REV91127

• Permit No: C1981021
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 11/14/1995
• Doc Name: BOURG MID TERM REVIEW C-81-021
• From: DMG
• To: DAN HERNANDEZ
• Type & Sequence: MT3
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

~~
• • III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
999
STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OE MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Deparunenl of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman 51., Room 215
Denver, Colorzdu 80207
Phone [phone]
FAX: p03) 8}2-8106
Date: November 14, 1995
To: Dan Hernandez
From: Kent Gorham IY'"
RE: Bourg Mid-term Review, #C-81-021
~I~~~
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAI.
RESOURCES
Roy Romer
Governor
lames 5. Lochhead
E~e<uuve Dueaor
Michael B Long
Diviswn Director
As per your request, I reviewed the Bourg permit application and
the Rules as presented in your memo dated September 18, 1995. My
comments are as follows:
Rule 2.04.5 General Description of Geoloav and Hvdroloav
The information in the current permit text is adequate considering
the mine is fully reclaimed.
Rule 2.04.7 Hydrology Description
The information presented in Section I is somewhat dated and
contradicts the approved monitoring program presented 4 pages
later. This section should be worded to describe the hydrology,
not the monitoring program.
Rule 2.04.8 Climatolooical Information
The information in Section L of the permit text is good and I have
no questions or concerns.
Rule 2.05.4(2)(g) Reclamation Plan {sealing wells)
This information should be updated to indicate that the wells will
be plugged by filling the hole up to the water table with clean
sand or gravel, cementing to the surface and providing a water
tight seal at the surface. (see Water Well Construction Rules,
April, 1995) '~^ot..J-a S°"A-`.-~ ~~A.~
Rule 2.05.6(3) Protection of the Hydrologic Balance
Given the current reclaimed state, the permit text information
presented in Section I, and the current hydrologic monitoring
program, I have no problems with this section. I am assuming that
through the annual hydrology report review, there have been no
identifiable impacts to the hydrologic system post-mining.