My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-10-31_REVISION - M1976009HR (7)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1976009
>
2011-10-31_REVISION - M1976009HR (7)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 5:44:22 PM
Creation date
11/1/2011 10:38:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1976009HR
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
10/31/2011
Doc Name
Submittal
From
Schmidt Construction Company
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM4
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Exhibit L <br />Reclamation Costs <br />Menzer Quarry Corrective Action Amendment Exhibit L October 2011 Page 1 <br />Reclamation Costs <br />Because this amendment includes additional land where the reclamation has already been <br />completed, no increase in reclamation costs for the permit should be required as a direct result of this <br />amendment. Any additional costs such as weed control is minuscule compared to the total <br />reclamation costs for the permit. Those costs should be easily absorbed in the current bond amount. <br />On the next page is an accounting of the costs incurred by the operator in performing this <br />corrective action. A total cost of $40,894.08 was incurred. This is for the reclamation work only. It <br />does not include the cost of doing additional mining to lower the crest of the slope down to the <br />permitted Mining Limit. Those costs, $32,287.22, are largely cost of mining because marketable rock <br />was acquired from the shot rock. Therefore, those costs, although related, should not be included in <br />the reclamation costs. Some of the rock removed from the slope in the course of performing the <br />reclamation was also sent to the processing plant, but only the upper few feet of the slope was <br />composed of previously high value, mined rock that was lost resource and recovered in the <br />reclamation. Much of the remainder of the rock excavated from the slope was of low quality due to <br />weathering and mixing with landslide fines as well as organic material from past growth. Much of <br />that rock undoubtedly ended up as crusher fines, a very low value material. Separating the various <br />rock types by volume and deducting the revenue from the reclamation costs would be little more than <br />a guess. It would be a small number compared to the cost of the reclamation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.