My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2020-08-07_REVISION - M1980244 (9)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1980244
>
2020-08-07_REVISION - M1980244 (9)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2024 11:55:29 PM
Creation date
8/13/2020 6:45:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980244
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
8/7/2020
Doc Name Note
Vol 1 of 2
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
CC&V
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM13
Email Name
TC1
JPL
ERR
BFB
MAC
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.
/
43
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
NEWMONT <br /> references Drawing C-'. Drawing C-2 does not show the pregnant.solution pipeline alignment nor the <br /> extent of liner,for phases?and 3 of b"LF?. If the pipeline is not over the liner in«nv location, secondary <br /> containment is required similar to that installed south of the High Grade dill between 6 LFI and 6"LF2. <br /> Please provide a figure showing the proposed pregnant solution and barren solution pipe alignments <br /> relative to the approved and proposed VLF liner system. <br /> Newmont Response: <br /> Drawing C-2 shows existing utilities, and the pipeline has not yet been constructed, Drawing C-3 <br /> (Attachment 6) has been updated to show the proposed pipeline alignment. Additional details <br /> showing the proposed pipeline relative the VLF liner system is shown in the updated design <br /> (Attachment 13). <br /> DBMS Comment(italics): <br /> 31. Section -.4 Security anti Sim. Please update this section to reflect the new requirements of Rule <br /> 3.1.12 regarding the mime site entrance signs. Specifically, the name of the operation needs to be <br /> included on the sign. .4dditionally, the minimum size of the sign with appropriate font. <br /> Newmont Response: <br /> Section 7.4 has been updated to reflect requirements of Rule 3.1.12. Updated Exhibit D is included in <br /> Attachment 8. <br /> DRMS Comment(italics): <br /> 32. Section -.4 Security and Sim. The narrative discussing the fencing of higInt•alls greater than 100 <br /> feet in depth which remain upon completion of mining and reclamation is inconsistent with that <br /> which was approved through previous adequacy review processes. In accordance with a prior <br /> commitment, please revise this to state that upon completion of mining and reclamation, a 6-foot <br /> high (minimum) chain link fence will he installed around the crest of all highwalls which are not <br /> reduced or backf filled. Please also revise this under Section 1.5.1 of the Exhibit E Reclamation Plan. <br /> Please note, through the reviews of.4AI- 11 anti TR-91, it was determined the minimum height of <br /> the fence should be 8-1eet high to be protective of large ungulates. <br /> Newmont Response: <br /> CC&V has committed to installing an 8-foot wire Post Mining Fence at closure, as approved in TR-91. <br /> Section 1.5.1 of the Reclamation Plan has been revised to state: "Upon completion of mining and <br /> associated reclamation activities, an eight-foot high Post Mining Fence eight-foot high fence will be <br /> installed around the external crest of those portions of the remaining highwalls that are greater than <br /> approximately 100 feet vertically below the crest and steeper than 2.514:1 V'". A copy of the revised <br /> Reclamation Plan is provided in Attachment 10. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.