2025-11-21_REVISION - M1980244 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SSR Mining Inc. PAGE 2/7 2. Section 3.2.2 – Soil Liner Fill: The report refers to Tables 7 and 8 for the SLF nuclear density/moisture testing and SLF depth checks respectively and that 102 tests were performed for each and had passing results. Table 7 shows a total of 103 tests with SLF-15-N failing and, it appears, a passing re-test for SLF-15-RT. In the narrative portion of the report, please discuss failed tests, the steps taken to remediate the issues (if necessary), and re-tests. Additionally, please include a footnote in table 7 to define the test number identifier of “RT”. R/. The explanation has been added to the amended report. A footnote has been added to Table 7 identifying the test number “RT” as a retest. 3. Section 3.4 - Geomembrane Construction Quality Assurance: The report refers to Appendix I for the specific QA results and specifically Appendix I.6 for pressure testing of fusion welds. Beginning on Pg. 2 of the Appendix I.6 table, several failing tests were recorded on multiple days of fusion welds. Please identify what remedial action was taken for welds that failed the pressure test and if those welds were retested. In the narrative portion of the report, please discuss failed tests, the steps taken to remediate the issues (if necessary), and re-tests. Additionally, please include an appropriate annotation in the Remarks column on the Appendix I.6 table to clearly show tracking of failed tests and associated re-tests. R/. Most of the fusion welds with an initial failing pressure test were re-tested, without modifications to the weld, after EC Applications, under NewFields supervision, identified the cause of failure was a result of air leakage at the insertion point of the hollow needle or an issue with the needle and air gauge itself. The needles were replaced and the weld re-tested. If a failing test was not identified as coming from the hollow needle or it’s insertion point, the seam was capped, as reported in the “Remarks” column. New comments were added to the “Remarks” column to show tracking of failed tests and associated re-tests. The updated Appendix I.6 has been provided as part of the amended report. Record of Construction Drawings 4. ROC Drawing 3 – 80 Mil Geomembrane Panel Layout: The panel interpreted to be P-5093 is obscured and cannot be clearly read. Please update this drawing and resubmit it for further review. R/. The 80 Mil Geomembrane Panel Layout drawing has been updated to more clearly show the P-5093 panel number. The updated drawing is provided as part of the amended report. 5. ROC Drawing 3 – 80 Mil Geomembrane Panel Layout: There is a small “wedge” between the panels P-5140 and P-5077 south to panels P-5158 and P-5134. This wedge appears to be comprised of multiple small panels that have been installed but contain no identifier. Looking the information for the extrusion destruct and repair for DX-341, it is located on panels P-5153 and P- 5130 but Drawing 3 shows this as being on the unidentified “wedge”. Please provide a discussion on this “wedge”. Please update the map to remove this feature as it appears to be incorrect. R/. The “wedge” shown is the overlap of panels. This overlap is due to the down-slope panels being buried in a temporary anchor trench, and the up-slope panels extrusion welded 2ft. (or more) over the temporary anchor trench. For visual clarity, any down-slope panel edges overlapped by up-slope panels are now displayed with a gray dashed line. The updated drawing is provided as part of the amended report. 6. ROC Drawing 3 – 80 Mil Geomembrane Panel Layout: Defects DX-349 and 350 are not shown on the drawing. Additionally, these defects involve panels that the Division does not have a record for their deployment. Please provide an explanation. R/. DX-349 and DX-350 are defects documented during Stage B.2. They are now removed from the amended report. Docusign Envelope ID: C6AD8C9C-B5B3-4338-ADF1-222396BA57C7