My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-05-25_PERMIT FILE - P2016008
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Prospect
>
P2016008
>
2016-05-25_PERMIT FILE - P2016008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/4/2020 11:10:10 PM
Creation date
6/2/2016 11:35:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
P2016008
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
5/25/2016
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Braun Environment, Inc.
To
DRMS
Email Name
MAC
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.
/
10
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
The meaning of the words "the Division will bond for the cost of replacing any permanent closures <br /> which must be removed to access the mine workings." Is not understood and we request clarification. <br /> Bypassing that issue for now, both the land owners and DRMS know,there have been some openings <br /> that have been missed during the closure program, some openings that, due to poor design, have re- <br /> opened, and some workings that have collapsed and opened after the DRMS program was completed. <br /> These openings can present a danger and liability, thus, it is the prospectors intention of making them <br /> safe. At this time, no specific openings have been specifically identified. If they are identified they <br /> should be handled in a manner that should please both DRMS and the property owner. <br /> 7 The Division encourages the Applicant to photograph all of the proposed prospecting <br /> sites, both before and after the proposed prospecting project. <br /> Response: <br /> In agreement <br /> 8 Explain how mine entries, trenches and excavations will be safeguarded from <br /> unauthorized entry. <br /> Response: <br /> As stated above in item 6 above, the easiest way to safeguard a collapsed feature will be to close it. As <br /> for trenches,the first defense against human access are locked gates and no trespassing signs. For <br /> wildlife and trespassers, the second line of defense is to not have any open excavations having greater <br /> than 1 to 1 slopes, or locations that can form a trap. In the instances, where this might not be possible, <br /> a barrier is to be installed to preclude casual entry. <br /> 9 The Applicant has stated groundwater will not be intercepted at the intended <br /> exploration depths. The proposed depth of the drill holes is 300 feet below the ground surface. <br /> Please specify the depth to groundwater in the vicinity of the drilling locations and provide any <br /> available documentation to demonstrate the static groundwater level is below the anticipated <br /> depth of the drill holes. <br /> Response: <br /> It is common knowledge that the structures in the area that is being explored is drained via the Argo <br /> Tunnel and its crosscuts, which are located about 1,400 feet in elevation nearly directly below the <br /> prospect area. <br /> 10 Provide a description of how any cuts, pits and trenches will be reclaimed. <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.