My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Search
DWR_4386555
DWR
>
Board and Commission Meetings
>
2025
>
02
>
DWR_4386555
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/6/2025 9:23:12 AM
Creation date
2/6/2025 9:22:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board and Commission Meetings
Board or Commission
Board of Examiners
Document Type - Board and Commission Meetings
Meeting Document
Document Date
10/1/2024
Subject
BOE Meeting Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
BOE Meeting Agenda <br /> October 1, 2024 <br /> Page 6 <br /> 13. John Hunyadi stated that he considers the inclusion of couplings reasonable as a <br /> means to avoid obstructions while pushing a tremie pipe <br /> a) Robert Hillegas agreed. <br /> C. Public Comment <br /> 1. Larry Finney <br /> a) Stated that, once you get your tremie pipe down the well, a larger <br /> annulus does not make a difference <br /> b) Asked what happens in a situation where you pump grout and it just <br /> keeps going in, possibly causing the obstruction of other wells <br /> (1) Todd Hunter responded that you stop pumping, let it heal, then <br /> pump again until you reach the top <br /> (a) Mr. Finney and Travis Day stated that this is no longer <br /> one continuous operation <br /> c) Asked who is using coupling with steel casing <br /> (1) Chris Sanchez stated he does not believe many are <br /> (2) Mr. Finney stated he believes coupling can act as a centralizer <br /> 2. Keith Branstetter <br /> a) Stated he believes the biggest risk for increasing the annulus is that <br /> increasing the rules only increases the cost for those contractors that <br /> follow the rules, leading to business undercuts <br /> 3. Joel Hellwege <br /> a) Asked Staff to provide proof of the wells that have failed before <br /> changing the rules <br /> b) Asked Staff to focus on increasing the number of well inspectors <br /> (1) Expressed that people who don't follow the regulations are <br /> outcompeting others and that their wells are not necessarily <br /> harming the water resources <br /> c) Stated that drillers are prepared to engage in litigation against the <br /> State of Colorado to get more well inspectors and require that the <br /> Chief Well Inspector be a licensed driller <br /> d) Proposed a solution where a private well inspector group is assembled <br /> to provide their expertise to well owners <br /> e) Asked Board to order Staff to stop the Rule revision process and work <br /> with legislators to get more well inspectors <br /> 4. Travis Day <br /> a) Stated that Staff should base rule changes on well failures or facts <br /> b) Suggested that, in Rule 6.2.1.2, "interval" should be added after <br /> production <br /> c) Suggested changes to figures <br /> (1) Kevin Donegan stated that figures have not been changed yet <br /> d) Stated that, if the goal is to protect groundwater resources, Staff <br /> needs to look more closely at Type III wells <br /> ***strikethrouh denotes Item was not discussed at this meeting <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.