DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 Introduction SRK Consulting (US) Inc. Suite 520 - 1250 Lamoille Highway Elko, NV 89801 T: 775.753.4151 F: 775.753.4152 [email protected] www.srk.com Memo To: Kevin Hurrell Date: May 23, 2018 Company: Bureau of Land Management, BMDO From: Carrie A. Schultz Copy to: Val Sawyer, SRK Project #: 465900.090 Subject: Prospect Mountain Project – Water Resources Report 1 Introduction Gullsil, LLC (Gullsil) is proposing to conduct mineral exploration and underground mining activities on patented and unpatented mining claims in the Eureka Mining District, located about 3.5 miles southwest of the town of Eureka in Eureka County, Nevada. The proposed Prospect Mountain Project (Project) would be located on public land administered by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Battle Mountain District and on private land controlled by Gullsil as shown on Figure 1. Gullsil submitted to the BLM and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation a plan of operations entitled the Prospect Mountain Project Plan of Operations and Reclamation Permit Application (NVN-092893) referred to herein as the Plan (SRK 2017a). The claim block, shown on Figure 1, has been used as the Assessment Area for soils. 1.1 Existing and Authorized Operations Gullsil is presently authorized by the BLM to conduct mineral exploration activities on the Fourth of July claims under a Notice (NVN-094784) as shown on Figure 2. Up to seven drill hole locations and about 3,300 feet of new/bladed 12-foot wide drill roads have been identified for exploratory drilling on claims administered by the BLM in Section 34 of Township (T) 19 North (N), Range (R) 53 East (E) and Section 3 of T18N, R53E. Additionally 3,900 feet of the running surface of an existing access road on public land were maintained within the existing disturbance width. Table 1-1: Presents a summary of authorized disturbance. Table 1-1: Summary of Authorized Disturbance Disturbance Type Dimension (feet) Acres (Public) Drill Site Within drill/access road disturbance 0.0 Drill Road 12 x 3,300 0.9 Access Road 1.0 Total 1.9 Gullsil plans to conduct similar exploration activities on patented claims controlled by Gullsil under this notice; the total disturbance on patented and public land would not exceed 4.5 acres. Existing and authorized operations are described in greater detail in the Plan. 1.2 Proposed Action Gullsil is proposing exploration and underground mining. Gold and silver as well as other economically viable mineral resource exploration would be conducted using both surface and underground techniques to estimate the in-situ mineral resources and reserves. Gullsil would also develop the Diamond, Berryman, and MacIntosh tunnels to modern standards and mine oxide resources. Activities proposed under the Proposed Action are described in the Plan. The proposed disturbance is shown on Figure 3 and includes: • Construction of surface exploration roads, drill sites, and sumps; CAS/VS 465900_090_ProspectMtn_WaterRep_CAS_20180524 May 2018 SRK Consulting Page 2 • RC and core drilling using truck- and track-mounted equipment with support vehicles; • Reopening and upgrading to current standards the existing underground workings at the Diamond, Berryman, and MacIntosh tunnels; • A cemented rock fill plant with a crusher and screening plant and a cement silo; • Drilling geotechnical boreholes for siting assessment of future potential mine facilities; • Collecting drill hole and ore samples for metallurgical testing and geochemical characterization; • Construction of a contained ore transfer stockpile pad; • Construction of two waste rock disposal areas; • Construction of ancillary support facilities (e.g., vehicle parking areas, equipment laydown yards, office space, worker change room, assay laboratory, underground explosives storage, etc.); • Construction of infrastructure (e.g., developing Einar Spring, water pipelines, water storage, hydrocarbon storage, connection to grid power, haul roads, monitoring wells, fencing, communications, and security); • Construction of growth media stockpiles; • Upgrading existing access/haul roads and constructing new roads; • Installing a solar array as a secondary power source; • Establishing stormwater controls; and • Incorporating authorized notice-level disturbance of 1.9 acres on public land. Gullsil estimates that about 83 acres of public and private land would be disturbed under the Proposed Action. Table 1-2 presents the surface disturbance estimates, and Figure 3 presents the proposed disturbance. Table 1-2: Summary of Authorized and Proposed Disturbance Authorized (acres) Proposed (acres) Total (acres) Component Public Private Total Public Private Total Public Private Total Drill Site 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Drill Road1 0.9 0.0 0.9 -0.9 0.0 -0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Exploration Area 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 23.0 26.2 3.2 23.0 26.2 Access Road1 1.0 0.0 1.0 -1.0 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Haul Roads 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.1 0.8 12.9 12.1 0.8 12.9 Rock Disposal Areas 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.3 0.0 11.3 11.3 0.0 11.3 Ore Transfer Pad 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 2.3 2.3 0.0 2.3 Ancillary2 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.0 1.0 22.0 24.1 1.0 25.1 GMS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 Portal 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.3 3.2 1.9 1.3 3.2 Yard 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 1.2 Total 1.9 0.0 1.9 51.6 26.1 77.7 56.6 26.1 82.7 1 0.9 acres of authorized notice-level Drill Road would be incorporated into the proposed Exploration Area, and 1.0 acres of authorized notice-level Access Road would be incorporated into the proposed Haul Road and Portal disturbance areas. 2 Includes laydown areas, solar arrays, parking and fuel storage areas, stormwater controls, fencing, growth media stockpiles, well pads, spring development, power lines, and septic system. 1.2.1 Surface Exploration Overland travel would be used for Project activities, where possible, to minimize the need for new road construction. New roads would be constructed utilizing standard cut and fill techniques to a running width of up to 16 feet. The depth of cut would be kept to a minimum, and growth media removed during construction CAS/VS 465900_090_ProspectMtn_WaterRep_CAS_20180524 May 2018 SRK Consulting Page 3 would be stockpiled as the fill slope to be used during reclamation. Road construction within drainages would be avoided whenever possible. When drainages must be crossed with a road, Best Management Practices (BMPs) established by the NDEP Handbook of Best Management Practices (NDEP 2008), would be followed to minimize surface disturbance and erosion potential. Culverts would generally not be installed in exploration roads but would be used as needed. Roads would be constructed with a Cat D-7 dozer or equivalent and would occur intermittently throughout the life of the Project. Specific road locations would be determined in the field based on geologic information collected during the exploration program. Maintenance of exploration roads would include minor seasonal grading as needed. Erosion controls would be monitored in the spring and fall. Road maintenance would consist of smoothing rutted surfaces and holes on existing access and drill roads. Maintenance of existing roads would be conducted only on an as-needed basis. New drill site disturbance would be kept to the minimum necessary for safe access and a safe working area for equipment and crews. Surface disturbance would vary based on the slope of the terrain where the sites are constructed. Sumps, typically one per drill site, would be constructed, as necessary. A laydown yard would be located within the drilling area as needed. The surface exploration program would consist of drilling bore holes utilizing track- or truck-mounted RC and core drill rigs and support equipment. Cuttings not bagged and removed during sample collection or remaining in the sumps would be used as a source of backfill and placed back down the borehole. Holes would be both vertical and angled with average drill depths of 1,500 feet bgs. More than one drill hole may be drilled from each site. Gullsil anticipates that up to 300 holes would be drilled during the Project including holes approved under Notice NVN-094784 and exploration drilling on patented. No more than four holes would be open at any one time. Water or non-toxic drilling fluids may be utilized, as necessary, during drilling. Gullsil would obtain water from the proposed Prospect wells 1, 2, and 3 and Einar Spring and/or Eureka County, pending arrangements, or other legal water sources. Sediment traps and sumps would be incorporated into each drill site to collect drill cuttings and manage drill water. The mixture of drill cuttings and drill water from the drilling operation would be managed in the sediment traps. The drill cuttings would be settled and remain in the sediment traps. A maximum of four drill rigs (both RC and core) are expected to be in operation at the Project area at any time. Each drill crew includes approximately three contract personnel, plus a Gullsil-employed geologist. Up to 24 individuals may be working at any time on the Project. Drilling activities would continue for up to 24 hours per day for some drill rigs. 1.2.2 Underground Exploration and Mining Gullsil proposes to conduct underground exploration and mining activities using the Diamond, Berryman, and MacIntosh tunnels to access existing workings.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • STRATIGRAPHY and STRUCTURE of the SOUTHERN SULPHUR SPRING RANGE, EUREKA COUNTY, NEVADA Redacted for Privacy Abstract Approved: U G
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESES OF Joseph T. Lipka IC for the degree ofMaster of Sciencein Geology presented on April 17, 1987 Title:STRATIGRAPHY AND STRUCTURE OF THE SOUTHERN SULPHUR SPRING RANGE, EUREKA COUNTY, NEVADA Redacted for Privacy Abstract approved: U G. Johnson Early Paleozoic limestones and dolomites of the shallow shelf transitional facies belt were mapped in the southern Sulphur Spring Range, Eureka County, Nevada.The four youngest units in the map area are in fault contact with the Lower Devonian rocks and wereprobably transported westward, along a low-angle normal fault. The minoirlal dolomites of the Hanson Creek Formation, dated as latest Ordovician in the map area, were deposited in a low-energy lagoon.Overlying the Hanson Creek Formation, with a gradational contact, is the lower member ofthe Lone Mountain Dolomite, a probable reef complex.The exposed thickness of the lower Lone Mountain Dolomite is estimated to be 250 feet.The Lower Devonian Old Whalen Member of the Lone Mountain Dolomite is composed of well-bedded, alternating brown and gray dolomites.The repetition of rock types in the Old Whalen Member indicates recurring shallow marine environments on a broad carbonate platform.The Old Whalen is estimated to be 1400 feet thick.Directly overlying the Old Whalen Member, is the Kobeh Member of the Mc Colley Canyon Formation.Rocks of the Mc Colley Canyon Formation were deposited on a shallow shelf under normal marine conditions.The mid-Lower Devonian Kobeh Member is sparsely to abundantly fosciliferous and varies from a peloidal wackestone to a peloidal sandy wackestone to a sandy peloidal packstone.The thickness is 276 feet.Overlying the Kobeh Member are the abundantly fossiliferous beds of the lower part of the Bartine.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Nevada Reno Ge.Ology of the Northern Part of The
    University of Nevada Reno Ge.ology of the Northern Part of the Diamond Range, Eureka and White Pine Counties, Nevada A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology by William D. Haworth December 1979 1 mines' USSUinr i V i e s / s The thesis of William D. Haworth is approved: / y o 5 University of Nevada Reno December 1979 V Figure 1 View of the western side of the northern part of the Diamond Range; the a lk a li fla t of Diamond Valley is at far left. ABSTRACT Upper Paleozoic rocks of the post-orogenic overlap assemblage are exposed throughout the northern part of the Diamond Range. The limestones, si Itstones, sandstones, shales, and conglomerates are characterized by abundant chert and quartz that was reworked from eugeosynclinal rocks exposed in the source area to the west. Continental sediments of the Newark Canyon Formation were deposited during the Early Cretaceous on an erosional surface above the Carbon Ridge Formation of Permian age. North-trending anticlines and syncl'ines are the dominant structures in the area. The major portion of the range is an asymmetrical syncline that plunges gently to the south. Several small scale folds on the east side of the area have been overturned to the east. The rocks were de­ formed both prior to and following the deposition of the Newark Canyon Formation. Numerous normal fa u lts, many of which are transverse to the trend of the folds, and a reverse fault have displaced the folded rocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
    BLM U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Land Speed Record Challenger North American Eagle, Inc. Diamond Valley, Eureka County, Nevada Final Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-B010-2016-0018-EA Preparing Office Battle Mountain District Office 50 Bastian Road Battle Mountain, NV 89820 December 2017 This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS i Table of Contents Chapter One: Purpose and Need for Action ............................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 3 Purpose and Need for Action .............................................................................. 3 1.2 Decision to be Made ........................................................................................... 6 1.3 Public Scoping Issues Identified .......................................................................... 6 1.3.1 Relevant Issues....................................................................................................... 6 1.4 BLM Responsibilities and Relationship to Planning ............................................. 7 1.4.1 Conformance to Plans, Statutes, and Regulations ................................................. 7 Chapter Two: Management Alternatives ................................................................... 11 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................13 2.1 Proposed Action: Land
    [Show full text]
  • Overall Economic Development Plan; 2001 Eureka County Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy and 2011 Eureka County Master Plan
    EUREKA COUNTY, NEVADA COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (CEDS) Preparation of this Plan Overseen By: Eureka County Economic Development Program P.O. Box 753 Eureka, Nevada 89316 August 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PREPARATION OF THIS CEDS 1 The Planning Team 1 CEDS Committee Resolution 2 Eureka County Commissioners Resolution 3 Relationship to Other Plans 4 THE AREA AND ITS ECONOMY 5 Geographic Features 10 Land Use 10 Vegetation 13 Climate 14 Water Resources 15 Mineral Resources 17 Socioeconomic Characteristics 18 STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNIUTIES AND THREATS 35 ECONOMIC DEVELOMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND TASKS 62 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 71 MEASURING SUCCESS 84 List of Tables Table 1. Eureka County Land Management and Ownership, 2009 11 Table 2. Oil Fields and Production for Eureka County: September – October 2013 13 Table 3. Hydrographic Basin Summaries: Eureka County (Acre Ft.) 15 Table 4. Population Trends: Eureka County with Comparisons to Elko, Lander and White Pine Counties; 2000 – 2030 19 Table 5. Age Distribution for Eureka and Comparisons to Elko, Lander and White Pine Counties; 2013-2030 19 Table 6. Distribution by Sex for Eureka County and Comparisons to Elko, Lander and White Pine Counties1; 2013 – 2030 21 Table 7. Race and Hispanic Origin: Eureka County with Comparisons to Elko, Eureka, Lander and White Pine Counties1; 2013 – 2030 21 Table 8. Employment by Industry for Eureka County with Comparisons to Elko, Lander and White Pine Counties; 2013 22 Table 9. Average Earnings by Industry for Eureka County with Comparisons to Elko, Lander and White Pine Counties; 2013 23 Table 10. Unemployed by Industry for Eureka County with Comparisons to Elko, Lander and White Pine Counties 24 i List of Tables Cont’d.
    [Show full text]
  • Mississippian Stratigraphy of the Diamond Peak Area, Eureka County, Nevada
    Mississippian Stratigraphy of the Diamond Peak Area, Eureka County, Nevada GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 661 Mississippian Stratigraphy of the Diamond Peak Area, Eureka County, Nevada By DAVID A. BREW With a section on the BIOSTRATIGRAPHY AND AGE OF THE CARBONIFEROUS FORMATIONS By MACKENZIE GORDON, JR. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 661 More than 7,000 feet of Late Mississippian synorogenic detrital clastic and limy sediments of the Chainman and Diamond Peak Formations were deposited in a narrow trough east of the Antler orogenic belt UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1971 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WALTER J. HICKEL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY William T. Pecora, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 70-608211 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Pare Abstract _________________________________ 1 Stratigraphy Continued Introduction ________________________________ 1 Cretaceous System _____ F9 Acknowledgments ____________________________ 2 Newark Canyon Formation ________ f? Location and geography ______________________ 3 Tertiary System __________ __ F3 Previous work _____________________________ 3 Fanglomerate and megabreccia _ F3 Terminology _______________________________ 3 Igneous rocks _______ JT4 Geologic setting _______________________________ 4 Quaternary deposits ____ F4 Regional stratigraphy _________________________ 4 Alluvium ___________________ _ F4 Regional structure _____________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeologic Framework and Ground Water in Basin-Fill Deposits of the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada
    Prepared in cooperation with Eureka, Lander, and Nye Counties, Nevada and the State of Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources Hydrogeologic Framework and Ground Water in Basin-Fill Deposits of the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5249 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. View looking south from the north end of southern Monitor Valley. Top photo: cover of Rush, F.E. and Everett, D.E., 1964, Ground-water appraisal of Monitor, Antelope, and Kobeh Valleys, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-Water Resources - Reconnaissance Report 30. Bottom photo: same view, 2006. Hydrogeologic Framework and Ground Water in Basin- Fill Deposits of the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada By Mary L. Tumbusch and Russell W. Plume Prepared in cooperation with Eureka, Lander, and Nye Counties, Nevada and the State of Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5249 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Carson City, Nevada: 2006 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]