My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE117639
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
200000
>
PERMFILE117639
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:13:23 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 4:05:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2001063
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
1/14/2002
Doc Name
OPHIR LODE FN M-2001-063 110 2 PERMIT APPLICATION 3RD ADEQUACY REVIEW LETTER
From
DMG
To
MIDAS MINING CO INC
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.
/
3
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
<br />• <br />iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ~ <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Depanmenl of NaWral Resources <br />1313 Sherman SI., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 866-3567 <br />FA%. 13031 832-8106 <br />January 4, 2002 <br />Wayne Giesy <br />Midas Mining Company, Inc. <br />P.O. Box 772 <br />Philomath, OR 97370 <br />~,~ ^. .,fe..1 / <br />n r~li rrJ~ ,' {' '~~~~~...,,, ! <br />c~~~h~~ . ~ S~r L-A L~,® <br />I <br />~f~('e„'E'IOw ~al.iR~ <br />DIVISION O F <br />b1INERALS <br />G~E'~OLOGY <br />RECLAMATION <br />MINING•SAFETY <br />Bill Owens <br />Governor <br />Greg E. Watcher <br />E><eculive Director <br />Michael B. Long <br />Division Director <br />Re: Ophir Lode, File No. M-2001-063, 110(2) Permit Application, Third Adequacy Review Letter. <br />Dear Mr. Giesy, <br />I have reviewed your packet of adequacy response materials, and find that nearly all of my questions have been <br />answered concerning the application named above. I have listed a few questions and a few comments in the <br />following paragrnphs below. Please respond to the questions, though you do not need to respond to my comments <br />unless I have misinterpreted something. They are arranged according to the exhibits to which they pertain. <br />Exhibit B -Site Description (Rule 6.3.2) <br />1. The soils descriptions recently provided helps us to understand that the native soil onsite is not distributed <br />uniformly and exists in limited quantities. 1 will comment on salvaging these limited soils below. <br />Exhibit C - Minin_g_Plan (Rule 6.3.3) <br />2. You committed in the initial application packet to salvage all available soil for later use in reclamation, though <br />as mentioned above, the soil will be irregularly distributed on areas to be affected. We acknowledge that it will not <br />be possible to salvage soil from under the existing waste rock dump. However, all available soil should be stripped <br />from new areas before they are affected, and set aside for reclamation. These new areas include: the expanded <br />waste rock dump site, the new equipment storage area, the new ore pile area, and the excavated floors of the <br />settlement ponds. I will comment further about replacing topsoil during reclamation in the paragraphs below. <br />3. in question 4 of my 12/21/01 letter, I asked about the shaping of the outslopes of the dump as new waste rock is <br />placed, and the setback distance from Red Cloud Creek. Your responses dealt with placement of ore, not waste <br />rock. Since waste rock will remain onsite, and its location and configuration must conform to certain reclamation <br />standards, we must know how it will be shaped and how the (mapped) setback distance will be maintained. Please <br />provide clarification to these items. <br />4. At this time, 1 assume that ore will not be graded to 3:1 slopes as it is placed in its stockpile location, since it is <br />only temporarily placed there. However, in reading through your response, a question came to mind: Are you <br />planning to use tracked equipment to trans the waste rock and ore from the mine to their dumped locations? If so, <br />please indicate the approximate maximum length of track which may exist outside the portal. <br />~. Are the results of the weekly water quality samples going to be sent to this office, or are they only for your use? <br />6. 1 want to ensure that there is no misunderstanding about the quarterly water quality sampling. These first five <br />consecutive quarters are intended to document the seasonal change in water quality prior to your operation, which <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.