My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HYDRO31606
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Hydrology
>
HYDRO31606
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:55:14 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 2:04:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980001
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
2/9/2000
Doc Name
4th Q 1999 WET test & December 1999 CDPS report
From
PITTSBURG & MIDWAY COAL MINING CO
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
DMR’s
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.
/
15
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 iiniiiiniuiii <br />The Pittsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. <br />A Chevron Company <br />6400 South Fiddler's Green Circle, Englewood, CO 80111-4991 <br />Mail Address: P.O. Box 6518, Englewood, CO 801556518 ~ FAl((303) 930<204 ~ Phone i303) 9303600 <br />Ms. Sandra L. Brown <br />Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />February 7, 2000 <br />CDPS Permit CO-0032635 <br />RECEIVED <br />FEB ~ ~ 2000 <br />Division of Minerals 8 Geology <br />Dear Ms. Brown: <br />Enclosed, please find the December 1999 CDPS results and fourth quarter 1999 WET testing <br />results for the Edna Mine (Permit CO-0032638). DMP 00] did not discharge during the <br />monitoring period. DMP 004 and 007 had discharge during the monitoring period. <br />Submittal of the results have been delayed due to technical difficulties with the laboratory <br />providing the analyses. P&M regrets any inconvenience the delay in reporting may have caused. <br />P&M is currently reviewing the laboratory's protocols to ensure a more timely submittal of <br />results in the future. <br />Both DMI' 004 and 007 exceeded the permit's sulfate criteria. Due to the delay in analyses <br />reporting from the laboratory, a second set of samples was not able to be tested during the <br />monitoring period to determine if sulfate levels had receded. The sample with the high sulfate <br />level taken at DMP 004 was collected during the first week of the moniroring period. DMP 004 <br />discontinued discharging shortly thereafter with no discharge occumng during the remainder of <br />the monitoring period. The first sample taken and analyzed for sulfate at DMP 007 subsequent <br />to the exceeded value showed that sulfate concentrations were incompliance v`~ith permit criteria. <br />Should you have any questions regazding these reports, please contact me at the Edna Mine. <br />Sincerely, <br />~~~~~ <br />Brian D. Gontarek <br />Sr. Environmental Engineer <br />cc: Mine File <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.