My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1995-08-11_REVISION - M1977493 (9)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977493
>
1995-08-11_REVISION - M1977493 (9)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/16/2021 6:27:01 PM
Creation date
9/14/2010 12:30:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977493
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
8/11/1995
Doc Name
EPP-I
From
CMC
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
TR7
Email Name
ACS
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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
The EPFs which control and contain the designated chemicals, as with the process water and <br /> tailing circuit, have a proven track record for effectiveness at the Climax Mine. As discussed in <br /> Section 5.3.2 and in the SPCC/MCP in Appendix B, designated chemicals have primary and, for <br /> most, secondary containment. In actuality, with the exception of the sulfuric acid tank at the <br /> Mayflower pump station, designated chemicals also have tertiary containment in that any <br /> accidental release which escapes secondary containment ultimately will report to and be <br /> contained by the tailing impoundments. <br /> The ETDL generally has a good record for effectiveness. However, leaks have occurred in the <br /> past. When these leaks have occurred, repairs to the line have been made and the material picked <br /> up and trucked directly to the nearest tailing impoundment. <br /> The effectiveness of the Robinson, Ten Mile, and Mayflower tailing impoundments is self- <br /> evident. The Robinson impoundment has been used since the mid-1930s, the Ten Mile <br /> impoundment since the mid-1950s, and the Mayflower impoundment since the mid-1970s <br /> without failures. All, in some fashion, serve to contain any major point and non-point source <br /> releases of potential contaminants from upstream areas including acidic seepages from the <br /> McNulty waste rock dump, the E-Dump, the OP dumps, and potentially contaminated surficial <br /> run-off from haul roads, the pit area, and the yard areas around the crusher/mill facilities. The <br /> effectiveness of the Mayflower impoundment(including the Mayflower seepwater collection and <br /> return system) in the Climax water treatment and discharge system has been discussed at length. <br /> Coherex has a documented proven record as an effective dust suppressant in the mining industry <br /> and elsewhere. Likewise, its use at Climax to suppress the release of airborne particulates from <br /> the Ten Mile tailing impoundment and dam area also is highly effective. The optimum <br /> effectiveness of Coherex and its application, however, is dictated by the knowledge of when to <br /> initiate application as discussed in Section 5.3.2 Storage and secondary containment of Coherex <br /> also has been discussed in Section 5.3.2 and in Appendix B. <br /> Dust suppression in the crusher and conveyor systems using scrubbers, Rotoclones, and <br /> baghouses has been highly effective during periods of mine and mill operation. These units are <br /> permitted by the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division as per Section 2.2. <br /> 5.5 Specific Environmental Protection Facility Monitoring/Alarms <br /> All of the critical EPFs at Climax are checked, inspected, or monitored either visually, <br /> • analytically, or both. Checks and inspections are defined and discussed in the SPCC/MCP in <br /> Appendix B. In the case of pump stations, mechanical and telemetric alarms also are operational <br /> 32 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.