Blairman, thanks for this, although if you read the caveat at the bottom of the page, you'll see that Connie has a policy on her private emails to people of forbidding them from being posted to message boards.
And on that topic, i've not heard back from Connie about a certain couple of emails that another poster and i received concerning the WATER SITUATION at Artillery Peak, AZ and CONTAINING SOME VERY REASSURING, EXCELLENT FACTS.
Connie has asked that i not post these two emails verbatim to the I-Hub or Stockhouse message boards, but "please do your best to convey this information as coming from the horse’s mouth" --meaning the person at AMY who is responsible for such issues. Longtimers or anyone who has done their d.d. on AMY will know who i'm talking about, but Connie has not yet gotten back to me on whether or not i can openly identify this source.
Anyway, here are the salient points about AMY's upcoming water needs and usage and the situation at Artillery Peak:
--The pilot plant report on tailings containing 33% water by weight seems high but indicates much less than conventional tailing which is typically 70% to 75% water by weight. AMY is continuing to investigate equipment and/or processes which would reduce the amount of water contained in the tailing to less than 25%.
--AMY's hydrogeological work to-date, as well as work by the US Geological Survey published in Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1360-D, confirms that there is sufficient recoverable ground water available on AMY's patented claims and adjacent public lands that exceeds the water requirements of the manganese extraction process. A series of wells and pipeline collection system has been built in to the project development plan. Also, a surface water collection and management plan is incorporated so as a process water supplement to minimize groundwater requirements.
--Obtaining the necessary water use and discharge permits are managed within the scope of the current project development plan. AMY is expecting that the regulatory process will move along relatively smoothly as they will be using much less water than is currently available from sustainable ground water sources; there are no other users within 10 miles of the project site; the project is designed as a “zero water discharge” facility; and the project does not require the use of any off-site surface waters.
--When asked if AMY would have enough water onsite to sustain a 3,500 tpd ore processing operation, our AMY source made it clear that the USGS estimated the maximum sustainable aquifer drawdown rate at about 7cfs or 3150 gpm would theoretically support a rock processing rate of about 40,000 tpd [!!] using AMY's extraction process to recover EMM.
I consider the above to be just some of the MAJOR DE-RISKING NEWS we've been getting for AMY along with the Kemetco pilot plant results and the CPM Group and Peter Zhang market studies on EMM and Larry’s statement that there would be “no surprises” on the pre-feasibility study by Wardrop.
