My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2019-07-16_REVISION - M1980244
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1980244
>
2019-07-16_REVISION - M1980244
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2024 10:57:46 AM
Creation date
7/16/2019 2:00:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980244
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
7/16/2019
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response #2
From
CC&V
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR113
Email Name
TC1
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.
/
25
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
NEWMONT <br /> G O L D CO R P. Newmont Goldcorp <br /> Cripple Creek&Victor Mine <br /> 100 N 3rd Street <br /> PO Box 191 <br /> Victor,CO 80860 <br /> newmontgoldcorp.com <br /> SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED RECEIVED <br /> 7018 0360 0001 1957 5076 <br /> JUL 16 2019 <br /> July 10, 2019 IDMSION OF RECLAMATION <br /> MINING AND SAFETY <br /> Mr. Timothy Cazier, P.E. pllP�Q <br /> Environmental Protection Specialist <br /> Colorado Department of Natural Resources <br /> Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety <br /> Office of Mined Land Reclamation <br /> 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br /> Denver, Colorado 80203 <br /> Re: Permit No. M-1980-244; Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company; Cresson <br /> Project; TR#113 - Leach Cell Study, Second Adequacy Review Response <br /> Dear Mr. Cazier: <br /> On July 2, 2019 Newmont Goldcorp Corporation - Cripple Creek and Victor Gold Mining <br /> Company (CC&V) received the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety's (DRMS) <br /> second adequacy review of Technical Revision (TR) No.113. Below are DRMS's <br /> comments in italics followed by CC&V's responses in bold. <br /> 1) Figures and Maps: The response is considered adequate. [Note: for future <br /> reference a scale is inappropriate for an isometric drawing as was included with <br /> the revised figure 31 <br /> 2) Liner: The response is considered adequate. <br /> 3) Stacking: The response is considered adequate. <br /> 4) Solution Application: The response is considered adequate. <br /> 5) Geotechnical Stability: The response is adequate. The PAR specifically <br /> requested the slope stability analysis account for "reduced friction on the wet <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.