Laserfiche WebLink
Climax agrees with the potential need for groundwater monitoring of shallow and deep systems at various <br />site locations. Please refer to responses to comments on the Water Quality Monitoring Plan regarding <br />groundwater monitoring. <br />In several areas of the plan the proposed Ceresco ridge haul road is mentioned as a potential source of <br />impacts (such as run -off into the Arkansas basin, and page 4 of the Water Quality Monitoring Plan (WQMP)). <br />During the last DRMS site visit, there was discussion with Climax regarding relocating this road from the route <br />proposed in AM06, and that this new alignment would possibly minimize the potential impacted runoff from <br />the road and other impacts on the surrounding areas. Please review the statements in the EPP regarding the <br />proposed Ceresco Ridge haul road and make any needed alterations. <br />The EPP submitted as TR -18 may not reflect the most current plan relative to the Ceresco Ridge haul <br />road, which has been evolving as the pit preparation project and ongoing mine planning efforts are <br />pursued. Climax has relocated the proposed haul route from Ceresco Ridge such that the road will occur <br />mostly within the open pit. A portion of the road will still be constructed in the lower portion of Ceresco <br />Ridge and initial review of the proposed footprint indicates that most, if not all, runoff will be able to be <br />conveyed directly into the storm water capture system in the Camp Area or will be collected by the Storke <br />area capture system that reports to the Storke Waste Water Pump Station. The new Ceresco Ridge haul <br />road, along with an assessment of the need for capture of runoff and any new diversion systems, will be <br />submitted to DRMS as a separate Technical Revision. Statements relative to the Ceresco Ridge haul <br />road in Section T -5.1.2 of the EPP have been reviewed and modified, as necessary. <br />Emergency Response Plan (ERP) <br />- Who is the Emergency Coordinator referred to in the ERP that will be directing initial on -site response <br />activities? This individual(s) should be clearly identified in the plan and contact list and be Incident Command <br />System (ICS) trained. <br />Matthew Main, the Climax Mine Health and Safety manager is currently the designated Emergency <br />Coordinator for the Site. However, Climax is continuing to hire additional staff necessary to support the <br />operation at the completion of construction and commissioning. One of the positions planned to be <br />added to the Safety Department is an Emergency Response Coordinator. In accordance with Rule 8.3, <br />Climax will provide timely updates of responsible personnel and their phone numbers to the Division. <br />Although Climax is not aware of any requirement (under Rule 8.3) that the Emergency Coordinator be <br />ICS trained, Mr. Main does have this training. <br />- Given that most of the designated chemicals on site are inhalation hazards, or can off -gas toxic breakdown <br />products, how many SCBA trained and approved responders would be on -site and able to respond if needed <br />under normal circumstances? (As noted in the plan at least 4 are required to do a Level B entry) <br />The site does not currently have any SCBA's on -site since construction is still underway and reagents <br />have not as yet been brought on site. Climax is in the process of hiring additional staff and procuring <br />necessary equipment and supplies to support the operation. In the meantime Climax will rely on local <br />emergency responders in Lake and Summit Counties. Adequate SCBAs, and other health and safety, <br />and emergency response equipment and supplies, will be available prior to the re -start of operations. <br />4 <br />