Laserfiche WebLink
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: 1303) 866-3567 <br />FAX: 1303) BJ2-8106 <br />DIVISION OF <br />MINERALS <br />GEOLOGY <br />RECLAMATION <br />MINING•SAFETY <br />INTERNAL MEMO <br />TO: Joe Dudash ~ 28 Jan 2000 <br />FROM: Jim Borne <br />SUBJ: Sanborn C ek TR-32 comments <br />Bill Owens <br />Governor <br />Greg E Watcher <br />6eculive Dvecmr <br />M¢hael B Long <br />Division Director <br />Joe, brief note as ~eview this. My comment was that they need up-gradient and down-gradient <br />monitoring in Elk Creek Canyon on either side of the new portal site. <br />OMI's response was that (1) they have upgradient monitoring with well EC-7. <br />I don't find this well on map or in monitoring plan. What am 1 missing? <br />OMI also responded that they can't put in adown-gradient well because the ground is disturbed. <br />My read on this is that it doesn't matter because (presumably) alluvial groundwater will be <br />moving down the canyon one way or the other. We need to see what happens to it in response to <br />the new portals. What is your take on their comment from your perspective? My recollection <br />is not that there is anything to preclude monitoring of water there. <br />Maybe the mitigating factor would be that there is so little groundwater as to make the point <br />moot. It's hard to contend that without baseline data, however. They could take that route, I <br />guess, get some data and make some calculations to show that there isn't enough water coming <br />down there to worry about. If they could prove that, it would be okay with me. <br />Jim <br />cc: LPR <br />