My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV89067
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV89067
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:11:03 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:48:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981033
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
3/28/2005
Doc Name
2005 Midterm Review Response Documents
From
J.E. Stover & Associates Inc
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
MT5
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.
/
85
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
J. J. Dudash - 3 - March 24, 2005 <br />interpretation of the source of the mine fire and resultant high surface <br />temperatures in its letter to the DMG dated February 2, 2004. Along the same <br />logic explained above for the global slope failure, Bear does not believe it should <br />be held responsible for high surface temperatures that originate in pre-law B- <br />Seam workings. <br />9. Please see Bear's letter to the DMG dated February 2, 2004 which explains <br />Bear's position regarding the source of the mine fire and whether it is the result of <br />the Bear No. 3 Mine operation. <br />10. The DMG's request to spray and/or mechanically treat several occurrences of <br />noxious weeds (tamarisk and thistle) is noted. <br />11. The DMG's comment regarding adding the soil testing and fertilizer plan to the <br />reclamation cost estimate is noted, <br />12. Bear responded to the DMG's letter dated August 16, 2002 by letter from the <br />undersigned dated September 9, 2004. The following table provides a <br />comparison of the spring and water samples from piezometer AA-1. The second <br />table provides a comparison of the spring and 1995 mine water. The correlation <br />between the spring and AA-1 is quite good. The lab parameters for monitoring <br />well AA-1 are all in the same order or magnitude as the spring with some dilution <br />which would be expected. There is virtually no correlation between the spring <br />and mine water. <br />Com arison S rin & AA-1 <br /> Avera a Values <br />Lab S rin AA-1 <br />Bicarbonate as CaCO3 1134 811 72% <br />Total Alkalinit 1134 814 72% <br />Chloride 48 25 52% <br />Residue, Filterable TDS 180 C 3351 2361 70% <br />Sulfate 1252 1112 89% <br />Ma nesium, dissolved 118 88 74% <br />Sodium, dissolved 835 553 66% <br />Com arison S rin & 1995 Mine Water Dischar e <br /> Avera a Values <br /> <br />Lab <br />S rin Mine <br />Water <br />Total Alkalinit 1134 2120 187% <br />Chloride 48 666 1384% <br />Residue, Filterable TDS 180 C 3351 1576 47% <br />Sulfate 1252 15 1 <br />13. The January 1998 Evaluation of the Bear No. 3 Mine Landslide prepared by <br />Wright Water Engineers, Inc., referenced above, contains a section on landslide <br />trigger mechanisms. Both flow within the B or C-Seam workings behind the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.