2015-08-31_PERMIT FILE - C1981010A ‎(23)‎

• Permit No: C1981010A
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 8/31/2015
• Doc Name: pages 2-346 to 2-424 ‎(2-392 to 2-401 confidential)‎
• Section_Exhibit Name: 2.7 Hydrology
• Media Type: D
• Archive: Yes

Trace Elements Analyses (Tables 2.7-6, 2.7-7 and 2.7-8)
A common characteristic of trace elements and micronutrients is that they are
required in very small amounts for plant nutrition. Also a vast majority of the
trace elements required for plant growth can be toxic if they occur at excessive-
ly high levels. Trace element availability and toxicity is often directly relat-
ed to the pH in the soil or overburden. Commonly, a low pH (acidic condition)
increases the abundance and availability of micronutrients and may lead to a
toxic condition from certain elements. The maintenance of an intermediate pH in
• soil is most desirable, thereby assuring adequate levels of trace elements but
not to the point of toxicity (Buckman and Brady, 1960). However, as previously
mentioned, pH related toxicity should not be a problem in the permit area.
In the western portion of the mine permit area, copper (Cu) concentrations are
within the expected range for this element, i.e., <0.5 to 3 ppm whereas 40 ppm
and above is considered unsuitable for plant growth (Table 2.7-6). Olsen (1974)
concluded that this element was not Iikely to cause any problems in plant
growth.
Iron (Fe) concentrations in the lower geological strata were somewhat lower in
the western portion (42-296 ppm) than in the eastern portion of the proposed per-
mit area (68 to 372 ppm)(Tables 2.7-6 and 2.7-7). The rapid conversion of Fe to
insoluble, unavailable compounds suggests little likelihood of Fe toxicity prob-
lems. Therefore, no problems are expected with this element.
Manganese (Mn) concentrations were all lower (4 to 43 ppm) than the 60 ppm level
that is considered unsuitable for plant growth (Table 2.7-6)(Tisdale, 1980).
Therefore, Mn should present no problems for plant establishments.
2-390
Therefore
in
the
spoil produced
the area represented by this drill hole will
probably have
a fairly
high ESP value. Two solutions are feasible for the situa-
tion. One would
be to
cover any such areas with extra topsoil to ensure that
plants do not
need the
spoil for a rooting medium. The second alternative would
be to plate the
spoil
with less sodic spoil from a nearby area and then retop-
soil.
Trace Elements Analyses (Tables 2.7-6, 2.7-7 and 2.7-8)
A common characteristic of trace elements and micronutrients is that they are
required in very small amounts for plant nutrition. Also a vast majority of the
trace elements required for plant growth can be toxic if they occur at excessive-
ly high levels. Trace element availability and toxicity is often directly relat-
ed to the pH in the soil or overburden. Commonly, a low pH (acidic condition)
increases the abundance and availability of micronutrients and may lead to a
toxic condition from certain elements. The maintenance of an intermediate pH in
• soil is most desirable, thereby assuring adequate levels of trace elements but
not to the point of toxicity (Buckman and Brady, 1960). However, as previously
mentioned, pH related toxicity should not be a problem in the permit area.
In the western portion of the mine permit area, copper (Cu) concentrations are
within the expected range for this element, i.e., <0.5 to 3 ppm whereas 40 ppm
and above is considered unsuitable for plant growth (Table 2.7-6). Olsen (1974)
concluded that this element was not Iikely to cause any problems in plant
growth.
Iron (Fe) concentrations in the lower geological strata were somewhat lower in
the western portion (42-296 ppm) than in the eastern portion of the proposed per-
mit area (68 to 372 ppm)(Tables 2.7-6 and 2.7-7). The rapid conversion of Fe to
insoluble, unavailable compounds suggests little likelihood of Fe toxicity prob-
lems. Therefore, no problems are expected with this element.
Manganese (Mn) concentrations were all lower (4 to 43 ppm) than the 60 ppm level
that is considered unsuitable for plant growth (Table 2.7-6)(Tisdale, 1980).
Therefore, Mn should present no problems for plant establishments.
2-390