My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-09-09_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M1977300
>
2012-09-09_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:07:47 PM
Creation date
9/21/2012 1:21:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977300
IBM Index Class Name
ENFORCEMENT
Doc Date
9/9/2012
Doc Name
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER
From
DRMS
To
COTTER
Violation No.
MV2012027
Email Name
TAK
AJW
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.
/
14
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
OBSERVATIONS <br />PERMIT #: M -1977 -300 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: TAK <br />INSPECTION DATE: June 28, 2012 <br />This inspection was conducted on June 28, 2012 by Tom Kaldenbach of DRMS. John Hamrick <br />represented the operator. The inspection was prompted by a phone call that the inspector received at <br />approximately 11:20 on the morning of the inspection from Amory Quinn of Cotter Corporation. In the <br />phone call, Mr. Quinn said Cotter was drilling holes at the Schwartzwalder Mine for a grout curtain that <br />Cotter had recently proposed in their application for TR -20. He said grouting had not yet begun, and <br />he wanted to notify DRMS before grouting begins. A short time after the phone call, the inspector <br />called Mr. Quinn back and told him an inspection would need to be done as soon as possible because <br />DRMS had not yet approved the drilling, and the TR -20 application was still being reviewed. (Cotter <br />had filed the TR -20 application with DRMS on June 22, 2012, starting the maximum 30 -day review <br />period specified by Rule 1.9.1). <br />The inspection began at 1:15 pm. A work crew with drilling and pressure grouting equipment was <br />active near Sump 10, the area of the grout curtain proposed in TR -20 (the "project area "). The <br />operator's representative described the work that had been completed so far as: <br />• An old core hole had been sealed with grout. <br />Seven new 3 -inch diameter vertical holes had been drilled on 15 -foot spacing, to depths <br />between 35 feet and 40 feet. <br />• Pressure grouting the new holes had begun after the crew's lunch break. <br />• Grouting pressure was 1 psi per foot of hole depth. <br />In the project area, there appeared to be four smaller areas, each measuring a few square feet in area, <br />where clear water was trickling out of the metamorphic bedrock and pooling in low areas. The total <br />flow of water corning out of the rock in the four smaller areas was visually estimated to be between 10 <br />and 50 gpm. Water in the lowest of the pooled areas was being pumped into a 4 -inch diameter HDPE <br />pipe that led to the treatment plant approximately 400 feet northwest of the project area. From the <br />treatment plant, the water is piped to the CDPS- permitted discharge into Ralston Creek (Outfall 001A, <br />CDPS permit CO- 0001244). <br />The inspector told the operator's representative that conducting the drilling and grouting work prior to <br />approval of TR -20 gives DRMS a reason to believe a violation has occurred. The operator's <br />representative explained that the drilling and grouting work had begun in advance of TR -20 approval <br />because it was necessary to prevent a violation of the 250 mg /I sulfate standard in Ralston Creek at <br />Outfall 001A. He explained that the water discharging from the rock in the project area had a uranium <br />of approximately 20 mg /I and probable high sulfate concentration as indicated by electroconductivity <br />measurements. He further explained that most of the uranium can be removed from the water at the <br />treatment plant, but the plant has no process for removing sulfate. <br />The work being performed in the project area appeared to be as proposed in the TR -20 application. <br />The project area is within a previously disturbed area of the mine site where the operator has been <br />excavating alluvial material over the last few months near Sump 10 in an effort to find sources of <br />groundwater seepage. Surface runoff in the project area would be retained within the excavated area. <br />Page 2 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.