Laserfiche WebLink
of proof and cannot because Battle Mountain submitted <br />substantial "evidence" that disturbance to the hydrologic <br />balance, including disturbance to existing water rights, would <br />be minimized. The evidence presented by Battle Mountain is <br />summarized below. <br />A. Substantial Evidence Was Presented Regarding Water <br />Quality. <br />Extensive evidence was presented in the Application, <br />the adequacy responses at the hearings that the :Project <br />operations would minimize disturbance to both surface and <br />ground water quality. Rule 6.2(1)(b). The Applicat:;on and <br />adequacy responses contained substantial evidence re<garding <br />water quality issues including: <br />1. Project operation design as a no discharge <br />system to prevent escape of contaminated <br />leachate to the environment. Vol. 6A, pages <br />997, 1008. <br />2. Double lining the heap leach facility to assure <br />that no contaminated leachate would enter the <br />ground water systems and committing to <br />monitoring, reporting and mitigation measures <br />if leachate was discovered between the two <br />liners. Vol. 6A, pages 997, 1009, Vol. 5, <br />pages 934-935. <br />3. Constructing berms around the heap leach <br />facilities to contain all leachate and F>revent <br />discharge of leachate to surface waters. Vol. <br />6A, page 1007. <br />4. Placing all heap leach process pipes irr lined <br />trenches to assure that the contaminated <br />solutions would be contained and would not <br />affect the environment. Vol. 6A, page 1009. <br />5. Locating sediment control traps throughout the <br />mine to minimize contribution of sediments to <br />- 13 - <br />