My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HYDRO30314
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Hydrology
>
HYDRO30314
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:49:03 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 12:14:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1988112
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
7/24/2000
Doc Name
DRAFT CDPS PN CO-0045675 RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT
From
BATTLE MTN GOLD
To
WQCD
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.
/
65
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
premature." Therefore, TR-28, which addressed long-term water quality in the <br />West Pit, was withdrawn from consideration by DMG at the request of BMRI. <br />With regard to the installation of a slurry wall, BMRI, the DMG, and the CDPHE <br />have reviewed the potential merits of the slurry wall and all parties have <br />concluded that the long-term consequences of the slurry wall outweigh the short- <br />term benefits as perceived by the reviewers. The flushing action provided by the <br />inflow of groundwater from the Rito Seco alluvial aquifer is a fundamental <br />component of the TR-026 water management plan because the inflow of <br />groundwater with lower concentrations of constituents more effectively flushes <br />the secondary sulfate salts associated with the backfill material. When the TR- <br />026 water management program is completed, the water quality in the West Pit <br />will no longer contain elevated concentrations of constituents. Thus, the issue of <br />"keeping clean water clean" is simplistic and will no longer hold. Additionally, <br />the installation of a slurry wall would further disturb the hydrologic system <br />beyond the changes induced as a result of the historical mining activity with no <br />corresponding benefits. <br />The suggestion by the reviewers that BMRI install a reactive barrier/wall is an <br />inadequate technical solution because of the nature of the chemical changes that <br />would have to occur in order to alter the concentrations of the key constituents <br />(i.e., sulfate and manganese). A reduction in the concentration of sulfate (and <br />TDS) can only occur through a chemical transformation that includes: (1) <br />precipitation of a solid phase (e.g., gypsum) or (2) a redox transformation coupled <br />to the precipitation of a solid phase (e.g., elemental sulfur or a metal sulfide). In <br />contrast, manganese removal would require an oxidizing environment ideally <br />coupled with a state of elevated pH. Thus, the ideal chemical state of a reactive <br />barrier for treatment of sulfate is antithetical to the optimum conditions for <br />treatment of manganese. <br />An extensive portion of the reseazch and chazacterization conducted as part of the <br />TR-015 Response Plan, as reported in TR-026, focussed on identifying viable <br />Battle Moun(ain Resources, Inc. HS/ GeoTrans <br />11 July 21.1000 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.