Laserfiche WebLink
_87_ <br /> <br />MS. BALDRIGE: Same as the leach pad liner, hdpe, 60 mill. Battle <br />Mountain has failed to obtain a timely review and comment from the Division of <br />Wildlife. The regulations do not require, they just suggest that you contact <br />the Division of Wildlife for their concerns on the application. Battle <br />Mountain tried several times starting in April of last year to contact the <br />local DOW representative. We arranged two site visits with the local <br />representative neither of which did he show up at. We continued to contact <br />him. We finally wrote him a letter sending him the application materials, <br />because he was unresponsive to any efforts to get him on site prior to <br />submittal of the application. <br />MR. HOLDER: We know they've been awfully busy. <br />MS. BALDRIGE: They have -- they have now submitted a response to the <br />project which indicates basically that as long as there is significant <br />protection for the aquatic species and substantial revegetation in accordance <br />• with the plan, they are satisfied with the plan as presented. <br />Battle Mountain has failed to adequately insure that the toxicity of the <br />heap leach pile will be neutralized during reclamation. The Division has <br />imposed standards of .2 parts per million free cyanide and a pH 'levels between <br />6 and 9, and Battle Mountain has committed that those detoxification standards <br />will be met prior to any reclamation of the heap activities and, of course, <br />bond release. That is contained in the Adequacy Letter under Question -- <br />under Question 74 of the Adequacy Letter. <br />Battle Mountain has failed to demonstrate that erosion control measures <br />will be maintained during reclamation. I believe we've already discussed that <br />-- that issue at length here in an earlier discussion. <br />Battle Mountain does not plan to reclaim the two mining pigs to their <br />original contour so that the land can be returned to range. The existing land <br />up there is not suitable for range land habitat, it has been signif icantly <br />over-grazed and in the pit areas the grass represents less that 'i% of the <br />species existing on site. The east pit area will be reclaimed tco <br />• approximately the pre-existing mine contours. We have previously discussed <br />