My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC33311
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC33311
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:35:47 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 10:41:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Name
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection Date
9/3/1996
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.
/
11
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
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made <br />during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the <br />inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />at the pond NPDES sites. The drainage area has not been affected by <br />mining yet so the surface water monitoring is for baseline data <br />acquisition. The operator reported that the source of the flow was <br />a spring, about one fourth mile upgradient. The flow through the <br />flume was about 20 gpm. All of the flow appeared to be going <br />through the flume. OSM personnel believed that the flume was not <br />level. If the flume is not level to the point that data is being <br />significantly affected, Trapper has agreed to level the flume. <br />BPOIL SPRINGB <br />Four spoil springs were inspected at the mine site, Johnson Gulch <br />spring, Cottonwood spring, Wapiti spring and West Buzzard spring. <br />Johnson Gulch spring is located in the Johnson drainage and, if <br />there was enough flow, would flow into the Johnson drainage pond <br />system. At the time of the inspection, it was flowing about five to <br />ten gpm through the outlet pipe that had been placed in a small <br />temporary dam. However, there was an equal amount of flow going <br />around the pipe. Trapper personnel said that, when it was time to <br />sample the spring, all of the flow is directed through the pipe. <br />Cottonwood spring and Wapiti spring are both located in the Coyote <br />drainage and, if there was enough flow, would flow into the Coyote <br />pond. The Wapiti spring lies about 100 feet upgradient of the <br />Cottonwood spring. Each spring is sampled separately for flow and <br />water chemistry. According to the operator, the two springs vary <br />from each other in TDS, temperature and conductivity. The flow of <br />the Cottonwood spring is captured by a gravel collection basin, <br />which is contained within a short, vertical section of culvert, and <br />directed through a pipe. The flow from the Wapiti spring is <br />channeled around the Cottonwood spring and eventually joins with <br />the Cottonwood spring flow downgradient. Both springs were flowing <br />less than five gpm each. <br />The last spoil spring that was inspected was the West Buzzard <br />spring, which is located directly upgradient of the West Buzzard <br />no. 2 pond. At the time of the inspection, the spring had dried up. <br />The operator reported that the spring had been flowing earlier in <br />the year. <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.