PERMFILE46723

• Permit No: M1988112
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 11/8/1988
• Section_Exhibit Name: APPENDIX Q ADEQUACY REVIEW QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

1

i

i

accurate demonstration of the potential for pit inflow. BMR
believes that based on site geology and well tests inflows to the
west Pit are expected to be minimal.
Inflows from the Rito Seco are expected to some degree in the
West Pit. The exact nature of these inflows can not be determined
until the extent of alluvium exposed in the south wall of the
West Pit is known. As discussed in the response to Comment 5, if
inflows in the alluvium are significant, a barrier will be
constructed between the pit wall and the Rito Seco.
Some inflows to the West Pit from annual precipitation are
expected. These inflows are discussed in Exhibit E.
No application change necessary.
EXHIBIT H - Wildlife
89. The Mined Land Reclamation Board's consideration of Earth Sciences,
Inc. 's 1983 amendment to the currently existing permit Na. M-79-021
noted the DOW 's July IT, 1983 recommendation for site closure between
January 1 and March 31 of each year, as the mine site is considered
critical deer and elk wintering range. The Board approved the amendment
with a specific statement encouraging the company to establish a pa]icy
minimizing the possibility of poaching or other damage to wildlife.
Pease specify what provisions have been postulated to accommodate the
Board's request.
Response: This area of the State is one of the most heavily poached areas.
BMR will not allow its employees to hunt on their land and MSHA
requirements will not allow firearms on the mine property.
Poaching on BMR property by any mine employee will be immediate
grounds for dismissal. The mine site is private property and
attempts will be made to limit access through the use of gating
when the mine is not in operation.
The DOW has submitted comments on the permit application. A copy
of these comments is enclosed. These comments do not recommend
site closure each winter.
DOW comments have been added to Appendix M 4/20/89.
EXHIBIT L - Reclamation Costs
90. We have not been able to verify the suggested dozer and associated
cost. We would suggest that a 215 H.P. Dozer (D-TH equivalent) equipped
with a ripper, a U-blade for topsoil work and an 5-b]ade for rock work,
at 590.00 per hour (total cost), would be the most efficient machine
for dozer work. We concur with the projected cost of an approximately
20 yd3 scraper (Cat 627E equivalent) at 595.00 per hour (total cost).
In order to maintain equipment efficiency, the costs of a medium sired
motor grader (Cat I4G equivalent), at 570.00 per hour, and a small
water truck at 550.00 per hour should be included. Misce)Ianeous costs