Laserfiche WebLink
11 <br />WESTERN MINING ACTION PROJECT ?? <br />WCOV0 <br />MAR 0 2 2010 z/ <br />mision of Kecia nation, <br />k ining and Safety <br />Roger Flynn, Esq., <br />Jeffrey C. Parsons, Esq. <br />P.O. Box 349 <br />440 Main Street, Suite 2 <br />Lyons, CO 80540 <br />(303) 823-5738 <br />Fax (303) 823-5732 <br />winap c? ioc.o?g <br />via email, hardcopy to follow <br />March 1, 2010 <br />NOW CONFIUENT?AL <br />&6 Li <br />- .11 Allen Sorenson, Reclamation Specialist / <br />Div. of Reclamation, Mining and Safety ? <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />RE: Powertech (USA) Inc. Request for Modification o Notice of Intent (NOI) File <br />No. P-2008-043 <br />Dear Mr. Sorenson: <br />Thank you for your letter of February 24, 2010 acknowledging receipt of public comments <br />and providing an update on the status of the Division's'review of Powertech (USA) Inc.'s <br />("Powertech") Notice of Intent (NOI) File No. P-2008-043. In your letter, you make reference to the <br />availability of "Well Construction and Test Reports required by the Colorado State Engineer and <br />referred to by Powertech in MD-03." While we appreciate the availability of those documents, there <br />appears to be significant additional information referred to in Powertech's application that is <br />necessary for the Division's and public's review, yet has not been made available to the public. <br />Further, the Division does not appear to have addressed in any way the issue of Powertech's proposal <br />to move forward with additional baseline characterization activities despite the lack of an approved <br />baseline characterization plan. As the Division is aware, commenters have submitted two previous <br />comment letters on this proposed modification, in September and November of 2009, raising similar <br />issues, and commenters reincorporate those concerns to the extent not specifically addressed herein. <br />With respect to the lack of necessary information, while the availability of Colorado State <br />Engineer documents is appreciated, there still appears to be no information publicly available with <br />respect to data obtained from previous aquifer pump tests in the area. This is despite the fact that <br />Powertech specifically relies on this data to support its conclusions regarding the potential for <br />vertical communication between aquifers in the context of the current proposal. For instance, <br />Powertech's NOI modification application materials assert that "[b]ased on previous pumping tests <br />conducted by Powertech in Section 33 and the observed aquifer response during development of <br />pumping well PW-1, it is estimated that PW-I can be produced at a sustainable rate of 8 to 10 gallons <br />per minute for the planned test duration of 3 to 5 days." Petrotek Engineering Corporation dated <br />October 27, 2009 ("Petrotek Report") at 3(emphasis added). See also Petrotek Report at p. 8 ("The <br />results from the Theis simulations for the well development scenario and from the previous pump