Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Section D.3.3.2 Waste Rock Geochemistry <br />7. STEVE: I did not receive a copy of these logs; however, if I did, I'm not <br />sure if I'ld be able to determine of the sampling was adequate. A class in <br />adequate sample size and selections well as experimental desia_n would enhance <br />the Division's evaluative potentials. <br />10. Upon reviewing the Interburden, Altered Gneiss, geochemical laboratory <br />analyses presented in Appendix F, pyritic sulfur (measured in tons CaCo3 per <br />K-ton) was compared against the acid neutralizing potential (10 mesh, measured <br />as tons CaC03 per K-ton). In both samples, the pyritic sulfur measurements <br />were greater than the acid neutralizing potential, indicating the potential <br />for acid production. <br />Waste Rock #1 Waste Rock #2 <br />Pyritic Sulfur 13.1 5.3 <br />Acid Neutralizing 3.48 1.41 <br />Potential (10 mesh) <br />Net Aci Neutra izing <br />Deficiency 9.62 3.89 <br />It is interesting to note that the pH values for the samples resulting from 8 <br />weeks of Humidity Cell Testing were an order of magnitude more acidic than the <br />pH values resulting from the 24-h r. batch tests: <br />Batch Humidity Cell Batch Humidity Cell <br />#1 #1 #2 #2 <br />pH 7.66 6.48 8.29 6.75 <br />The Division has not had ample opportunity to research the sipnifi~;ance of the <br />Humidity Cell Testing method, and has therefore relied on the more <br />conventional Static Acidification/Neutralization Potential analyses to make <br />its determination. Therefore, as there appears to be a slight potential for <br />acid production, please describe what mitigation is proposed to ensure that <br />the Interburden will not be acid-forming. <br />Additionally, please specify the approximate volume of Interburden waste rock <br />expected to be generated. <br />