Laserfiche WebLink
silicates (quartz), alumino-silicates (feldspars), and other relatively inert rock -forming minerals <br />(i.e., biotite, muscovite, hornblende, and traces of fluorite, and other targeted minerals) which <br />will need no treatment to prevent leaching or toxic materials as none are produced via <br />weathering. <br />6.3.4.(2) <br />Reclamation costs were calculated using the Nevada State Standardized Reclamation Cost <br />Estimator (SRCE) program. This program includes cost basis data files updated in August 2017, <br />Davis -Bacon labor rates. <br />The Standardized Reclamation Cost Estimator (SRCE) model (the Model) was originally <br />developed with guidance developed during the implementation of the Nevada Standardized <br />Unit Cost (NSUC) Project, a cooperative effort between the Nevada Division of Environmental <br />Protection, Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation (NDEP), the U.S. Department of <br />Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Nevada Mining Association (NvMA) to <br />facilitate accuracy, completeness and consistency in the calculation of costs for reclamation. <br />The Nevada SCRE cost basis and resulting estimation spreadsheets are used here as there are <br />no available, standardized methods of calculating reclamation costs available to me through the <br />Colorado DRMS, Colorado USFS, or Colorado BLM. <br />The basic cost model includes rates for mob -demob; equipment rental rates including fuel, oil, <br />and grease (FOG); and labor rates for operators built in to the hourly equipment rates. The <br />table below approximates costs for reclamation of the anticipated reclamation work over the <br />life of the operation at the Ten Percenter Claim if an outside contractor was used. Of course, <br />actual reclamation costs were significantly less than the RCE as backfilling, recontouring, and <br />seeding was conducted by the Operator as excavations are completed while equipment was <br />still on site. (The table includes actual mob -demob and equipment operating costs as invoiced <br />in the fall of 2017 to illustrate true reclamation costs incurred during the 2017 work program.) <br />The total amount of newly proposed surface disturbance shown in Table 1, in 6.3.3 (1) (f) is <br />listed as 9.10 acres for years 2019 — 2023 (the end of the current USFS Plan of Operations). <br />This disturbance would be entirely within the Proposed Affected Area. The entire Proposed <br />Affected Area may ultimately be subject to excavation should anticipated results either exceed <br />expectations or should additional excavation prove warranted under the current USFS <br />Poo/MPO permit (# 092815); however, four areas of possible excavation are listed in Table 1 <br />and may be the only disturbance created over the life of the permit. <br />As noted above in the introduction of this section and reiterated here: Large dumps will be <br />avoided and reclamation efforts will be reduced as the backfill, though rough, will be already <br />replaced into the trenched area during actual trenching using a cut ahead and fill behind cut <br />and fill approach. Final recontouring, topsoil replacement, raking, and seeding will be all that <br />would remain after backfill from this type of excavation. <br />Reclamation Permit Application for Ten Percenter Claim BLM CMC254209 <br />USFS File Code 2810, USFS MPO-2018-004 <br />