My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-04-16_HYDROLOGY - M1978091UG
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Hydrology
>
Minerals
>
M1978091
>
2009-04-16_HYDROLOGY - M1978091UG
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:45:37 PM
Creation date
4/28/2009 8:19:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1978091UG
IBM Index Class Name
HYDROLOGY
Doc Date
4/16/2009
Doc Name
Response to request for extension
From
Gault Group Inc.
To
LKA International, Inc.
Email Name
RCO
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.
/
4
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
April 15, 2009 <br />Mr. Kye Abraham <br />LKA International, Inc. <br />3724 47"' St. Ct. NW <br />Gig Harbor, WA 98335 <br />RECENED <br />APR 2 7 2009 <br />Division of Pied-mation, <br />Minsng and Safety <br />;pg <br />,,; 24T <br />Re: Golden Wonder Mine, Permit M-1978-091 UG, Level 6 <br />Characterization Report, Response to Operator's Request for Extension. <br />Hydrologic <br />Dear Mr. Abraham: <br />The following presents Gault Group, Inc.'s (GGI) understanding of the key concerns expressed <br />by the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining & Safety (DRMS) in their letter dated February <br />9, 2009 along with a response to each of those concerns. <br />DRMS provided four `General Comments' as summarized below. In addition to the general <br />comments, DRMS included a list of specific comments that delve into the details of the analysis. <br />Many of the bulleted comments appear to be the commenter's stated views or opinions rather <br />than a specific request for information. The remaining specific comments seem to revisit the <br />general comments and GGI has attempted to address those in the general response as well. <br />COMMENT #1: Summary of DRMS's concerns: The site setting indicates that the toe seeps <br />may still be comprised of `shallow ground water flow/interflow' from Deadman Gulch. DRMS <br />is not certain that the geotextile channel is containing all the possible flow that is transmitted <br />through the Gulch. <br />RESPONSE: The most compelling evidence that demonstrates the effectiveness of the <br />Deadman Gulch geotextile channel is from direct observation of surface flows. The <br />channel was completed in - September 2007 and there were several occasions when <br />water was observed in the geotextile channel from Gulch flows, and there were no flows <br />at the toe seeps. Given the physical location of the seeps in relation to the `notched cut' <br />where the emergent flows are captured into the geotextile channel; it stands to reason that <br />if the toe seeps were significantly comprised of gulch alluvium flow, then there would be <br />a cumulative gain underneath the pile and the seeps would flow whenever there was <br />2355 East Camelback Road, Suite 860 • Phoenix, AZ 85016 • Ph. 602.294.6652 Fx. 602.294.6659 <br />1250 24th Street North West, Suite 300 • Washington, DC 20037 • Ph. 202.467.8343 <br />36 West Main Street • Cortez, CO 81321 • Ph 970.565.1222 Fx 970.565-1226 <br />960 <br />M <br />aR? <br />www.gaultarour).com
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.