Laserfiche WebLink
<br />waste rock must be protected in order to prevent the generation and release of acid and toxic <br />materials. <br />The WQCC Proposal. <br />In the Division's previous written exchanges and meetings with the Company, we established <br />logical premises for assessing the quality of discharges of process water from the CCC&V site. <br />In those cases, water quality was assessed on the basis of what the Division understood at the <br />time to be the most likely discharge limitations. <br />In this review it is assumed that the operative discharge limitations for the long-term are likely <br />to be the "numeric standards" listed in the WQCC Proposal. The WQCC has not accepted <br />the company's proposal, but as I understand, the WQCD agrees with it; so, considering that, <br />I have used their initial acceptance in evaluating the geochem leach tests. <br />The "temporary modifications and qualifiers" are not applicable because they will apply for <br />three years only. Our responsibility is to protect mining sources of acid and toxic materials <br />from leaving the site for the life of mine. <br />Conclusions. <br />CC&V's refutations of the Division's review, assessment, and conclusions regarding the <br />potential for the ore and waste to generate acid and toxic materials have been considered. As <br />part of that consideration I have re-examined all of the initial, new, and cited information. <br />My conclusions, based on this examination of new information and re-examination of the <br />older data is the same as before. My evaluation is based on the premise that the water quality <br />standards for Arequa Gulch that will be applicable for the long term are the proposed <br />"numeric standards" for Arequa Gulch. <br />A complete assessment of the "contact tests" has not been completed as I am not familiar with <br />the test parameters, and no supposing explanation has been offered. Also, the "report" itself <br />is anoperator-generated rendition of the test results that lacks verification, analytical units, <br />locations of samples, explanation of representativeness, and sampling methodology. Upon <br />receipt of this information, we should review the results further, and in context of all <br />previously-submitted information. <br />cc: Bruce Humphries <br />Jim Stevens <br />Jim Pendleton <br />A:\CCVS 95.REV <br />