My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2019-01-04_REVISION - M1994117 (3)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1994117
>
2019-01-04_REVISION - M1994117 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2025 2:27:52 AM
Creation date
1/4/2019 4:14:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1994117
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/4/2019
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response #2
From
Colorado Milling Company
To
DRMS
Email Name
MAC
AME
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.
/
76
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
either of these mines that show any evidence of significant fractures or faulting in the country <br /> rocks. <br /> 18) The operator's response to item no. 29 (a) clarified the decant lines which connected the <br /> tailings pond with the Hazel A adit were disconnected, cut up and removed from the site in 1999. <br /> Please provide documentation to demonstrate the removal and proper disposal of the decant <br /> lines. <br /> CMC Response: There is no documentation that demonstrates the removal and proper disposal <br /> of the decant lines during the time when ITEC Environmental was actually active as the <br /> permitted operator of the Gold Hill Mill. However, on April 15,1998, ITEC Environmental sent <br /> a letter to the Division of Minerals and Geology regarding "Water Balance Techniques applied to <br /> the Gold Hill Mill, Boulder, Colorado, M-1994-117" stating that "The single 2" PVC line from <br /> the Hazel "A" to the pond has been secured and there are no leaks." During that time, the entire <br /> length of that PVC pipeline was cut up and hauled away as trash. The PVC pipeline has not been <br /> present on the property since that time period, and, consequently, it has not used by any of the <br /> subsequent permitted operators of the Gold Hill Mill. <br /> 19)The operator's response to item no. 29 (b) clarified all of the tailings that had been placed <br /> within the Hazel A adit were removed in 1995. This contradicts information found in the permit <br /> file, including a letter received from the operator on August 28, 1998 stating the operation was in <br /> the process of dewatering the Hazel A adit so they could clean out the remaining tailings sands <br /> from the adit. This indicates that all tailings were not removed from the adit in 1995. Please <br /> provide documentation to demonstrate the removal and proper disposal of these tailings. <br /> CMC Response: A search of the DRMS records shows that on November 21, 1995, Richard L. <br /> Fanyo, Esq. sent Carl Mount a detailed plan for dealing with this problem, and that Allen <br /> Sorenson sent Carl Mount a memorandum regarding "Removal of Tailings from the Hazel-A <br /> Adit, Colina Oro Molino, Inc. (Com, Inc.), Gold Hill Mill, Permit No. M-1994-117." <br /> DRMS records indicate that the removal of the tailings was actually completed by December 3, <br /> 1995. Allen Sorenson reported to the Mined Land Reclamation Board with a "Board Update" on <br /> December 14,1995 that the "Mill tailing impounded behind the Hazel —A bulkhead" requiring a <br /> "Corrective Action" to `Remove tailing from Hazel — A, reestablish and seal bulkhead" with a <br /> "Deadline Established by Division of 12/l/95" and a "Deadline Established by Board of <br /> 12/10/95" had been dealt with by Colina Oro Molina, Inc., under the heading "Date that Problem <br /> was Corrected" with the notation "Tailings removal completed 12/3/95: Operator reports that <br /> bulkhead sealing is now complete". On December 18, 1995, Richard Fox, P.E. sent Allen <br /> Sorenson a letter describing in detail his examination of the Hazel-A Adit, and there is no <br /> mention of any tailings being present. <br /> 20)The operator's response to item no. 29 (d) states a discharge permit has not been obtained <br /> from the CDPHE for the Hazel A adit as it is not discharging water. This contradicts information <br /> found in the permit file, including a Division inspection report for May 27, 2004 which notes <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.