My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC13534
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC13534
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:15:05 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 9:01:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977215
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
11/21/1997
Doc Name
MINERALS PROGRAM INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection Date
11/13/1997
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.
/
3
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
(Page 2) • <br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-77-2 <br />INSPECTION DATE 11-13-97 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS SSS <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This partial inspection was conducted to evaluate the portal re-opening process and mine <br />drainage problems encountered due to higher-than-expected discharge volumes. <br />The miners were slowly removing the roof fall material approximately 300 feet inby the <br />portal, at what ie termed "Daylight Curve". Water was issuing from the pile of material at <br />a height of approximately 2.5 to 3 ft. above the floor. The mine discharge flow that day was <br />measured at 35 g.p.m. The discharge is clear and recent field parameters have the pH at the <br />mid 6's. The operator indicated that the discharge through the pile was issuing out along <br />the roof timbers when the high flows were first encountered approximately 11-6-97. <br />There was water dripping from the roof every several feet as we proceeded into the 6390 adit. <br />Water staining inside the portal seems to indicate that water level behind the bulkhead, <br />before it's removal was approximately 4.5 to S ft. above the floor. <br />The operator indicated that the roof above the full set timbers, in the area of daylight <br />curve, is approximately 30 ft. up for as far as he can see in both directions. This is of <br />concern because of possible subsidence to the county road which lies approximately 200 ft. <br />above. Homestake will need to address this concern. <br />There were three of the five or six sprinkler sets operating to dissipate the 35 g.p.m. mine <br />discharge. Ice mounds were building up around the sprinkler heads and were also built up <br />around the non-operating sets. The temperature was cold and no evidence of melting was noted <br />around the non-operating sets. The operating sets had runoff that was observed flowing into <br />a puddle at the crest of the waste dump, near where Windy Gulch rises to the level of the top <br />of the dump. Though water was flowing into the puddle, it was not discharging. It is <br />evident that this water is infiltrating into the dump at a point where it most assuredly <br />makes its way into Windy Gulch. Homestake must address this problem and prevent it from <br />occurring in the future. If operation of all sprinkler sets does not disperse the water <br />enough to prevent surface accumulation and infiltration into or through the waste dump, then <br />the operator will need to use the infiltration trench to lower the volume of water that the <br />sprinklers have to handle or propose some other remedial action. <br />The infiltration trench was not being used at the time of inspection. <br />No springs were noted along windy gulch from the 6390 portal level down to the toe of the <br />waste dump. No flow was heard trickling beneath the surface rock in Windy Gulch along the <br />toe of the dump. <br />I & E Contact Address cc: Tom Gillis, DMG <br />^ CE <br />NAME Alan Cox ^ gL <br />OPERATOR Homestake Mining Comoany! ^ FS <br />STREET 6 0 ai; o nia ^ HW <br />CITY/STATE/ZIP can F an ;s o al;fnrn;a aaina ^ HMWMD (CH) <br />^ SE <br />^ WQCD (CH) <br />^ OTHER <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.