My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-06-06_REVISION - M1981185 (61)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1981185
>
2011-06-06_REVISION - M1981185 (61)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 5:58:14 PM
Creation date
6/7/2011 8:03:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1981185
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
6/6/2011
Doc Name
Response to 2nd & 3rd geotechnical adequacy issues (CN-01)
From
R Squared Inc.
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
CN1
Email Name
WHE
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.
/
36
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
Response to Preliminary and Secondary Issues April 28, 2011 <br />In Response #15, the Applicant states a separate access road adequacy letter is being submitted <br />under separate cover. The Division received a letter entitled "Response to CN-01 Preliminary <br />Adequacy Issues for a 112d-1 Application, CN-0 1, Wildcat Mining Corporation, May Day Idaho <br />Mine Complex, File No. M-1985-185 Geotechnical Response" written by J. Erich Rauber. Please <br />confirm this is the letter referenced in Response # 15. <br />Response #4-Geotechnical Stability Response to DRMS-April 18, 2011 Comments <br />The letter prepared by J. Erich Rauber is the geotechnical response to a few of Mr. <br />Cazier's comments. <br />Adequacy Issue #5- Geotechnical Stability Response to DRMS April 18, 2011 Comments <br />In Response #26, the Applicant states Exhibit 6.5 provides the final configuration of the <br />reclaimed access road corridor. Exhibit 6.5 (Attachment E-8) did not discuss reclamation of the <br />access road. Please explain this discrepancy and provide the final configuration of the reclaimed <br />.road corridor. <br />Response #5- Geotechnical Stability Response to DRMS-April 18, 2011 Comments <br />Design specifications including reclamation are presented in Attachment F CLC Road <br />Design Third Adequacy Response Other reclamation activities are presented in Revised <br />Exhibit E (Attachment L-Third Adequacy Respone)Adequacy Issue #6 Geotechnical Stability Response to DRMS April 18, 2011 Comments <br />As mentioned in Question #4 above, the Applicant states this letter is an access road adequacy <br />letter response. The content of the letter discusses the requirements for Rule 6.5 and references <br />the engineering reports by Sakura and R Squared, but does not address the outstanding access <br />road adequacy issues or the outstanding adequacy questions for the Sakura and R Squared <br />reports. Please respond to the access road adequacy questions from the March 7, 2011 <br />memorandum and memos written by Allen Sorenson. <br />Response #6 <br />Design specifications including reclamation are presented in Attachment E and F CLC <br />Road Design- Third Adequacy Response The design prepared and by CLC Associates and <br />the submitted work plan addresses Mr. Allen Sorenson's memorandum and memos dating <br />back to 2008. The design has been P E stamped by CLC Engineering and the geotechnical <br />design has been stamped R Squared <br />Adequacy Issue #7- Geotechnical Stability Response to DRMS April 18, 2011 Comments <br />On page 2 in the New Access Road - road stability including cut slope section, the Applicant <br />states a geotechnical reconnaissance report as outlined in a May 29, 2010 memo (Attachment D) <br />are adopted by reference. Attachment D submitted in the most recent adequacy response (April <br />Response-Second and Third Geotechnical Issues 6 5/27/2011
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.