My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV02841
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV02841
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:00:34 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:04:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977342
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/20/1996
Doc Name
INTEROFFICE MEMO COMMENTS HENDERSON MINE & MILL GROUNDWATER MONITORING PLAN TR M-77-342
From
DMG
To
ALLEN SORENSON
Type & Sequence
TR5
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.
/
2
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
A- ~ iiiii iiiiiii <br />INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM <br />DNISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />TO: <br />FROM: <br />DATE: <br />SUBJECT: <br />Allen Sorenson <br />Harry Posey ~~~~~- 4 <br />August 20, 1996 <br />Comments -Henderson Mine & Mill Groundwater Monitoring Plan Technical <br />Revision: M-77-342 <br />Ceochemical Review <br />This memo discusses sections of Climax Molybdenum Company's July 23, 1996, letter and recalls <br />our conversations on the subject of groundwater monitoring at the Henderson facility. <br />As background, it is my understanding that the rocks with which we are concerned include not <br />only the unaltered Pre-Cambrian, as mentioned by the operator, but also altered Pre-Cambrian <br />bedrock, and mineralized mine tailings. I have assumed further that the alteration zone and the <br />spent ore contains elevated concentrations of pyrite or other iron sulfides, and that the ore contains <br />elevated concentrations of other potential contaminants, which is consistent with general models of <br />molybdenum porphyries. <br />CMC asserts that the Division's proposed list of analyzes for groundwater monitoring is <br />"unreasonable." Presumably, their support for this assertion is (1) that some of the parameters are <br />not regulated water quality parameters, (2) that their current discharge permits from the CDPHE <br />do not require monitoring of some of these parameters, and/or (3) their belief that these pollutants <br />are not present in significant amounts in the waste rock. It should be noted that the Division's list <br />of proposed monitoring parameters will apply to a few wells from which water samples are to be <br />collected for five quarters in order to establish baseline groundwater conditions. Long term <br />monitoring requirements would be established from the list of baseline parameters. <br />The list of proposed monitoring parameters includes the regulated metals plus Na, which in high <br />concentrations may cause soil damage, and Mo, which in high concentrations can upset the Cu:Mo <br />ratio and induce molybdenosis in livestock and wildlife, particularly sheep. The Operator should <br />understand that the Division is not bound to follow the monitoring requirements of other agencies, <br />although the Division does serve as the implementing agency for the Water Quality Control Act on <br />matters dealing with groundwater. Rather, the Division's obligations are general, and require <br />i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.