Laserfiche WebLink
%~` <br />March 25, 1996 DMG letter in response to operator denying operator's request for additional time <br />to install tailing pond spray system. Emphasized that the site is unacceptable <br />without implementation of the approved contingency measures and maintained <br />installation date of 4-1-96. <br />April 11, 1996 Operator submits report by Fox to install land application system. Approved by <br />DMG on 4-12-96. <br />August 5, 1996 DMG inspection: recirculating pump had been removed from the spray <br />evaporative system for repairs. DMG required that the spray evaporative system <br />be operational by 8-16-9~ <br />March 4, 1997 DMG letter directing operator to reinstall the spray evaporative system and the <br />land application system before April 1, 1997. <br />April 9, 1997 Division inspection found that the approved spray evaporative system and the <br />land application system were not installed and operational. <br />April 26, 1997 DMG letter reminded operator that the spray evaporation system in pond be <br />operated at least 8 hours each day until there is insufficient water in the pond to <br />recharge the pump. <br />May 6, 1997 Division inspected the site and found that the spray evaporative system had been <br />partially installed and that the land application system had not been installed. <br />May 10, 1997 Division inspection found that the spray evaporative system had been installed <br />and was operational, but not in accordance with the approved design. The land <br />application system had been installed. <br />~u~y ~- <br />}~e--1..1, 1997 DMG inspection found that both the spray evaporation system and the land <br />application system were installed and operable, but not in accordance with. the <br />approved design. <br />September 5, 1447 DMG inspection found that the recirculating pump for the spray evaporative <br />system has been set into a sump area which has been dug into the tailings in the <br />bottom of the pond. The foot valve intake is set in an open 5 gallon bucket. This <br />is still an inefficient screen and needs to be improved. The intake must be placed <br />fully enclosed within a screen inside a coarser screen or filter. <br />It was also observed during this inspection that not all spray heads are Flowing at <br />full capacity. The operator was required to submit verification that this system <br />meets the capacity as designed by Richard Fox and approved by the Division. <br />2 <br />