My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HYDRO29526
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Hydrology
>
HYDRO29526
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:48:28 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 11:03:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1988112
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
8/25/1999
Doc Name
TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT FOR THE CDPS PERMIT APPLICATION
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.
/
40
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
L~~ <br /> <br />June 8, 1989 <br />Battle Mountain Gold Company <br />MCorp Plaza, Forty-Second Floor <br />333 Clay Street <br />Houston, Texas 77002 <br />Attn: A. Walter Wise, Esq. <br />Senior Counsel <br />' Subject: Spring Survey, San Luis Gold Project, Costilla County, <br />Colorado. <br />Project No. 5146 <br />Dear Walt: <br />' Based on our proposal of July 25, 1988, we proposed to conduct a <br />spring survey of the mine site area in May 1989. This proposed <br />spring survey was also mentioned in your Colorado Mined Land <br />Reclamation Divsion permit application. Per the proposal, the <br />spring survey was conducted on May 13, 1989. <br />Spring locations were identified during the previous site visits <br />and located on a topographic map as they were observed in the <br />field. Also assisting in the spring compilation was Mr. Vernon <br />' DeRuyter, a geologic consultant to Battle Mountain Gold. He <br />identified several springs which he had noted during his 1987 <br />surface geologic mapping of the mine area. <br />During the spring survey, we visited each of the previously- <br />identified springs to measure the flow rate discharging from the <br />spring, along with the water quality paramters of pH, specific <br />conductance and temperature. Notes were also made regarding what <br />formation the spring was eminating from and other general <br />comments related to the spring. A summary of the field-measured <br />water quality parameters, flow data and other comments related to <br />the springs is presented in Table 1. <br />~ As Table 1 shows, only one identified spring had a significant <br />~ <br />flow at the time of the spring survey. This spring i.s identified <br /> <br />1 <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.