My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-04-15_REVISION - M1977306 (15)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977306
>
2013-04-15_REVISION - M1977306 (15)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:28:26 PM
Creation date
5/8/2013 2:49:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977306
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
4/15/2013
Doc Name
RESPONSE TO ADEQUACY REVIEW #1
From
COTTER
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM1
Email Name
DMC
GRM
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.
/
38
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 DRMS Adequacy Review (1) — Cotter JD -9 Mine Reclamation Plan Amendment <br />21. Page U -S (2) states that maps showing drill hole data are found in this exhibit. A map <br />showing drill hole data was not provided. Please submit 2 copies of a map that displays <br />drill hole data. <br />The statement that a drill hole map was included in the EPP is incorrect. Cotter <br />acknowledges that the JD-9 mine is a wet mine and the use of drill hole data is <br />unnecessary to support any conclusions in this regard. <br />22. Page U -13 states that a small spring near the mine portal discharges water from a <br />perched aquifer. Has this spring ever been sampled for water quality analysis? <br />This spring has been sampled and the results are reported in Table 3: Selected <br />Water Samples from the Mine Sumps and Portal Spring. The small spring near <br />the mine portal is designated as the "Portal Spring" in the table. <br />23. Please clarify the term 'RL" in Tables 3 and 4. <br />RL stands for Reporting Limit. <br />24. Regarding Table 4, the data collected on 412612007 should be omitted due to it not being <br />apart of the continuous data set. Furthermore, the values recorded for the sample are <br />outliers and drastically influence the average values listed in the table. Please provide a <br />revised Table 4 without the 412612007 data <br />A revised Table 4 eliminating data and adjusting the averages is included as <br />Attachment 9 <br />25. Page U -22 states "Water quality is poor as indicated by a sulfate level of 2160mg /L. " The <br />sulfate level mentioned factors the average with the data from the 412612007 sample and <br />is therefore not considered statistically viable. Please revise the statement with a level <br />without the influence of the 412612007 sample data <br />The statement will be revised to read, "Water quality is poor as indicated by a <br />sulfate level of 1484 mg/1." <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.