My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-04-08_REVISION - M1983141
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1983141
>
2009-04-08_REVISION - M1983141
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/16/2021 6:25:30 PM
Creation date
4/15/2009 2:16:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1983141
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
4/8/2009
Doc Name
Tailing Disposal into Mine Workings
From
Mark A. Steen
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR6
Email Name
ACS
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.
/
8
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
03/06/2009 14:40 7205653497 MOUNT ROYALE VENTUR <br />P <br />EPA. - Follow-up 3-6-09.doc 3/6/2009 <br />PAGE 04/04 <br />3of3 <br />Mining and milling operations, and certainly the minimal tailings emplacement <br />completed to date, were halted in September of 2008 to await better economic <br />conditions. <br />Confusing language in the TROS approved documents recently discovered upon <br />DRMS review, likely as a result of Mr. Steen's complaint, by Allen Sorenson, the <br />current DBMS specialist overseeing MRV's permits, specifically stated that MRV. <br />would request a technical revision addressing the backfilling of mine tails at a later <br />date. In conference, Mr. Sorenson and MRV agreed that, in order to eliminate any <br />confusion regarding the ability of MRV to emplace tails (cemented or not) <br />underground (as permitted by rule), a new technical revision (TR06) to the M1983- <br />141 permit would be submitted as soon as possible. As I stated yesterday, this is <br />being submitted today. <br />Your concern regarding the EPA's permitting of an activity not allowed by the <br />DRMS, while valid, puts MRV in a Catch 22. That is to say, if MRV had no UIC <br />permit (by rule), we would be in direct conflict with the approval of AM2 and TR05 <br />of the DRMS permits. MRV must obtain one of, these permits before the other. The <br />DRMS absolutely requires compliance with the UIC program, so it matters little <br />which, permit is obtained fist, so long as they are both obtained. <br />MR'V believes strongly that the permitting of our tailings emplacement by the EPA to <br />date is in full compliance with the UIC program. To eliminate confusion regarding <br />the DRMS permitting of the tailings emplacement, a technical revision is being <br />submitted to unequivocally authorize the backfilling. In fact, it is the very submittal <br />that MRV sent to the EPA in December of 2007 that is the basis for the DRMS TR06 <br />submittal. If your office reviews the significant information submitted by MRV in <br />December of 2007, MRV believes you will find adequate environmental protection <br />measures exist to continue to allow the MRV Class V - UIC minor facility permit by <br />rule to remain in force. <br />We hope this answers some of the concerns that Mr. Steen's complaint has raised. <br />Again, as degreed professionals, industry leaders and responsible mine operators, <br />MRV desires no less than full compliance with all applicable rules and regulation, as <br />well as excellent cooperation with you and your office. <br />Please feel free to contact MRV for any further information. <br />Best regards, <br />Matt Collins <br />General Manager - Front Range Gold project
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.