Laserfiche WebLink
/~Jr~ r / III I I I'll III <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Depanmern of Natural Resources <br />I } I }Sherman 51., Room ? I S <br /> <br />Denver, Colorado 8020} ~~~~~ <br />Phone: 170E 866J56: <br />FA.\. 11Ub B}_-8106 <br /> DEPARTlv1ENT OF <br /> NATURAL. <br />December 9. 1997 RESOURCES <br /> Roy Romer <br /> Governor <br />Mr. Joe Wilcox Tames S. Lnchhead <br /> <br />Hydrologist E~ermive Dbcaor <br /> <br />Western Regional Coordinating Center nii<harl g. Lung <br />Dnision Direclnr <br />Office of Surface Mining <br />1999 Broadway, Suite 3320 <br />Denver, Colorado 80202 <br />RE: Special Focus Surface Water Hydrology, Trapper Mine, Permit No. C-81-010, Trapper <br />Mining, Inc. <br />Deaz Mr. Wilcox: <br />The Division has completed its second adequacy review of Trapper's 1996 Annual Report, which <br />includes the 1996 Annual Hydrology Section. A copy of the Division's second adequacy review <br />letter, dated December 9, 1997, is being mailed to you under separate cover, as part of the <br />Special Focus Inspection of surface water hydrology at the Trapper Mine. The Division's first <br />adequacy review letter, dated July 1 ~, 1997, has already been sent to you. <br />At this time, the Division would like to summarize the current status of the issues brought up <br />during the field and office portions of the Special Focus inspection of Trapper Mine. These <br />issues had been detailed in a letter dated November 14, 1996, from the Division to Trapper Mine, <br />with OSM receiving a copy. The format of this letter follows the format of the November 14, <br />1996 letter. <br />OFFICE REVIEW <br />Trapper had been requested to clarify two statements on page 4-222 of the permit <br />application. The first statement was "The baseline data did not adequately detine the <br />expected TSS values from the Trapper Mine drainages." The second statement was <br />"Some increase in TDS is expected from runoff from the disturbed area, but the existing <br />data are not conclusive whether this has occurred." <br />Trapper submitted a revised page 4-222 to clarify these two statements. The Division <br />believes that the issue has been resolved. as stated in comment number 30 of the second <br />adequacy review letter, dated December 9, 1997. <br />