ML20196E430

Forwards Reply Re Fry Conyon Sites

ML20196E430
Person / Time
Issue date:	09/09/1996
From:	Paul Goldberg NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	Evans B, Moriarty M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV), NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
Shared Package
ML20196E288	List: IA-99-238, Forwards Reply Re Fry Conyon Sites ML20196E305 ML20196E398 ML20196E430
References
FOIA-99-238 NUDOCS 9906280256
Download: ML20196E430 (7)

Text

..

1 From:

Paul Goldberg #8

1. • / 7/ e#%

MM To:

TWD2.TWP8( XM1), ARD1.ARP1(RJE)

$/4

/

f Date:

9/9/961:57pm g

Q, y'

Subject:

Fry Canyon Sites -Reply

Bob, Based on the information you gave me, here's what i found (and didn't find).

1. The same COG license.that Maureen gave you - P-03142. Nothing under Titan Mill.

2. No other licenses for the Hakes family. Nothing for Hel-Nan or Victoria.

3. About 40 other mining licenses for White Canyon or White Canyon Mining District. If you want a list of these, let me know.

Another consideration to keep in mind is that we will apparently soon tum the followup on all these sites that ORNL identifies over to Agreement States.-

CC:

ARD1.ARP1(CLC, LLH),

/'1 99o6asoas6 990621 Ai PDR FDIA

{'V FIELDS99-238 PDR 9% zf625G

f wi-,w-,,,ni-,in--

Field Demonstration ofIn Situ Chemical Barriers s

To Control 1

l Uranium Contamination in Ground Water, Fry l

Canyon, Utah i

Number:

UT-96-242 Cooperating Agencies:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of Energy, Utah Department of Environmental Quality Staff:

D.L. Naftz. Hydrologist, Project Chief G.W. Freethey, Supervisory Hydrologist Ryan Rowland, Ilydrologic Technician Pe<fod of Project:

October 1995 to September 1999 Problem:

Potable ground-water supplies worldwide are contaminated or threatened by advancing plumes containing radionuclides and metals. Passive in-situ chemical barriers may offer a cost-effective attemative or supplement to pump-and-treat technologies for controlling ground-water contamination.

An in-situ chemical barrier is a permeable zone of reactive materials placed in the subsurface that removes ground

• vater contaminants and results in clean ground water exiting from the treatment zone. Laborator, experiments have indicated the usefulness of chemical barriers; however, field demonstrations of these technologies are needed to test their usefulness for ground-water clean up.

Abandoned and unreclaimed tailings from uranium-upgrading and copper-leaching operations adjacent to Fry Creek provides a site for the Geld demonstration of chemical barrier technology to remove uranium from ground water. The Fry Canyon site is located on Bureau of Land Management property.

Objectives:

(1) Characterize the pre-demonstration hydrologic and geochemcial conditions in the shallow ground-water system at the Fry Canyon site, (2) assess developed technologies for application to the site, including laboratory experiments to obtain site-specific operating parameters, (3) design the field test and obtain necessary permits, (4) perform the field test, and (5) evaluate the performance of the field system and determine cost effectiveness of the process.

Approach:

The investigations will be completed in five phases: (1) Characterize the pre-experiment hydrology and geochemistry of the shallow ground-water system (s) using standard techniques, (2) use tailings and ground water collected from the site in laboratory experiments to obtain operating parameters for i

the field experiment, (3) use laboratory and field data to design the field experiment, (4) install the f

chemical barrier and conduct and monitor the field experiment, and (5) use data collected from the i

field experiment to determine method effectiveness and develop cost estimates for commercialization of the technique.

Progress:

A A multi-agency and multi-discipline study team was assembled, and initial organizational meetin s %

1 of 2 4/14/9911:39 At

http1/www dutsic.w r.usgs.govh n f ores /projectVut242.htn E

were conducted. A project work plan was completed and approved by the study team. Eight monitoring wells were installed and site hydrologic and geochemical conditions in the shallow ground-water system at the Fry Canyon site were determined. Three reactive chemical materials were selected for use in the chemical barrier based on laboratory experiments. Regulatory approval for installation of the chemical barrier was obtained. The chemical barrier and associated monitoring wells and equipment were installed. An abstract describing the initial study results was submitted and accepted for an upcoming scientific meeting.

Plans for Next Year:

Publish results of the hydrologic characterization activities at Fry Canyon. Attend a scientific meeting on chemical barriers. Continue monthly and bimonthly field-monitoring activities to assess barrier performance. Produce a USGS Fact Sheet and journal article describing the demonstrations.

1 I

l I

l 4/14/9911:39 ^!

2of2

and Hydrology

, Tne general geology of the Fry Creek drainage basin at and downstream f rom the tailings site can be sumarized as f ollows. Fry Creek quarternary alluvium

)

The alluvium is estimated to overlies late triassic age Cedar Mesa sandstone.

The alluvium will be y, less than 10 feet thick in most areas pf Fry Creek.

Tne Cedar sorted silt sand and gravel with moderate to high permeabilities.

Mesa sandstone is estimated at several hundred feet thick in tne region and is Permeability data a sandstone unit which originally was a regional sand dune.65-568, 1985).

is available for tne Cedar Mesa unit (USGS Open File Report Results of a pump test are discussed in the recort and indicate condu:tivities The Cedar Mesa sandstone is likely to have (K) of.35 to.02 feet per day.

secondary porosity and high permeability f rom f racturing in the upper reaches of the unit, and moderate to low permeabilities in deeper sections due to less

'f racturing and water being der,1ved f rom primary porosity (personal This situation could result in contamination entering comunication, USGS).

near surf ace fractures in the Ce'dar Hesa s'andstone and traveling significant j

distances to discharging springs, or moving downward to depth in the sandstone

,.Ap2Llig 4yppAymwell approximately 1-1/4 mile downgradient from the b

unit.

site is completed at 350 f eet in the Cedar Mesa sandstone.

Humerous perennial springs' issuing f rom bedding planes in the Cedar Mesa sandstone enter Fry Creek and result in a perennial flow in Fry Creek, both Subsequent continuous evaporation from the damp above and below the site.

alluvium of Fry Creek results in alkaH (salt) deposits along much' of the,

The present width o'f th'e Fry Creek channel is generally' surface material.

The creek.is less than 30 f eet in.most areas adjacent to the. tailings. site.

- assumed'to be losing' water along most reaches to evaporation plus's'eepage' to

~

the underlying Cedar Hesa sandstone. According to the owner of the Fry Canyon t

store and motel, a public water supply wel1~used by the store is completed in The static water level in the Cedar Mesa sandstone at a depth of 350 feet.

this well is reportedly 300 feet below and surface, although no documentation exists to ' validate this water level'. The Fry Canyon store is approximately j

1-1/4 mile downgradient f rom the tailings area.

@[

Site History Most of the inform)$1on '

he ite history was obtained by a phone and from an article in

{

conversation with I

the TREF 0lt magaz W The site was first developed for upgrading (concentrating) of uranium minerals. The upgrader was constructed and operated by COG Minerals Corporation, a subsidiary of Colorado Oil and Gas COG Minerals operated three mines, namely, the Spook,- Bullseye, Co rporation.

The and Coleman in the White Canyon Mining District of southeastern Utah.

ores of the White Canyon District were distinctive in that there were sulfide copper minerals, ind sometimes' substantial quantities of pyrite, asso:iated Ores f rom the district were usually sold to the' with the uranium minerals.

Texas-Zinc Minerals Corporation mill at Mexican Hat, Utah, seme 70 miles The long haulage and ore grade requirements of the mill, made is necessary for the miners to ship only the very best grade of ore for away.

These conditions prompted COG to install f acilities to profitable operation.

upgrade material that otherwise would have been a waste product.

1 9

}

The upgrader was located in a remote desers area ca_11ed Fry. canyon approximately 60 miles west of Blanding. Utah, and was initially accessible only by a dirt and gravel road.

The upgrader was constructed on the hillside adjacent to the Fry Spring Area, f rom which water f or plant operation was 1 constructed in the alluvium of Fry Creek obtained via a large ' radial w The initial design of (1/86 phone call'to lot plant, but within the upgrader was for a 75 tons 'of are per day (TPD) j seven months of operation the plant had been expanded to a 200 tpd capacity.

The upgrader st,arted operation early in 1957 and operated f or ab.out three It was shut down in early 1960.

years.

During its operating lif e, the upgrader processed approximately 50,000 tons of All production.

ore estimated to contain between 0.10 and 0.15% V 0g.

3

-consisting of three producti (a gravity concentrate, a flotation concentrate, The gravity and slimes) was. shipped to the Texas-Zinc mill at Mexican Hat.

concentrate, representing 1.5% b.y weight of the ore, contained 4.20% U 0 38 The flotation concentrate amounting to 1.0% by weight of the and 17.4% Cu.

ore, assayed 0.30% U 0s and 22.0% Cu. The slimes constituted 19.8% of the 3

ore weight and contained roughly twice the U 03 8 grade of the ore fed to Te tas-Zinc paid a premium f or the process, or 0.20% to 0.30% V 0s.

3 38 in 0 0g in the concentrates and the ree.ular ore prices

• for the U 0 3

purchased the U 0s the slimes.' The Ato'mic' Energy Conrnission ( AEC) 3 attributable to the COG upgrader production that was recovered by Texas-Zinc.

7he upgrading process used by COG consisted of conventional brushing and grinding to minus 6-mesh, at a rate of 8 ton't per hour, in a' rod mill.' The mill d'ischarge was. sampled.and then fed to'a jig where.the high' grade gravity concentrate was recovered.' The jig tailing was pumped to Humphrey spirals with the spiral concentrate being clea'ned on a Wilfley table, and the spiral tailing passing to flotation where additional copper sulfide minerals recovered.

The sand tailings were pumped to waste and to separate the sands and slimes.

In the the slimes were thickened and pond dried during early operations.

later stages of operation, a filter was installed f or dewatering the slimes.

A U.S. patent (No. 2,968,524 issued January 17, 1961) was granted for the upgrading process invented by COG Minerals.

It is estimated.that about 40,000 tons of sand tailings (analyzed to contain When roughly 0.02% U 0g) had been impounded when the upgrader shut down.

3 Western operations ceased. COG sold the plant to Western Nuclear, Inc.

Nuclear moved the buildings and most of the milling equipment to Wyoming for use in constructing its' Spook concentrator. That equipment not useabl'e at the Spook facility was consigned to a Salt Lake City used equipment dealer.

Western Nuclear removed everything but the fitte ore bin.

at the that f rom nis recollection, the he B5HW contact on Septemb 1

state upgracer on Fry Cree

(

tailings (est. '40,'000 tons) were I f t by COG, but should' pose no problem as the uranium had been extracted.

27. 1987, 85HW contacted the company that acautred the site and I

On.lanuary water rights f rom COG in about 1962, and began a copper heap leaching

. as name Basinare f rom the four-acre mine.

This compan w

Doth of' operating usin or and had tw

?I 13

'Monticello, Utah.

was conta de6, and he explaineo tha? 2here was rela ive y little tailings ef % f rom '

3G-uranium upgrader h;

operation and that most of what exists %0 day is froc.

r copper leaching operation, including the leach ponds adjacent to Fry

,,eck.

I

1. n 1 pH and the pregnant solution was the'n precipitated with hydr sulfide and collected on pieces'of scrap iron (piles of scrap iron still f

~

litter the site).

No d'ata is available on tne actual tonnage of ore j

p roc'e s s ed.

The ran f rom about 1963 to 1968 until one of owners Qy of th nd left for Mexico and has never been near rom since.

Immediately a that, the company and operation f olded.

stated there was very little uranium tailings on the site when they began operations.

3 Since the time the operations ceased, the site has been in an unreclaimed state, allowing the tailings to blow of f-s~ite and erode directly into Fry Creek.

conclusions and Recommendations At present it is dif ficult to dif f erentiate how much tailings were lef t f rom the COG upgrader operation and how much are left f rom the copper leach operatt' n, since reports f rom the two companies conflict. Another-o complicating f act is the copper ore in the White Canyon District.is.

uraniferous (contains uranium).

'AdditEo'nalenvironmentalconcernsassociatedwiththeoresoftheDistrictare that both vanadium and silver are found in association with most of the uranium-copper ' ores and is of ten recovered during processing.

There is no record, however, if these ehments were recovered or lef t on-site f rom the processed ore at the Fry Canyon site.

To date, one ranch located imediately downstream f rom th'e tailings is using water f rom Fry Creek f or drinking and domestic purposes. Heasured values of 100 pci/1 uranium have been documented.in Fry Creek downstream f rom the site.

and Recommer1[ations for furt'her action include sampling Fry Creek p'o [dbwnstream]f rom the tailings site,i, tamp._ ling sediments in Fry CreekTpstream

~ hdyowristream f rom site, sampling water]{n tTe'. leach ponds,._and limited.. gH

~

a a

I e

samplThg'boTihe source material an of f-site windblown materia}.

(..,

?

l

~......

n::The State Of fice of Drinking Water and USGS were contacting regarding -any g,-

analysis on the well at Fry Canyon' Hotel, and none exists. Therefore, a f.lsample-is also recomended to.be taken and analyzed f rom this well.

/ 'j j

p

?,

\\

N(

\\

I N LB/pw 0035z/6-9 l

~.-/

'[;[/.. r i:t,~.

'..f.

'<,* %. rt

.i.-

,m rr.a *.t-# *, *%' ': ;." *L,p

.u.

e

\\.

i s :

. &x. '.,G.. N.f.f.

• y

.*,,s.

4-e

.f *;

• y.. f..,....*

..w....n,*.,

. %...$."..v e

.e 4.

?,.

' 1 %pe:

o

.d..'.:

.. i L';'.l:c,,;G':d.g L,.m :w.:q :.v...{'.,

.y ;#,..; c:, '

w.;

7

. a, M.y.. &.%, N ;../:g:n,..

T

- ~

m

...-..g n -.

..-.u

.~

...,.w.* *..

k~.,.3.~,. / A6.

v/j..s m

,c... :.:

.~...v,.....,-

4 a

• ;:, *., t. '.\\..n *, e.':. !

.t

• i "... g;.

~

., he... s r.

.,.?..'

sa'

..i.

..r...

q;;

s

.v.

,i

,:,.*;%r

i ;,*. - ~ s.:y: gQ.6 3 -

...W

• .a

's.

) s.n..

..r*

.s..,

r a

y,.

g

,o

, ' fq'

.a......g, %. f *>.r '.,

..... Au e*

. g...J ' ' '

• y p..

... p....... %:

y.

.,..w e. y * * ~, -

s

..,....f,.

. '.p... w..r.,.....,w.'....,.

n p.O r~

. e..%

,.y1,.....:..

M.u...g sa.a,6.,.g,,;,,. %., y.. f

.s e. ~..

..... ' ; y.P...,<,...

pi, r,,,m.....-%. #r m.

c.. :.

a.. m.qo,

• .-....q.m. t.

.. u..

~..

...< p..

.n. ;....s.,.,. %.. n -

. m. -

d

.t:.?

f. Q.,;.,

.y. @ ;. f,4..

v w;L,wnV ::c:'.a ?%;: ;i%.'..u.,a.. ':, y.

o

. n.

. s. r. : A....m.,.. %

.t.~....

w :.'c,w..t...y...:::.

~t

, r :,.:... V, s...;b s.....~.ir. : +.

,c

..e.. y.1

,.h c.,.. o.e.v..y ;...

.s,..u.

.. f. < a 1 7v. $w a.

> i a.

.5

$1

.I.

• s.

L.,*

. p gue.

. J. f ' __

7 g.

(n e

.' '. 7 k..0 Tomngs " N U. @., p '...:' N... : k. % c,

.'O,

. y?

. 'I Y.

h3 t

e

<i

..:,,..,4,.

d,.....,,,,"..

n. cop. di....,..,.h.,...

.,y t

,,,..ti.......

..s......

...,...<.. ej +

• aya 4

g d..,.

.n, kSa.

,s.

. g...

.... r e. g e..#.4 4.,. i..id$. i me..,.,

. y 4-l J eg@(pnF,ge.*g

. v./,,,..,.

t.w.

.a

...,. p. u.a Nes e.

g.

@,:,;f,,7 :,.* g*

Leod, '.

p

, %.. fr.tPM. r.i.n'cO

' T%..'4 *

.....3. p. p...- e...e., s.- s.

.o.

3.,,.1 3,...

..M.,,..,

.x.a li.

..,.,4.,....

..........,.s.

,.,g..

.%gol,epy,.,..

g f ; r.~... c.e.

.... t.:.v..

.so

.s L.

.....e

...e...

..-.f.

.o ms

. uh.. q..... 9.4., )p:

p m*

ss, A.

s,.;,

94

,4.w :..~. s,

.w

~.*

~ -.

.. :3. s ~.. e e

..:. J.....

...a.1. w.,.-

a.

+

n,.

~..

Y ; ; S E;. &. a s. z.

! ?..

n.; >; c e,;.s.

i e

1 m.

1. '.Q~c.: !.,i. j/.y,2*!fJ.T.f rg.

.:7 lf 1;

voootopon.,

:'h,$ ;m,,

et s

-trot #e y c.e,c -

..,.,'r

.d fatnr,c 4".;, C,%. :concentr.qlTf e.:

N.

~. ' b.

.c J

%Q&ey$.W..

'Wp?;$.' e -

m

-l: yy..: ' Q. O.:f,b.*

m 9, ;~..y.w' ?.l t.

0:.

.w :..y. c.-s,,n v.ch's,.a, n.c 6,. 3 m. 4 '[.*

• P

... f a,. y,.j g,. 9 '

,.4

,, i g f.

'e

.o.

,,, 4,3

...j,

5. -

sr e

.p

.y.,'.

,g g, 3 4' j,;.:.

(

h N,]',,f'.'j,*.. !i;;';.:-

y,,

h, j

'g 3'.O. ;.

I./# ag t.

. s.) w.si....r, 2,[,

. '-r'n t 4;

,.. r

y.. u

.: : a.

..t ~ -

~

- K't c.~.s.

\\*

- ~~

s

*. A.,% r ?. i..i:.c..r:........-

• ...n e

o n

+,..'.'.&....

.s.;.

, i *.' :.1. ' ~.

1.%b f..;:

.-*p.;

.h

~ *

. f. %....'.' 6 :

.,,s'~~...e

• . e o.. >..m. '

.'. f-

e r

J.4.

o t.

e

• n...+...

.,.,. 4. E. d :

. o.., y ;..,,

. v.I.

5).~......,.e...,.g.....q.,.....

y.

...t, s.d,. v,.., %.

..,..,j c.

.,,..... a.v.e.s..,,..

e e.

-,+

. g*g.-.

p,,

g,

.a..,.

,...t,...z.

.u..

e,

..s. s.

.. p. \\ s.,n.

.e..

. \\. m..

g.

w i.'

I. C.~0f

• c., N, *' h...,.,.' '.,.

• s g2..

...,=

...,g

.g

,k.;.c,d.,q., fil.)**";

• Q.V;. c..; h..w. n. y,4,, J,.

b:

u:..

.t

.... D. e:.;,T,*. 2A 4,[?: -.::

. ls' e-p' jf z.. %.

...c

~r.

i m.:

'..T ' *.3'.a.^ L

..' s

..,',' [t.s W.o o'.t.

s a

~ ~ - a.? ?

f... '.

,g.....L.

' g..t.

.. r ~, e.,,. n.s 3..e o

e l l[.. u..

.c,e....

....v.

4. g,;.g ' x,.n. ~.

a.

....:1:f

@2 *?* l '

vpS... -

n.. -.

<.v j.

A g'

.I

.j

q. ?.

.,....a,. O f* '.,.,. s W f.:

,... ' b W *

.. p ::,/:. h,.;(,f,**,0,. d r cee ~o 4 w

.y*

.: ::9

..e..

y

.r.

r., v.

u

'.',=-.1.}s,.

.y

\\,%, S=o..

j.

.r.,r

. g.

• +';

a #' *C.,.

• 9

...e.;t.,f 8

.s

... e M,

...fI -

C, Q.r..T...

e.

,.,.0..r.

s.

• • se g,'

,1,.

,.r :

e

• e.......e e-.e y.

. s e,g.,h(q,,rf. g.

e r-

.,ss...-.,..,

...I

.s

.s..

~,z.

. tr. c.e. A,.

v..

I i,..

<.p..-

f...,......,......,o..

c.,.1.,,...

..A q.

~$,.,.,<..

.,.. t. v..

. p..

w.

.< w.

w,. n.'c..

1 '.,...,..

r.

.>s, m: m.., r.. m... e.,.,i...

e 4.

...... e. :..,

,s

.r..

.y..

.a

),, u,y. s.r... s. -

6 4n 4.\\... c.

s

.:..e.,

...s.

.7, 9...s:s s.

,. rs. <,...,;y...

• .s l

.i- - ;m..y3, '

.2 p......,,..

3..,e,e,

[.-

...,g..

. */> s

.....v...,...;....s......s t.

e

-y

- g.,t w.:.

. ~.,.,.

A.,...

,s

.. p....,.,.......t

-1s.~,..s...,

.....e,s.,

s..

,.,.,.L..,.

?.

..., =..

e

... - 4, p,s.

...,g...

g

..e

. e......

c.,

..o.,'...g.A,s...,

s.

.t

.o is.

.a..

..L,,

...~g...

',f.

.,s.

s.

..~o....

,..,...,t 3

,.,u.

r. e.

u e

.s

.y. c.,(

~.?yM s

,..*9

• s

.: H..i. ~. 'd,......,9.,

w,... w/.L..'...

- g,..

a.. - s.: c., *. f.

• , e : - -. :..M.. yq, t

• g. :

}

,.ns g

3.

a. ;,f.

4.

~..

J....,.: '..,

0, e%.'$.,..........,,..

. o s t.,..

i s,.

s.

. ;r.

s

?::

t. '. L..

....'. i; :...,) ?. R.,

., ' :.;?. ;, e

,.y,.*

y...'..*

. ?. 9+l, \\ r,= >.

....i.

..,+M:.,t.

....s.

o

.s ~.

L

. o;..

"to:.

v,

. y. w...

~

s

,.... f.

,t.

., y.....

y....

.,-c,..... ;.42.... s....w...".

/.,s.. "..h..

..*'l.l...,,

T.

t..

,-=.4s

..i

' r.

".e... > * ;*l... p,\\ "."c'. '* ',.* > U. s .. ". ?

t

• ~ ~. '. '.

,. ?,%..p. s '.. "._i.'.,,e.'j... s..

..s.....

y...c ;w.,a.,. d.'

J,.'..,',.r..Q...3

,w g.

5

-'e

.,...t a. s'...g

.. i.* n.

g.....,v.

s,,.,

o. ?

..17:;. ~.. ; a.

.o. s. te

.s s

s p..=. -

.g-e**,.- ;.... r

,r m~

c.

u.. %.u o w w.y ow.iu.auao m v

. u..u.,

w..w r. u e

EXPLANATION lenorwed toe d Urdmproved read

= = =

y 8

0 1000 2.ON Acco fin 1

i i

I

(

4 0

230 SCO 750 wTtas Moure 3. Fry Canyon Stucy Area, San Juan County, Utah.

\\l g

\\(

I h

Suzanne Canooy. M.CL. M.P.H.

,:.v. 3 f,

g

• s m, of

[

Draft -- February 18, 1981 Second Oraf t -- April 27, 1987 I/MW P / d ',@

004834

)

Preliminary Assessment Report Fry Canyon Tailings UT0980718688 Executive Sunnary The Fry Canyon site (dTD980718688) consists of unr'eclaimed tailings, leach pads, and leach ponds as a result of a uranium upgrader operation, and later a copper heap leach ope' ration. The site is located a'pproximately 85 miles south of Hanksville in San.luan County, Utah.

The uranium upgrader processed between 1957 and 1960 approximately 50,000 tons of ore, which resulted in approximately 40,000 tons of sand. tailings..The copper leach operation has no An recorded operating history except what is presented in this summary.

estimated 45,000 tons of tailings re' main at the site..The Bureau of Land Management has' always owned the land the site in on; however, the site has been operated by C,olorado Oil and Gas (COG). Denver,. f or uranium upgrading and -

Basina're Corp of Monticello, Utah for copper 1,eaching.

~

Issues at site _

The Utah Department of Health Bureaus of Radiation Control (BRC) and Solid and Hazardous Waste (BSHW) have conducted site visits to the Fry Canyon tailings Bureau-of. Radiation Control's visit was in April 1984; BSHW was in May site.

Samples of Fry Creek water in April 1984 indicated uranium levels 1986.

A ranch occupied year round is y

downstream of the tailings site of'100 pei/1.

located approximately 1,000 feet downstream f rom. the tailings and uses the Q (s The BRC water f rom the stream for-domestAc purposes, including drinking.

o d'res ter for rinking." A phone call to the

, in January 1987 has confirmed ontinued use to present of wa in Fry Cr for domestic purposes.

i

]

What is assumed to be wind-blown tailings have been observed by BSHW to extend y 7

several hundred yards of f-site towards th The site is unsecured allowing access to anyone who desires.

• The copper leach operation used sulf uric acid to leach the copper ore f rom'the host rock, thus the pH of the water from each of the six ponds may be hatardous whens are ero precipitation concentrates in the ponds.

The tailing' directly into Fry Creek, a perennial stream. Vegetation

• appears st~ressed downkind from the tailings area, i

Krrvit:*t L MerrJ DrtClo-. Desaort of Ewrorvrer.tst Heae 0

• .. s..v vrs.ccT.. 3: ;..'

HR *..~ W. c. ' ' i. 2:a:..

• s : n

\\

l L

-