REP18316

• Permit No: C1981034
• IBM Index Class Name: Report
• Doc Date: 3/26/1999
• Doc Name: RED CANYON MINE 1998 ANNUAL HYDROLOGY REPORT
• From: DMG
• To: LARRY ROUTTEN
• Permit Index Doc Type: HYDROLOGY REPORT
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

~"\
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ~~~,~~ o~ ~oLor~Do

DIVISION OF MINERALS Af~14 G~OLQGY . T
Depanmem of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman 51., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203 DIVISION O F
Phone. [phone] MINERAL S
FAX: [phone] &
GEOLOGY

DATE: March 26, 1999 RECLAMATION
MINING•SAFETY

TO: Larry ROUtten Bill Owens
Governor
.//r iJ Greg E. Walther
FROM: Dan Mathews C/__
l
////"
// Ezttutive Director
l
/
! Michael B. long
Division Diretlor
RE: Red Canyon Mine 1998 Annual Hydrology Report
Enclosed is a copy of the referenced AHR, along with a review checklist that I filled out. Please
forward the report to Mike Boulay for PHC review, and for his consideration with respect to the
final bond release review. As Jim Stover acknowledges in the report, "monitoring efforts were
directed towazds final bond release concerns so not all of the routine monitoring was performed
during the year." In our letter of May 28, 1998, regarding the 1997 AHR, we had approved
sealing of most monitoring wells, and directed the operator to perform certain specific monitoring
to support the anticipated final bond release application, which was submitted in September,
1998. The additional monitoring we requested was performed, and the data included in the final
bond release application. We did not specifically authorize termination of surface water
monitoring, but as Mr. Stover indicates, the sole remaining hydrologic concern for final bond
release has been identified as the rising water level in Well E-1, and its possible relationship to
water levels in the sealed mine workings.
Required data (with the exception of temperature) was reported for Ward Creek upper and lower
sites for May, 1998, but no data was provided for these sites for September, 1998. Spring 3 was
sampled in May but not September (temp. not reported). Spring I was "inaccessible" and not
sampled in May, and was also not sampled in September.
Depending on what is resolved with respect to the bond release application, we will need to
specifically address monitoring to be performed during 1999, within our AHR review letter to Jim
Stover. If we do not issue a bond release approval decision, and modification of the monitoring
plan is warranted, we should probably request the operator to submit a technical revision to
amend the plan. Until such time that bond release is final, or a technical revision has been
approved, I would think the operator should be directed to perform the May and September
monitoring as set forth in the approved permit. Do you agree?
cc: Jim Stover, MINREC, Inc.
rcan\98ahr.mem