My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1995-08-11_REVISION - M1977493 (12)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977493
>
1995-08-11_REVISION - M1977493 (12)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/16/2021 6:27:01 PM
Creation date
9/14/2010 12:30:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977493
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
8/11/1995
Doc Name
EPP-IV
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.
/
58
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
5 <br /> amount of consumption would be due to the tailing and the mine facilities. Many engineering calculations <br /> were performed by various hydrologists to make the 63 I/s determination. Due to obvious uncertainties, it <br /> was determined in an effort to make the system fail-safe, that the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) <br /> would be designed to handle double the estimates, or 126 I/s. At this rate it was obvious that the <br /> Company would be conservative and in a position to handle any problems affecting capacity. <br /> In retrospect, the designers of the system made several major errors. First, they were working on <br /> averages and as we have already discussed, averages don't work very well when you have swings from <br /> desert to wet climates in the course of a single year. They also had the problem that not everyone in the <br /> Company understood the significance of their work. As a result, the original calculations for quantity of <br /> water did not take into account the fact that the new tailing pond was going to effectively double the <br /> intercepted area of tailing. Finally, until now the volume of water generated in the tailing area was <br /> unimportant. With twenty years of hindsight, we have a firm handle on the water balance and we know <br /> that in an average year we must discharge an average of approximately 315 I/s to keep the water system <br /> in balance. With this in mind, consider that in the mid-1970's, it was determined that the WWTP would be <br /> capable of 126 I/s. It is obvious that the WWTP was going to have problems from its inception. <br /> Construction of WWTP <br /> Research indicated that a Higgins Loop continuous flow ion-exchange column was the most <br /> efficient method to remove molybdenum from the process water. The column was designed to remove Mo <br /> at a concentration of up to 18 mg/kg in the feed water. During the construction of this column, we <br /> reinitiated the research program due to a new NPDES permit that required the removal of heavy metals <br /> other than molybdenum. These included lead, copper, iron, zinc and manganese. Research indicated the <br /> best way to proceed on the "Fast-track" was by incorporating a Swift ElectroClear unit, a micro-flotation <br /> unit, which generated bubbles by electrolysis. Construction of the ElectroClear units began about the time <br /> that the ion-exchange column was almost completed. The flowsheet was relatively simple. Mo would be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.