineer indicate that there may be twenty four registered wells within <br />600 feet of the proposed mining site. Well information was summarized in Exhibit G of the <br />application materials. Of these twenty four wells, fourteen are deep wells finished in a <br />confined bedrock aquifer. The approximate location and depth of one well (Permit No. <br />60905) is unknown, although records of the State Engineer indicate that it is located south of <br />120th Avenue and upgradient of the proposed mining area. (Groundwater in the area of the <br />site flows in a north/north-westerly direction towards the South Platte River.) Of the ten <br />wells that are finished in shallow groundwater, two (Permit Nos. 99012A and 11020R) are <br />south of 120"' Avenue and upgradient. Two (Permit Nos. 10898R and 2437) are located <br />significantly east of the mining area, upgradient, and likely more than 600 feet away. One <br />(Permit No. 10899R) is owned by the Applicant and is inactive. <br />There appear to be four registered, active, shallow wells that are downgradient and within <br />600 feet of the proposed mining area. These four wells are generally located west of the site <br />and east of Brighton Road. According to records of the State Engineer, one (Permit No. <br />100919A,, owned by Richard and Geraldine Frost) is used for domestic purposes (but not <br />drinking water, as homes along Old Brighton Road are connected to the South Adams County <br />Water and Sanitation District.) Three of the four (Permit Nos. 55897F, 12992R, and 12993R) <br />are relatively high yield wells, used for crop irrigation. Don and Jeanne Off own two of these <br />wells; and the third is owned by Kirk Kirby. <br />On behalf of Don and Jeanne Off, who own approximately 15 acres immediately west of and <br />adjacent to the site, a consultant (Doty & Associates) has predicted possible impacts to the <br />nearest of the Offs' two high capacity, shallow wells. This well is 20 feet deep, with the <br />bottom 8 feet placed in ground water, although the aquifer is likely 15 to 30 feet thick in the <br />well's location. The report predicts that, right now, if the well is pumped at 500 gallons per <br />minute, 24 hours per day, for 180 days, water inside the well itself (not in surrounding <br />groundwater) would drop 5.1 feet, leaving only 3.9 feet of water in the well. Following <br />completion of the water storage reservoir, if this well was pumped at 500 gallons per minute, <br />24 hours per day, for 180 days, the report predicts that water inside the well would drop an <br />additional 1.8 feet and suggests that the "adjudicated right" of the Offs would be injured. In <br />these extreme pumping circumstances, not only does this report predict an effect that does not <br />appear significant; but it also misleads readers of what the Offs are entitled to from their well. <br />An adjudicated water right is relative to pumping rate (gpm) and to a beneficial use. The <br />Offs do not have a right to turn on their well and pump at 500 gpm for 6 months; rather they . <br />can take water at that rate for only so long as they can make beneficial use of the water for <br />irrigation. Further, the seniority of the Offs' water right does not give a right to an inefficient <br />means of diversion, such as this well, which reaches only 8 feet into the available water <br />supply. <br />Although all technical opinions appear to support a conclusion that there will be no effect on <br />nearby wells, the Applicant does appreciate the concerns of neighboring well owners, as there <br />are many variables that affect groundwater availability; and being out of sight, it is difficult to <br />correlate these variables with effects. Therefore, the Applicant is working on agreements <br />with the two well owners that have expressed concerns (Off and Frost) during the Adams <br />County conditional use application and hearing processes. For the Offs, the Applicant is <br />offering to construct a replacement well for their nearest high capacity well before <br />construction of the slurry wall is completed. As allowed by the Ofi ice of the State Engineer,
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.