HYDRO23279

• Permit No: C1996083
• IBM Index Class Name: Hydrology
• Doc Date: 3/29/2005
• Doc Name: Pond Volumes E-mails
• From: DMG
• To: CDPHE
• Permit Index Doc Type: Correspondence
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Dudash,Joe
From: Jeffrey Coombe [[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 4:07 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bowie #2 March Inspection
Thanks for sending that to me, Joe. 6nfortunately, I only got the first
page, the rest is a just a bunch of EPA symbols. Looks like you might
have to fax it over, number [phone]. Or you can try to email it
again, fine by me. Either way, I appreciate you taking the effort to
qet the info to me.
I'm glad to hear that Pond C (which connects to outfall 002) is being
clean, and Z would be happier if it was enlarged. Would I be stepping
on any toes there at DMG to write a Compliance Advisory requesting Pond
C is enlarged? I know we work mostly with the end-of-pipe, but pond
size directly affects discharge quality.
Thanks again,
Jeffrey G. Coombe
Compliance Assurance & Data Management Unit
Water Quality Control Division
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
»> "DUdash, Joe" <[e-mail]> 03/29/05 03:34PM »>
Attached is my March 23, 2005 inspection report for the Bowie No. 2
Mine.
The file is a TIF file. Z hope you are able to read it. If not, please
e-mail your fax number to me so I can get the inspection report to you
that
way.
I talked to Bill Bear and Bowie's consultant, Jim Stover, at the mine
last
week concerning pond volumes at the Bowie No. 2 Mine. Later, Bill said
that
Jim Stover will submit a revision to the Division of Minerals and
Geology to
enlarge Pond B. They will also look at enlarging Pond C.
Last week, Pond C had been dewatered and the operator was going to
clean out
the west side of the pond. Pond B was being dewatered and had gone down
a
few feet more than what I mentioned in the inspection report when I
left the
North Fork on Thursday of last week.
«Bowie #2 Inspection.TIF»
1