3809 Surface Management:
Appendixes |
||
Last Updated: |
PART 3800--MINING CLAIMS UNDER THE GENERAL MINING LAWS
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 351; 16 U.S.C. 460y-4; 30 U.S.C. 22; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 154; 43 U.S.C. 299; 43 U.S.C. 1201; 43 U.S.C. 1740; 30 U.S.C. 28k.
* * * * *
Subpart 3809 -- Surface Management
Source: 45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980, unless otherwise noted.
Note: The information collection requirements contained in this subpart have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3507 and assigned clearance number 1004 - 0104. This information is needed to permit the authorized officer to determine if a plan of operation is needed to protect the public lands and their resources and to determine if the plan of operations, if one is required, is adequate. The obligation to respond is required to obtain a benefit.
(See 48 FR 8816, Mar. 2, 1983.)
General
§ 3809.0 - 1 Purpose.
The purpose of this subpart is to establish procedures to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of Federal lands which may result from operations authorized by the mining laws.
§ 3809.0 - 2 Objectives.
The objectives of this regulation are to:
(a) Provide for mineral entry, exploration, location, operations, and purchase pursuant to the mining laws in a manner that will not unduly hinder such activities but will assure that these activities are conducted in a manner that will prevent unnecessary or undue degradation and provide protection of nonmineral resources of the Federal lands;
(b) Provide for reclamation of disturbed areas; and
(c) Coordinate, to the greatest extent possible, with appropriate State agencies, procedures for prevention of unnecessary or undue degradation with respect to mineral operations.
§ 3809.0 - 3 Authority.
(a) Section 2319 of the Revised Statutes (30 U.S.C. 22 et seq.) provides that exploration, location and purchase of valuable mineral deposits, under the mining laws, on Federal lands shall be ``under regulations prescribed by law,'' and section 2478 of the Revised Statutes, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1201), provides that those regulations shall be issued by the Secretary.
(b) Sections 302, 303, 601, and 603 of the Federal and Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) require the Secretary to take any action, by regulation or otherwise, to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the Federal lands, provide for enforcement of those regulations, and direct the Secretary to manage the California Desert Conservation Area under reasonable regulations which will protect the scenic, scientific, and environmental values against undue impairment, and to assure against pollution of streams and waters.
(c) The Act of July 23, 1955 (30 U.S.C. 612), provides that rights under mining claims located after July 23, 1955, shall prior to issuance of patent therefor, be subject to the right of the United States to manage and dispose of the vegetative surface resources and to manage other surface resources. The Act also provides that ``Any mining claim hereafter located under the mining laws of the United States shall not be used, prior to issuance to patent therefor, for any purposes other than prospecting, mining or processing operations and uses reasonably incident thereto.''
(d) Section 9 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1280) provides that regulations issued shall, among other things, provide safeguards against pollution of the rivers involved and unnecessary impairment of the scenery within the area designated for potential addition to, or an actual component of the national wild and scenic rivers system.
(e) The Act of October 21, 1970 (16 U.S.C. 460y et seq.), as amended by Section 602 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 460y - 8), established the King Range Conservation Area in California. The Secretary is required under these Acts to manage activities in this conservation area under the General Mining Law of 1872 in such a manner as to protect the scenic, scientific, and environmental values against undue impairment, and ensure against pollution of streams and waters.
[45 FR 78909, Nov, 26, 1980, as amended at 59 FR 44856, Aug. 30, 1994]
§ 3809.0 - 5 Definitions.
As used in this subpart, the term:
(a) Authorized officer means any employee of the Bureau of Land Management to whom authority has been delegated to perform the duties described in this subpart.
(b) Casual Use means activities ordinarily resulting in only negligible disturbance of the Federal lands and resources. For example, activities are generally considered casual use if they do not involve the use of mechanized earth moving equipment or explosives or do not involve the use of motorized vehicles in areas designated as closed to off-road vehicles as defined in subpart 8340 of this title.
(c) Federal lands means lands subject to the mining laws including, but not limited to, the certain public lands defined in section 103 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. Federal lands does not include lands in the National Park System, National Forest System, and the National Wildlife Refuge System, nor does it include acquired lands, Stockraising Homestead lands or lands where only the mineral interest is reserved to the United States or lands under Wilderness Review and administered by the Bureau of Land Management (these lands are subject to the 43 CFR part 3802 regulations).
(d) Mining claim means any unpatented mining claim, millsite, or tunnel site located under the mining laws and those patented mining claims and millsites located in the California Desert Conservation Area which have been patented subsequent to the enactment of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of October 21, 1976.
(e) Mining laws means the Lode Law of July 26, 1866, as amended (14 Stat. 251); the Placer Law of July 9, 1870, as amended (16 Stat. 217); and the Mining Law of May 10, 1872, as amended (17 Stat. 91); and all laws supplementing and amending those laws, including among others the Building Stone Act of August 4, 1892, as amended (27 Stat. 348); and the Saline Placer Act of January 31, 1901 (31 Stat. 745).
(f) Operations means all functions, work, facilities, and activities in connection with prospecting, discovery and assessment work, development, extraction, and processing of mineral deposits locatable under the mining laws and all other uses reasonably incident thereto, whether on a mining claim or not, including but not limited to the construction of roads, transmission lines, pipelines, and other means of access for support facilities across Federal lands subject to these regulations.
(g) Operator means a person conducting or proposing to conduct operations.
(h) Person means any citizen of the United States or person who has declared the intention to become such and includes any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity.
(i) Project area means a single tract of land upon which an operator is, or will be, conducting operations. It may include one mining claim or a group of mining claims under one ownership on which operations are or will be conducted, as well as Federal lands on which an operator is exploring or prospecting prior to locating a mining claim.
(j) Reclamation means taking such reasonable measures as will prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the Federal lands, including reshaping land disturbed by operations to an appropriate contour and, where necessary, revegetating disturbed areas so as to provide a diverse vegetative cover. Reclamation may not be required where the retention of a stable highwall or other mine workings is needed to preserve evidence of mineralization.
(k) Unnecessary or undue degradation means surface disturbance greater than what would normally result when an activity is being accomplished by a prudent operator in usual, customary, and proficient operations of similar character and taking into consideration the effects of operations on other resources and land uses, including those resources and uses outside the area of operations. Failure to initiate and complete reasonable mitigation measures, including reclamation of disturbed areas or creation of a nuisance may constitute unnecessary or undue degradation. Failure to comply with applicable environmental protection statutes and regulations thereunder will constitute unnecessary or undue degradation. Where specific statutory authority requires the attainment of a stated level of protection or reclamation, such as in the California Desert Conservation Area, Wild and Scenic Rivers, areas designated as part of the National Wilderness System administered by the Bureau of Land Management and other such areas, that level of protection shall be met.
(l) King Range Conservation Area means the area designated pursuant to the Act of October 21, 1970 (16 U.S.C. 460y et seq.), as amended by Section 602 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 460y - 8).
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980, as amended at 48 FR 8816, Mar. 2, 1983; 59 FR 44856, Aug. 30, 1994]
§ 3809.0 - 6 Policy.
Consistent with section 2 of the Mining and Mineral Policy Act of 1970 and
section 102(a) (7), (8), and (12) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act,
it is the policy of the Department of the Interior to encourage the development
of Federal mineral resources and reclamation of disturbed lands. Under the
mining laws a person has a statutory right, consistent with Departmental
regulations, to go upon the open (unappropriated and unreserved) Federal lands
for the purpose of mineral prospecting, exploration, development, extraction and
other uses reasonably incident thereto. This statutory right carries with it the
responsibility to assure that operations include adequate and responsible
measures to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the Federal lands and to
provide for reasonable reclamation.
§ 3809.1 Operations.
§ 3809.1 - 1 Reclamation.
All operations, whether casual, under a notice, or by a plan of operations, shall be reclaimed as required in this title.
§ 3809.1 - 2 Casual use: Negligible disturbance.
No notification to or approval by the authorized officer is required for casual use operations. However, casual use operations are subject to monitoring by the authorized officer to ensure that unnecessary or undue degradation of Federal lands will not occur.
§ 3809.1 - 3 Notice: Disturbance of 5 acres or less.
(a) All operators on project areas whose operations, including access across Federal lands to the project area, cause a cumulative surface disturbance of 5 acres or less during any calendar year shall notify the authorized officer in the District office of the Bureau of Land Management having jurisdiction over the land in which the claim(s) or project area is located. Prior to conducting additional operations under a subsequent notice covering substantially the same ground, the operator shall have completed reclamation of operations which were conducted under any previous notice. Notification of such activities, by the operator, shall be made at least 15 calendar days before commencing operations under this subpart by a written notice or letter.
(b) Approval of a notice, by the authorized officer, is not required. Consultation with the authorized officer may be required under paragraph (c)(3) of this section when the construction of access routes are involved. Notices properly filed under this section constitute authorization under part 8340 of this title (Off-Road Vehicles).
(c) The notice or letter shall include:
(1) Name and mailing address of the mining claimant and operator, if other than the claimant. Any change of operator or in the mailing address of the mining claimant or operator shall be reported promptly to the authorized officer;
(2) When applicable, the name of the mining claim(s), and serial number(s) assigned to the mining claim(s) recorded pursuant to subpart 3833 of this title on which disturbance will likely take place as a result of the operations;
(3) A statement describing the activities proposed and their location in sufficient detail to locate the activities on the ground, and giving the approximate date when operations will start. The statement shall include a description and location of access routes to be constructed and the type of equipment to be used in their construction. Access routes shall be planned for only the minimum width needed for operations and shall follow natural contours, where practicable, to minimize cut and fill. When the construction of access routes involves slopes which require cuts on the inside edge in excess of 3 feet, the operator may be required to consult with the authorized officer concerning the most appropriate location of the access route prior to commencing operations;
(4) A statement that reclamation of all areas disturbed will be completed to the standard described in § 3809.1 - 3(d) of this title and that reasonable measures will be taken to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the Federal lands during operations.
(d) The following standards govern activities conducted under a notice:
(1) Access routes shall be planned for only the minimum width needed for operations and shall follow natural contours, where practicable to minimize cut and fill.
(2) All tailings, dumps, deleterious materials or substances, and other waste produced by the operations shall be disposed of so as to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation and in accordance with applicable Federal and State Laws.
(3) At the earliest feasible time, the operator shall reclaim the area disturbed, except to the extent necessary to preserve evidence of mineralization, by taking reasonable measures to prevent or control on-site and off-site damage of the Federal lands.
(4) Reclamation shall include, but shall not be limited to:
(i) Saving of topsoil for final application after reshaping of disturbed areas have been completed;
(ii) Measures to control erosion, landslides, and water runoff;
(iii) Measures to isolate, remove, or control toxic materials;
(iv) Reshaping the area disturbed, application of the topsoil, and revegetation of disturbed areas, where reasonably practicable; and
(v) Rehabilitation of fisheries and wildlife habitat.
(5) When reclamation of the disturbed area has been completed, except to the extent necessary to preserve evidence of mineralization, the authorized officer shall be notified so that an inspection of the area can be made.
(e) Operations conducted pursuant to this subpart are subject to monitoring by the authorized officer to ensure that operators are conducting operations in a manner which will not cause unnecessary or undue degradation.
(f) Failure of the operator to prevent undue or unnecessary degradation or to complete reclamation to the standards described in this subpart may cause the operator to be subject to a notice of noncompliance as described in § 3809.3 - 2 of this title.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980, as amended at 48 FR 8816, Mar. 2, 1983]
§ 3809.1 - 4 Plan of operations: When required.
An approved plan of operations is required prior to commencing:
(a) Operations which exceed the disturbance level (5 acres) described in § 3809.1 - 3 of this title.
(b) Any operation, except casual use, in the following designated areas:
(1) Lands in the California Desert Conservation Area designated as controlled or limited use areas by the California Desert Conservation Area plan;
(2) Areas designated for potential addition to, or an actual component of the national wild and scenic rivers system,
(3) Designated Areas of Critical Environmental Concern;
(4) Areas designated as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System and administered by the Bureau of Land Management;
(5) Areas designated as closed to off-road vehicle use as defined in subpart 8340 of this title.
(6) The area designated as the King Range Conservation Area pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 460y et seq., as amended by section 602 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976.
(c) Plans properly filed and approved under this section constitute authorization under part 8340 of this title (Off-Road Vehicles).
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980, as amended at 48 FR 8816, Mar. 2, 1983; 59 FR 44856, Aug. 30, 1994]
§ 3809.1 - 5 Filing and contents of plan of operations.
(a) A plan of operations must be filed in the District Office of the Bureau of Land Management having jurisdiction over the Federal lands in which the claim(s) or project area is located.
(b) No special form is required for filing a plan.
(c) The plan shall include:
(1) The name and mailing address of the operator (and claimant if not the operator). Any change of operator or change in the mailing address shall be promptly reported to the authorized officer;
(2) A map, preferably a topographic map, or sketch showing existing and/or proposed routes of access, aircraft landing areas, or other means of access, and size of each area where surface disturbance will occur;
(3) When applicable, the name of the mining claim(s) and mining claim serial numbers assigned to the mining claim(s) recorded pursuant to subpart 3833 of this title.
(4) Information sufficient to describe or identify the type of operations proposed, how they will be conducted and the period during which the proposed activity will take place;
(5) Measures to be taken to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation and measures to reclaim disturbed areas resulting from the proposed operations, including the standards listed in § 3809.1 - 3(d) of this title. Where an operator advises the authorized officer that he/she does not have the necessary technical resources to develop such measures the authorized officer will assist the operator in developing such measures. If an operator submits reclamation measures, the authorized officer will ensure that the operator's plan is sufficient to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation. All reclamation measures developed by the operator, or by the authorized officer in conjunction with the operator, shall become a part of the plan of operations.
(6) Measures to be taken during extended periods of nonoperation to maintain the area in a safe and clean manner and to reclaim the land to avoid erosion and other adverse impacts. If not filed at the time of plan submittal, this information shall be filed with the authorized officer whenever the operator anticipates a period of nonoperation.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980]
§ 3809.1 - 6 Plan approval.
(a) A proposed plan of operations shall be submitted to the authorized officer, who shall promptly acknowledge receipt thereof to the operator. The authorized officer shall, within 30 days of such receipt, analyze the proposal in the context of the requirement to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation and provide for reasonable reclamation, and shall notify the operator:
(1) That the plan is approved; or
(2) Of any changes in or additions to the plan necessary to meet the requirements of these regulations; or
(3) That the plan is being reviewed, but that a specified amount of time, not to exceed an additional 60 days, is necessary to complete the review, setting forth the circumstances which justify additional time for review. However, days during which the area of operations is inaccessible for inspection shall not be counted when computing the 60 day period; or
(4) That the plan cannot be approved until 30 days after a final environmental statement has been prepared and filed with the Environmental Protection Agency; or
(5) That the plan cannot be approved until the authorized officer has complied with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act or section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
(b) The authorized officer shall consult with the appropriate official of the bureau or agency having surface management responsibilities where such responsibility is not exercised by the Bureau of Land Management. Prior to plan approval the authorized officer shall obtain the concurrence of such appropriate official to the terms and conditions that may be needed to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation.
(c) The authorized officer shall undertake an appropriate level of cultural resource inventory of the area to be disturbed. The inventory shall be completed within the time allowed by these regulations for approval of the plan (30 days). The operator is not required to do the inventory but may hire an archaeologist approved by the Bureau of Land Management in order to complete the inventory more expeditiously. The responsibility for and cost of salvage of cultural resources discovered during the inventory shall be the Federal Government's. The responsibility of avoiding adverse impacts on those cultural resources discovered during the inventory shall be the operator's.
(d) Pending final approval of the plan, the authorized officer shall approve any operations that may be necessary for timely compliance with requirements of Federal and State laws, subject to any terms and conditions that may be needed to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation.
(e) In the event of a change of operators involving an approved plan of operations, the new operator shall satisfy the requirements of § 3809.1 - 9 of this title as it relates to bonding.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980]
§ 3809.1 - 7 Modification of plan.
(a) At any time during operations under an approved plan, the operator on his/her own initiative may modify the plan or the authorized officer may request the operator to do so.
(b) A significant modification of an approved plan must be reviewed and approved by the authorized officer in the same manner as the initial plan.
(c)(1) If, when requested to do so by the authorized officer, the operator does not furnish a proposed modification within a reasonable time, usually 30 days, the authorized officer may recommend to the State Director that the operator be required to submit a proposed modification of the plan. The recommendation of the authorized officer shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth the facts and the reasons for the recommendations.
(2) In acting upon such recommendations the State Director shall determine, within 30 days, whether:
(i) All reasonable measures were taken by the authorized officer at the time the plan was approved to ensure that the proposed operations would not cause unnecessary or undue degradation of the Federal land;
(ii) The disturbance from the operations of the plan as approved or from unforeseen circumstances is or may become of such significance that modification of the plan is essential in order to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation; and
(iii) The disturbance can be minimized using reasonable means.
(3) Once the matter has been sent to the State Director, an operator is not required to submit a proposed modification of an approved plan until a determination is made by the State Director. Where the State Director determines that a plan shall be modified, the operator shall timely submit a modified plan to the authorized officer for review and approval.
(4) Operations may continue in accordance with the approved plan until a modified plan is approved, unless the State Director determines that the operations are causing unnecessary or undue degradation to the land. The State Director shall advise the operator of those reasonable measures needed to avoid such degradation and the operator shall immediately take all necessary steps to implement those measures within a reasonable period established by the State Director.
§ 3809.1 - 8 Existing operations.
[following section was reinstated by court's May 1998 ruling]
(a) Persons conducting operations on the effective date of these regulations, who would be required to submit a notice under § 3809.1 - 3 or a plan of operations under § 3809.1 - 4 of this title may continue operations but shall, within:
(1) 30 days submit a notice with required information outlined in § 3809.1 - 3 of this title for operations where 5 acres or less will be disturbed during a calendar year; or
(2) 120 days submit a plan in those areas identified in § 3809.1 - 4 of this title. Upon a showing of good cause, the authorized officer may grant an extension of time, not to exceed an additional 180 days, to submit a plan.
(b) Operations may continue according to the submitted plan during its review. If the authorized officer determines that operations are causing unnecessary or undue degradation of the Federal lands involved, the authorized officer shall advise the operator of those reasonable measures needed to avoid such degradation, and the operator shall take all necessary steps to implement those measures within a reasonable time recommended by the authorized officer. During the period of an appeal, if any, operations may continue without change, subject to other applicable Federal and State laws.
(c) Upon approval of a plan by the authorized officer, operations shall be conducted in accordance with the approval plan.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980]
§ 3809.1 - 9 Bonding requirements.
[following section was reinstated by
court's May 1998 ruling]
(a) No bond shall be required for operations that constitute casual use (§ 3809.1 - 2) or that are conducted under a notice (§ 3809.1 - 3 of this title).
(b) Any operator who conducts operations under an approved plan of operations as described in § 3809.1 - 5 of this title may, at the discretion of the authorized officer, be required to furnish a bond in an amount specified by the authorized officer. The authorized officer may determine not to require a bond in circumstances where operations would cause only minimal disturbance to the land. In determining the amount of the bond, the authorized officer shall consider the estimated cost of reasonable stabilization and reclamation of areas disturbed. In lieu of the submission of a separate bond, the authorized officer may accept evidence of an existing bond pursuant to State law or regulations for the same area covered by the plan of operations, upon a determination that the coverage would be equivalent to that provided in this section.
(c) In lieu of a bond, the operator may deposit and maintain in a Federal depository account of the United States Treasury, as directed by the authorized officer, cash in an amount equal to the required dollar amount of the bond or negotiable securities of the United States having a market value at the time of deposit of not less than the required dollar amount of the bond.
(d) In place of the individual bond on each separate operation, a blanket bond covering statewide or nationwide operations may be furnished at the option of the operator, if the terms and conditions, as determined by the authorized officer, are sufficient to comply with these regulations.
(e) In the event that an approved plan is modified in accordance with § 3809.1 - 7 of this title, the authorized officer shall review the initial bond for adequacy and, if necessary, adjust the amount of the bond to conform to the plan as modified.
(f) When all or any portion of the reclamation has been completed in accordance with the approved plan, the operator may notify the authorized officer that such reclamation has occurred and that she/he seeks a reduction in bond or Bureau approval of the adequacy of the reclamation, or both. Upon any such notification, the authorized officer shall promptly inspect the reclaimed area with the operator. The authorized officer shall then notify the operator, in writing, whether the reclamation is acceptable. When the authorized officer has accepted as completed any portion of the reclamation, the authorized officer shall authorize that the bond be reduced proportionally to cover the remaining reclamation to be accomplished.
(g) When a mining claim is patented, the authorized officer shall release the operator from that portion of the performance bond which applies to operations within the boundaries of the patented land. The authorized officer shall release the operator from the remainder of the performance bond, including the portion covering approved means of access outside the boundaries of the mining claim, when the operator has completed acceptable reclamation. However, existing access to patented mining claims, if across Federal lands shall continue to be regulated under the approved plan. The provisions of this subsection do not apply to patents. issued on mining claims within the boundaries of the California Desert Conservation Area (see § 3809.6 of this title).
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980]
§ 3809.2 Prevention of unnecessary or undue degradation.
§ 3809.2 - 1 Environmental assessment.
(a) When an operator files a plan of operations or a significant modification which encompasses land not previously covered by an approved plan, the authorized officer shall make an environmental assessment or a supplement thereto to identify the impacts of the proposed operations on the lands and to determine whether an environmental impact statement is required.
(b) In conjunction with the operator, the authorized officer shall use the environmental assessment to determine the adequacy of mitigating measures and reclamation procedures included in the plan to insure the prevention of unnecessary or undue degradation of the land. If an operator advises the authorized officer that he/she is unable to prepare mitigating measures, the authorized officer, in conjunction with the operator, shall use the environmental assessment as a basis for assisting the operator in developing such measures.
(c) If, as a result of the environmental assessment, the authorized officer determines that there is substantial public interest in the plan, the authorized officer shall notify the operator, in writing, that an additional period of time, not to exceed the additional 60 days provided for approval of a plan in § 3809.1 - 6 of this title, is required to consider public comments on the environmental assessment.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980, as amended at 48 FR 8816, Mar. 2, 1983]
§ 3809.2 - 2 Other requirements for environmental protection.
All operations, including casual use and operations under either a notice (§ 3809.1 - 3) or a plan of operations (§ 3809.1 - 4 of this title), shall be conducted to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the Federal lands and shall comply with all pertinent Federal and State laws, including but not limited to the following:
(a) Air quality. All operators shall comply with applicable Federal and State air quality standards, including the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857 et seq.).
(b) Water quality. All operators shall comply with applicable Federal and State water quality standards, including the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (30 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.).
(c) Solid wastes. All operators shall comply with applicable Federal and State standards for the disposal and treatment of solid wastes, including regulations issued pursuant to the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.). All garbage, refuse or waste shall either be removed from the affected lands or disposed of or treated to minimize, so far as is practicable, its impact on the lands.
(d) Fisheries, wildlife and plant habitat. The operator shall take such action as may be needed to prevent adverse impacts to threatened or endangered species, and their habitat which may be affected by operations.
(e) Cultural and paleontological resources. (1) Operators shall not knowingly disturb, alter, injure, or destroy any scientifically important paleontological remains or any historical or archaeological site, structure, building or object on Federal lands.
(2) Operators shall immediately bring to the attention of the authorized officer any cultural and/or paleontological resources that might be altered or destroyed on Federal lands by his/her operations, and shall leave such discovery intact until told to proceed by the authorized officer. The authorized officer shall evaluate the discoveries brought to his/her attention, take action to protect or remove the resource, and allow operations to proceed within 10 working days after notification to the authorized officer of such discovery.
(3) The Federal Government shall have the responsibility and bear the cost of investigations and salvage of cultural and paleontology values discovered after a plan of operations has been approved, or where a plan is not involved.
(f) Protection of survey monuments. To the extent practicable, all operators shall protect all survey monuments, witness corners, reference monuments, bearing trees and line trees against unnecessary or undue destruction, obliteration or damage. If, in the course of operations, any monuments, corners, or accessories are destroyed, obliterated or damaged by such operations, the operator shall immediately report the matter to the authorized officer. The authorized officer shall prescribe, in writing, the requirements for the restoration or reestablishment of monuments, corners, bearing and line trees.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980, as amended at 48 FR 8816, Mar. 2, 1983]
§ 3809.3 General provisions.
§ 3809.3 - 1 Applicability of State law.
(a) Nothing in this subpart shall be construed to effect a preemption of
State laws and regulations relating to the conduct of operations or reclamation
on Federal lands under the mining laws.
[[following section was reinstated
by court's May 1998 ruling]
(b) After the publication date of these
regulations the Director, Bureau of Land Management, shall conduct a review of
State laws and regulations in effect or due to come into effect, relating to
unnecessary or undue degradation of lands disturbed by exploration for, or
mining of, minerals locatable under the mining laws.
.
(c) The Director
may consult with appropriate representatives of each State to formulate and
enter into agreements to provide for a joint Federal-State program for
administration and enforcement. The purpose of such agreements is to prevent
unnecessary or undue degradation of the Federal lands from operations which are
conducted under the mining laws, to prevent unnecessary administrative delay and
to avoid duplication of administration and enforcement of laws. Such agreements
may, whenever possible, provide for State administration and enforcement of such
programs.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980]
§ 3809.3 - 2 Noncompliance.
(a) Failure of an operator to file a notice under § 3809.1 - 3 of this title or a plan of operations under § 3809.1 - 4 of this title will subject the operator, at the discretion of the authorized officer, to being served a notice of non-compliance or enjoined from the continuation of such operations by a court order until such time as a notice or plan is filed with the authorized officer. The operator shall also be responsible to reclaim operations conducted without an approved plan of operations or prior to the filing of a required notice.
(b) Failure to reclaim areas disturbed by operations under § 3809.1 - 3 of this title is a violation of these regulations.
(1) Where an operator is conducting operations covered by 3809.1 - 3 (notice) of this title and fails to comply with the provisions of that section or properly conduct reclamation according to standards set forth in 3809.1 - 3(d) of this title, a notice of noncompliance shall be served by delivery in person to the operator or his/her authorized agent, or by certified mail addressed to his/her address of record.
(2) Operators conducting operations under an approved plan of operations who fails to follow the approved plan of operations may be subject to a notice of noncompliance. A notice of noncompliance shall be served in the same manner as described in § 3809.3 - 2(b)(1) of this section.
(c) All operators who conduct operations under a notice pursuant to § 3809.1 - 3 and a plan pursuant to § 3809.1 - 4 of this title on Federal lands without taking the actions specified in a notice of noncompliance within the time specified therein may be enjoined by an appropriate court order from continuing such operations and be liable for damages for such unlawful acts.
(d) A notice of noncompliance shall specify in what respects the operator is failing or has failed to comply with the requirements of applicable regulations, and shall specify the actions which are in violation of the regulations and the actions which shall be taken to correct the noncompliance and the time, not to exceed 30 days, within which corrective action shall be started.
[following section was reinstated by court's May 1998 ruling]
(e) Failure
of an operator to take necessary actions on a notice of noncompliance, may
constitute justification for requiring the submission of a plan of operations
under § 3809.1 - 5 of this title, and mandatory bonding for subsequent
operations which would otherwise be conducted pursuant to a notice under §
3809.1 - 3 of this title.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980; 45 FR 82934, Dec. 17, 1980]
§ 3809.3 - 3 Access.
(a) An operator is entitled to access to his operations consistent with provisions of the mining laws.
(b) Where a notice or a plan of operations is required, it shall specify the location of access routes for operations and other conditions necessary to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation. The authorized officer may require the operator to use existing roads to minimize the number of access routes, and, if practicable, to construct access roads within a designated transportation or utility corridor. When commercial hauling is involved and the use of an existing road is required, the authorized officer may require the operator to make appropriate arrangements for use and maintenance.
§ 3809.3 - 4 Fire prevention and control.
The operator shall comply with all applicable Federal and State fire laws and regulations, and shall take all reasonable measures to prevent and suppress fires in the area of operations.
§ 3809.3 - 5 Maintenance and public safety.
During all operations, the operator shall maintain his structures, equipment, and other facilities in a safe and orderly manner. Hazardous sites or conditions resulting from operations shall be marked by signs, fenced, or otherwise identified to alert the public in accordance with applicable Federal and State laws and regulations.
§ 3809.3 - 6 Inspection.
The authorized officer may periodically inspect operations to determine if the operator is complying with these regulations. The operator shall permit the authorized officer access for this purpose.
§ 3809.3 - 7 Periods of non-operation.
All operators shall maintain the site, structures and other facilities of the operations in a safe and clean condition during any non-operating periods. All operators may be required, after an extended period of non-operation for other than seasonal operations, to remove all structures, equipment and other facilities and reclaim the site of operations, unless he/she receives permission, in writing, from the authorized officer to do otherwise.
§ 3809.4 Appeals.
(a) Any operator adversely affected by a decision of the authorized officer made pursuant to the provisions of this subpart shall have a right of appeal to the State Director, and thereafter to the Board of Land Appeals, Office of Hearings and Appeals, pursuant to part 4 of this title, if the State Director's decision is adverse to the appellant.
(b) No appeal shall be considered unless it is filed, in writing, in the office of the authorized officer who made the decision from which an appeal is being taken, within 30 days after the date of receipt of the decision. A decision of the authorized officer from which an appeal is taken to the State Director shall be effective during the pendency of an appeal. A request for a stay may accompany the appeal.
(c) The appeal to the State Director shall contain:
(1) The name and mailing address of the appellant.
(2) When applicable, the name of the mining claim(s) and serial number(s) assigned to the mining claims recorded pursuant to subpart 3833 of this title which are subject to the appeal.
(3) A statement of the reasons for the appeal and any arguments the appellant wishes to present which would justify reversal or modification of the decision.
(d) The State Director shall promptly render a decision on the appeal. The decision shall be in writing and shall set forth the reasons for the decision. The decision shall be sent to the appellant by certified mail, return receipt requested.
(e) The decision of the State Director, when adverse to the appellant, may be appealed to the Board of Land Appeals, Office of Hearings and Appeals, pursuant to part 4 of this title.
(f) Any party, other than the operator, aggrieved by a decision of the authorized officer shall utilize the appeals procedures in part 4 of this title. The filing of such an appeal shall not stop the authorized officer's decision from being effective.
(g) Neither the decision of the authorized officer nor the State Director shall be construed as final agency action for the purpose of judicial review of that decision.
[45 FR 78909, Nov. 26, 1980, as amended at 48 FR 8816, Mar. 2, 1983]
§ 3809.5 Public availability of information.
(a) Information and data submitted and specifically identified by the operator as containing trade secrets or confidential or privileged commercial or financial information shall not be available for public examination. Other information and data submitted by the operator shall be available for examination by the public at the office of the authorized officer in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.
(b) The determination concerning specific information which may be withheld from public examination shall be made in accordance with the rules in 43 CFR part 2.
§ 3809.6 Special provisions relating to mining claims patented within the boundaries of the California Desert Conservation Area.
In accordance with section 601(f) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of October 21, 1976, all patents issued on mining claims located within the boundaries of the California Desert Conservation Area after the enactment of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act shall be subject to the regulations in this part, including the continuation of a plan of operations and of bonding with respect to the land covered by the patent.
1. BLM is amending part 3800 by revising subpart 3809 to read as follows:
Subpart 3809--Surface Management
Sec.
GENERAL
INFORMATION
3809.1 What are the purposes of this subpart?
3809.2 What is
the scope of this subpart?
3809.3 What rules must I follow if State law
conflicts with this subpart?
3809.5 How does BLM define certain terms
used in this subpart?
3809.10 How does BLM classify operations?
3809.11
When does BLM require that I submit a notice or a plan of
operations?
3809.11When does BLM require that I submit a notice of
intention to operate or a plan of operations? (Forest Service
Alternative)
3809.100What special provisions apply to operations on
segregated or withdrawn lands?
3809.101What special provisions apply to
minerals that may be common variety minerals, such as sand, gravel, and building
stone?
3809.111Public availability of information.
3809.115
Information collection.
3809.116As a mining claimant or operator, what
are my responsibilities under this subpart for my project area?
FEDERAL/STATE AGREEMENTS
3809.201What kinds of agreements may BLM and a
State make under this subpart?
3809.202Under what conditions will BLM defer
to State regulation of operations?
3809.203What are the limitations on BLM
deferral to State regulation of operations?
3809.204 Does this
subpart cancel an existing agreement between BLM and a
State?
OPERATIONS CONDUCTED UNDER NOTICES
3809.300Does
this subpart apply to my existing notice-level operations?
3809.301Where do I
file my notice and what information must I include in it?
3809.311What action
does BLM take when it receives my notice?
3809.312 When may I begin
operations after filing a complete notice?
3809.313Under what
circumstances may I not begin operations 15 business days after filing my
notice?
3809.320Which performance standards apply to my notice-level
operations?
3809.330May I modify my notice?
3809.331Under what conditions
must I modify my notice?
3809.332How long does my notice remain in
effect?
3809.333May I extend my notice, and, if so, how?
3809.334What if I
temporarily stop conducting operations under a notice?
3809.335What happens
when my notice expires?
3809.336What if I abandon my notice-level operations?
OPERATIONS CONDUCTED UNDER PLANS OF OPERATIONS
3809.400Does
this subpart apply to my existing or pending plan of
operations?
3809.401Where do I file my plan of operations and what
information must I include with it?
3809.411What action will BLM take
when it receives my plan of operations?
3809.412When may I operate
under a plan of operations?
3809.415How do I prevent unnecessary or
undue degradation while conducting operations on public lands?
3809.420What
performance standards apply to my notice or plan of
operations?
3809.423How long does my plan of operations remain in
effect?
3809.424What are my obligations if I stop conducting
operations?
MODIFICATIONS OF PLANS OF OPERATIONS
3809.430May I
modify my plan of operations?
3809.431When must I modify my plan of
operations?
3809.432What process will BLM follow in reviewing a modification
of my plan of operations?
3809.433 Does this subpart apply to a new
modification of my plan of operations?
3809.434 Does this subpart
apply to my pending modification for a new facility?
3809.435 Does
this subpart apply to my pending modification for an existing facility?
FINANCIAL GUARANTEE REQUIREMENTS--GENERAL
3809.500In general,
what are BLM's financial guarantee requirements?
3809.503 When must I provide
a financial guarantee for my notice-level operations?
3809.505How do
the financial guarantee requirements of this subpart apply to my existing plan
of operations?
3809.551What are my choices for providing BLM with a financial
guarantee?
INDIVIDUAL FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
3809.552What must my individual financial
guarantee cover?
3809.553 May I post a financial guarantee for a part of my
operations?
3809.554How do I estimate the cost to reclaim my
operations?
3809.555What forms of individual financial guarantee are
acceptable to BLM?
3809.556What special requirements apply to financial
guarantees described in §3809.555(e)?
BLANKET FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
3809.560Under what circumstances may I provide
a blanket financial guarantee?
STATE-APPROVED FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
3809.570Under what circumstances may I
provide a State-approved financial guarantee?
3809.571 What forms of
State-approved financial guarantee are acceptable to BLM?
3809.572What
happens if BLM rejects a financial instrument in my State approved financial
guarantee?
3809.573What happens if the State makes a demand against my
financial guarantee?
MODIFICATION OR REPLACEMENT OF A FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
3809.580What happens
if I modify my notice or approved plan of operations?
3809.581Will BLM accept
a replacement financial instrument?
3809.582How long must I maintain my
financial guarantee?
RELEASE OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
3809.590When will BLM release or reduce the
financial guarantee for my notice or plan of operations?
3809.591What are the
limitations on the amount by which BLM may reduce my financial
guarantee?
3809.592Does release of my financial guarantee relieve me of all
responsibility for my project area?
3809.593 What happens to my financial
guarantee if I transfer my operations?
3809.594 What happens to my
financial guarantee when my mining claim is patented?
FORFEITURE OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
3809.595 When will BLM initiate
forfeiture of my financial guarantee?
3809.596 How does BLM initiate
forfeiture of my financial guarantee?
3809.597 What if I do not comply with
BLM's forfeiture notice?
3809.598 What if the amount forfeited will not cover
the cost of reclamation?
3809.599 What if the amount forfeited exceeds the
cost of reclamation?
INSPECTION AND
ENFORCEMENT
3809.600 With what frequency will BLM inspect my
operations?
3809.601What type of enforcement action may BLM take if I
do not meet the requirements of this subpart?
3809.602Can BLM revoke
my plan of operations or nullify my notice?
3809.603How does BLM serve me
with an enforcement action?
3809.604What happens if I do not comply
with a BLM order?
PENALTIES
3809.700What criminal penalties apply to violations of
this subpart?
3809.701What happens if I make false statements to
BLM?
3809.702What civil penalties apply to violations of this
subpart?
3809.703Can BLM settle a proposed civil penalty?
APPEALS
3809.800What appeal rights do I have?
Subpart 3809--Surface Management
AUTHORITY: 16 U.S.C. 1280; 30
U.S.C. 22; 30 U.S.C. 612; 43 U.S.C. 1201; and 43 U.S.C. 1732, 1733, 1740, 1781,
and 1782.
GENERAL INFORMATION
§3809.1 What are the purposes of this subpart?
The purposes of this subpart are to:
(a) Prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands by operations authorized by the mining laws. Anyone intending to develop mineral resources on the public lands must prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the land and reclaim disturbed areas. This subpart establishes procedures and standards to ensure that operators and mining claimants meet this responsibility; and
(b) Provide for maximum possible coordination with appropriate State agencies to avoid duplication and to ensure that operators prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands.
§3809.2 What is the scope of this subpart?
(a) This subpart applies to all operations authorized by the mining laws on public lands, including Stock Raising Homestead lands, as provided in §3809.11(i), where the mineral interest is reserved to the United States.
(b) This subpart does not apply to lands in the National Park System, National Forest System, and the National Wildlife Refuge System; acquired lands; lands leased or patented under the Recreation and Public Purposes Act; lands patented under the Small Tract Act; or lands administered by BLM that are under wilderness review, which are subject to subpart 3802 of this part.
(c) This subpart applies to all patents issued after October 21, 1976 for mining claims in the California Desert Conservation Area, except for any patent for which a right to the patent vested before that date.
(d) This subpart applies to operations that involve metallic minerals; some industrial minerals, such as gypsum; and a number of other non-metallic minerals that have a unique property which gives the deposit a distinct and special value. This subpart does not apply to leasable and salable minerals. Leasable minerals, such as coal, phosphate, sodium, and potassium; and salable minerals, such as common varieties of sand, gravel, stone, and pumice, are not subject to location under the mining laws. Parts 3400, 3500 and 3600 of this title govern mining operations for leasable and salable minerals.
§3809.3What rules must I follow if State law conflicts with this subpart?
If State laws or regulations conflict with this subpart regarding operations on public lands, you must follow the requirements of this subpart. However, there is no conflict if the State law or regulation requires a higher standard of protection for public lands than this subpart.
§3809.5 How does BLM define certain terms used in this subpart?
As used in this subpart, the term:
Casual use means activities ordinarily resulting in no or negligible disturbance of the public lands or resources. For example--
(1) Casual use generally includes the collection of mineral specimens using hand tools, hand panning, and non-motorized sluicing.
(2) Casual use does not include use of mechanized earth-moving equipment, truck-mounted drilling equipment, portable suction dredges, motorized vehicles in areas designated as closed to "off-road vehicles" as defined in §8340.0-5 of this title, chemicals, or explosives; "occupancy" as defined in §3715.0-5 of this title; or hobby or recreational mining in areas where the cumulative effects of the activities result in more than negligible disturbance.
Mining claim means any unpatented mining claim, millsite, or tunnel site located under the mining laws. The term also applies to those mining claims and millsites located in the California Desert Conservation Area that were patented after the enactment of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of October 21, 1976. Mining "claimant" is defined in §3833.0-5 of this title.
Mining laws means the Lode Law of July 26, 1866, as amended (14 Stat. 251); the Placer Law of July 9, 1870, as amended (16 Stat. 217); and the Mining Law of May 10, 1872, as amended (17 Stat. 91); as well as all laws supplementing and amending those laws, including the Building Stone Act of August 4, 1892, as amended (27 Stat. 348); the Saline Placer Act of January 31, 1901 (31 Stat. 745); the Surface Resources Act of 1955 (30 U.S.C. 611-614); and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.).
Minimize means to reduce the adverse impact of an operation to the lowest practical level. During review of operations, BLM may determine that "minimize"means to avoid or eliminate particular impacts.
Mitigation, as defined in 40 CFR 1508.20, may include one or more of the following:
(1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
(2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation;
(3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment;
(4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; and
(5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, or providing substitute, resources or environments.
Most appropriate technology and practices (MATP) means equipment, devices, or methods that have demonstrable feasibility, success, and practicality in meeting the standards of this subpart. MATP includes the use of equipment and procedures that are either proven or reasonably expected to be effective in a particular region or location. MATP does not necessarily require use of the most expensive technology or practice. BLM determines whether the requirement to use MATP is met on a case-by-case basis during its review of a notice or plan of operations.
Operations means all functions, work, facilities, and activities on public lands in connection with prospecting, discovery and assessment work, development, extraction, and processing of mineral deposits locatable under the mining laws; reclamation of disturbed areas; and all other reasonably incident uses, whether on a mining claim or not, including the construction of roads, transmission lines, pipelines, and other means of access across public lands for support facilities.
Operator means any person who manages, directs, or conducts operations at a project area under this subpart, including a parent entity or an affiliate who materially participates in such management, direction, or conduct. An operator on a particular mining claim may also be the mining claimant.
Person means any individual, firm, corporation, association, partnership, trust, consortium, joint venture, or any other entity conducting operations on public lands.
Project area means the area of land upon which the operator conducts operations, including the area required for construction or maintenance of roads, transmission lines, pipelines, or other means of access by the operator.
Public lands, as defined in 43 U.S.C. 1702, means any land and interest in land owned by the United States within the several States and administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the BLM, without regard to how the United States acquired ownership, except--
(1) Lands located on the Outer Continental Shelf; and
(2) Lands held for the benefit of Indians, Aleuts, and Eskimos.
Reclamation means taking measures required by this subpart following disturbance of public lands caused by operations to meet applicable performance standards and achieve conditions required by BLM at the conclusion of operations. Components of reclamation include, where applicable:
(1) Isolation, control, or removal of acid-forming, toxic, or deleterious substances;
(2) Regrading and reshaping to conform with adjacent landforms, facilitate revegetation, control drainage, and minimize erosion;
(3) Rehabilitation of fisheries or wildlife habitat;
(4) Placement of growth medium and establishment of self-sustaining revegetation;
(5) Removal or stabilization of buildings, structures, or other support facilities;
(6) Plugging of drill holes and closure of underground workings; and
(7) Providing for post-mining monitoring, maintenance, or treatment.
For a definition of "reclamation" applicable to operations conducted under the mining laws on Stock Raising Homestead Act lands, see part 3810, subpart 3814 of this title.
Riparian area is a form of wetland transition between permanently saturated wetlands and upland areas. These areas exhibit vegetation or physical characteristics reflective of permanent surface or subsurface water influence. Typical riparian areas include lands along, adjacent to, or contiguous with perennially and intermittently flowing rivers and streams, glacial potholes, and the shores of lakes and reservoirs with stable water levels. Excluded are areas such as ephemeral streams or washes that do not exhibit the presence of vegetation dependent upon free water in the soil.
Tribe means, and Tribal refers to, a Federally recognized Indian tribe.
Unnecessary or undue degradation means conditions, activities, or practices that:
(1) Fail to comply with one or more of the following: §3809.420 of this subpart, the terms and conditions of an approved plan of operations, operations described in a complete notice, and other Federal and State laws related to environmental protection and protection of cultural resources;
(2) Are not "reasonably incident" to prospecting, mining, or processing operations as defined in §3715.0-5 of this title; or
(3) Fail to attain a stated level of protection or reclamation required by specific laws in areas such as the California Desert Conservation Area, Wild and Scenic Rivers, BLM-administered portions of the National Wilderness System, and BLM-administered National Monuments and National Conservation Areas.
§3809.10 How does BLM classify operations?
BLM classifies operations as--
(a) Casual use, for which an operator generally need not notify BLM;
(b) Notice-level operations, for which an operator must submit a notice (except for certain suction-dredging operations covered by §3809.11(h)); and
(c) Plan-level operations, for which an operator must submit a plan of operations and obtain BLM's approval.
§3809.11 When does BLM require that I submit a notice or a plan of operations?
To see when you must submit a notice or a plan of operations, follow this table:
<< Conversion error >>
If your operations . . . | Then . . . |
(a) Consist of casual use, | You do not need to notify BLM or seek permission to conduct operations. You must reclaim casual-use disturbance. BLM may monitor your operations to ensure that unnecessary or undue degradation does not occur. |
If your operations . . . | Then . . . |
(b) Consist of unreclaimed surface disturbance of 5 acres or less of public lands, | You must give BLM a complete notice of your planned activities 15 business days before you plan to start operations. You have the option to file a plan of operations. You must not segment a project area by filing a series of notices solely to avoid filing a plan of operations. See §§3809.300 to 3809.336. |
(c) Consist of unreclaimed surface disturbance of more than 5 acres of public lands, | You must submit a plan of operations and obtain BLM's approval before beginning operations. See §§3809.400 to 3809.435. |
(d) Cause any surface disturbance greater than casual use in the special status areas described in paragraph (j) of this section, | You must submit a plan of operations and obtain BLM's approval. See §§3809.400 to 3809.435. |
(e) Involve any recreational mining activities by a group, such as a mining club, | The group's representative must contact BLM at least 15 business days before initiating activities to find out if BLM will require the group to file a notice or a plan of operations. This contact is not required if the group submits a notice or plan of operations. |
(f) Involve any leaching or storage, addition, or use of chemicals in milling, processing, beneficiation, or concentrating activities (This does not include chemicals used solely for fuel or as lubricants for equipment.), | You must submit a plan of operations and obtain BLM's approval. See §§3809.400 to 3809.435. |
(g) Require you to occupy or use a site for activities "reasonably incident" to mining, as defined in § 3715.0-5 of this title, | Whether you are operating under a notice or a plan, you must also comply with part 3710, subpart 3715, of this title. |
(h) Involve the use of a portable suction dredge with an intake diameter of 4 inches or less, the State requires an authorization for its use, and BLM and the State have an agreement under §3809.201 addressing suction dredging, | You need not submit a notice or plan of operations unless otherwise required by this section. For all other use of a suction dredge, you must submit to BLM either a notice or a plan of operations, whichever is applicable under this section. |
(i) Are located on lands patented under the Stock Raising Homestead Act and you do not have the written consent of the surface owner, | You must submit a plan of operations and obtain BLM's approval. Where you have surface-owner consent, you do not need a notice or a plan of operations under this subpart. See part 3810, subpart 3814, of this title. |
(j) The special status areas where BLM requires a plan of operations for all operations greater than casual use include:
(1) Lands in the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) designated by the CDCA plan as "controlled" or "limited" use areas;
(2) Areas in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and areas designated for potential addition to the system;
(3) Designated Areas of Critical Environmental Concern;
(4) Areas designated as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System and administered by BLM;
(5) Areas designated as "closed" to off-road vehicle use, as defined in §8340.0-5 of this title;
(6) Any areas specifically identified in BLM land-use or activity plans where BLM has determined that a plan of operations is required to provide detailed review of project effects on unique, irreplaceable, or outstanding historical, cultural, recreational, or natural resource values, such as threatened or endangered species or their critical habitat;
(7) National Monuments and National Conservation Areas administered by BLM; and
(8) All areas segregated in anticipation of a mineral withdrawal and all withdrawn areas, except for areas segregated or withdrawn under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, and the Alaska Statehood Act.
(k) If your operations do not qualify as casual use, you must submit a notice or plan of operations, whichever is applicable.
___________________________________________________________________
"Forest
Service" Alternative
§3809.11 When does BLM require that I submit a notice of intention to operate or a plan of operations?
To see when you must submit a notice of intention to operate or a plan of operations, follow this table:
<< Conversion error >>
If . . . | Then . . . |
(a) Your proposed operations--
(1) Are limited to the use of vehicles on existing public roads or roads used and maintained for BLM purposes; (2) Involve individuals desiring to search for and occasionally remove small mineral samples or specimens; (3) Consist of prospecting and sampling that will not cause significant surface resource disturbance and will not involve removal of more than a reasonable amount of mineral deposit for analysis and study; (4) Are limited to marking and monumenting a mining claim; (5) Involve subsurface operations that will not cause significant surface resource disturbance; or (6) Do not involve the use of mechanized earthmoving equipment, such as a bulldozer or a backhoe, and will not involve the cutting of trees; |
You do not need to notify BLM or seek permission to conduct your operations. You must reclaim your operations, and BLM may monitor them to ensure that unnecessary or undue degradation does not occur. |
(b) You propose to conduct operations that--
(1) Are not described in paragraph (a) of this section; and (2) Might cause disturbance of surface resources, |
You must file with BLM a complete notice of intention to operate 15 business days before you plan to start operations. See §§3809.300 to 3809.336. |
(c) After reviewing your notice of intention to operate, BLM determines that your operations are likely to cause significant disturbance of surface resources, | You must submit a plan of operations and obtain BLM's approval. See §§3809.400 to 3809.435. |
(d) You always have the option to submit a plan of operations in lieu of the notice of intention to operate required under paragraph (b) of this section.
[End of
alternative]
___________________________________________________________________
§3809.100What special provisions apply to operations on segregated or withdrawn lands?
(a) Mineral examination report. After the date on which the lands are withdrawn from appropriation under the mining laws, BLM will not approve a plan of operations until BLM has prepared a mineral examination report to determine whether the mining claim was valid before the withdrawal, and whether it remains valid. BLM may require preparation of a mineral examination report before approving operations on segregated lands. If the report concludes that the mining claim is invalid, BLM will not approve operations on the mining claim. BLM will also promptly initiate contest proceedings.
(b) Allowable operations. If BLM has not completed the mineral examination report under paragraph (a) of this section, if the mineral examination report for proposed operations concludes that a mining claim is invalid, or if there is a pending contest proceeding for the mining claim, BLM may--
(1) Approve a plan of operations for the disputed mining claim proposing operations that are limited to taking samples to confirm or corroborate mineral exposures that are physically disclosed and existing on the mining claim before the segregation or withdrawal date, whichever is earlier; and
(2) Approve a plan of operations for the operator to perform the minimum necessary annual assessment work under §3851.1 of this title.
(c) Time limits. While BLM prepares a mineral examination report under paragraph (a) of this section, it may suspend the time limit for responding to a notice for operations in Alaska or acting on a plan of operations. See §§3809.311 and 3809.411, respectively.
(d) Final decision. If a final departmental decision declares a mining claim to be null and void, the operator must cease all operations, except required reclamation.
§3809.101What special provisions apply to minerals that may be common variety minerals, such as sand, gravel, and building stone?
(a) Mineral examination report. On mining claims located on or after July 23, 1955, you must not initiate operations for minerals that may be "common variety" minerals, as defined in §3711.1(b) of this title, until BLM has prepared a mineral examination report, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Interim authorization. Until the mineral examination report described in paragraph (a) of this section is prepared, BLM will allow notice-level operations or approve a plan of operations for the disputed mining claim for--
(1) Operations limited to taking samples to confirm or corroborate mineral exposures that are physically disclosed and existing on the mining claim;
(2) Performance of the minimum necessary annual assessment work under §3851.1 of this title; or
(3) Operations to remove possible common variety minerals if you establish an escrow account in a form acceptable to BLM. You must make regular payments to the escrow account for the appraised value of possible common variety minerals removed under a payment schedule approved by BLM. The funds in the escrow account must not be disbursed to the operator or to the U.S. Treasury until a final determination of whether the mineral is a common variety and therefore salable under part 3600 of this title.
(c) Determination of common variety. If the mineral examination report under paragraph (a) of this section concludes that the minerals are common variety minerals, you may either relinquish your mining claim(s) or BLM will initiate contest proceedings. Upon relinquishment or final departmental determination that the mining claim(s) is null and void, you must promptly close and reclaim your operations unless you are authorized to proceed under parts 3600 and 3610 of this title.
(d) Disposal. BLM may dispose of common variety minerals from an unpatented mining claim with a written waiver from the mining claimant.
§3809.111 Public availability of information.
Part 2 of this title applies to all information and data you submit under this subpart. If you submit information or data under this subpart that you believe is exempt from disclosure, you must mark each page clearly "CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION." You must also separate it from other materials you submit to BLM. BLM will keep confidential information or data marked in this manner to the extent required by part 2 of this title. If you do not mark the information as confidential, BLM, without notifying you, may disclose the information to the public to the full extent allowed under part 2 of this title.
§3809.115Information collection.
(a) The Office of Management and Budget has approved the collections of information contained in subpart 3809 under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and assigned clearance number 1004-____. BLM will use this information to regulate and monitor mining and exploration operations on public lands. Response to requests for information is mandatory in accordance with 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq. The information collection approval expires _____________.
(b) BLM estimates that the public reporting burden for this information averages 8 hours per response for notices and 80 hours per response for plans of operations. This includes reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information Collection Clearance Officer (783), Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D.C. 20240, and the Office of Management and Budget, Attention Desk Officer for the Interior Department, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503, referring to information collection clearance number 1004-____.
§3809.116 As a mining claimant or operator, what are my responsibilities
under this subpart for my project area?
(a) Mining claimants and
operators (if other than the mining claimant) are jointly and severally liable
for obligations under this subpart that accrued while they held their interests.
Joint and several liability, in this context, means that the mining claimants
and operators are responsible together and individually for obligations, such as
reclaiming the project area. In the event obligations are not met, BLM may take
any action authorized under this subpart against either the mining claimants or
the operators, or both.
(b) Relinquishment, forfeiture, or abandonment of a mining claim does not relieve a mining claimant's or operator's responsibility under this subpart for obligations or conditions created while the mining claimant or operator was responsible for operations conducted on that mining claim or in the project area.
(c) Transfer of a mining claim or operation does not relieve a mining claimant's or operator's responsibility under this subpart for obligations or conditions created while the mining claimant or operator was responsible for operations conducted on that mining claim or in the project area until--
(1) BLM receives documentation that a transferee accepts responsibility, and
(2) BLM accepts an adequate replacement financial guarantee.
FEDERAL/STATE AGREEMENTS
§3809.201 What kinds of agreements may BLM and a State make under this subpart?
To prevent unnecessary administrative delay and to avoid duplication of administration and enforcement, BLM and a State may make the following kinds of agreements:
(a) An agreement to provide for a joint Federal/State program; and
(b) An agreement under §3809.202 which provides that, in place of BLM administration, BLM defers to State administration of some or all of the requirements of this subpart subject to the limitations in §3809.203.
§3809.202Under what conditions will BLM defer to State regulation of operations?
(a) State request. A State may request BLM enter into an agreement for State regulation of operations on public lands in place of BLM administration of some or all of the requirements of this subpart. The State must send the request to the BLM State Director with jurisdiction over public lands in the State.
(b) BLM review. (1) When the State Director receives the State's request, he/she will notify the public and provide an opportunity for comment. The State Director will then review the request and determine whether the State's requirements are consistent with the requirements of this subpart, and whether the State has necessary legal authorities, resources, and funding for an agreement. The State requirements may be contained in laws, regulations, guidelines, policy manuals, and demonstrated permitting practices.
(2) For the purposes of this subpart, BLM will determine consistency with the requirements of this subpart by comparing this subpart and State standards on a provision-by-provision basis to determine--
(i) Whether non-numerical State standards are functionally equivalent to BLM counterparts; and
(ii) Whether numerical State standards, such as the 5-acre threshold for plans of operations, are the same as corresponding BLM standards, except that State review and approval time frames do not have to be the same as the corresponding Federal time frames.
(3) A State environmental protection standard that exceeds a corresponding Federal standard is consistent with the requirements of this subpart.
(c) State Director decision. The BLM State Director will notify the State in writing of his/her decision regarding the State's request. The State Director will address whether the State requirements are consistent with the requirements of this subpart, and whether the State has necessary legal authorities, resources, and funding to implement any agreement. If BLM determines that the State's requirements are consistent with the requirements of this subpart and the State has the necessary legal authorities, resources, and funding, BLM must enter into an agreement with the State so that the State will regulate some or all of the operations on public lands, as described in the State request.
(d) Appeal of State Director decision. The BLM State Director's decision will be a final decision of BLM and may be appealed to the Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management, but not to the Department of the Interior Office of Hearings and Appeals. See §3809.800(c) for the items you should include in the appeal.
§3809.203What are the limitations on BLM deferral to State regulation of operations?
Any agreement between BLM and a State in which BLM defers to State regulation of some or all operations on public lands is subject to the following limitations:
(a) Plans of Operations. BLM must concur with each State decision approving a plan of operations to assure compliance with this subpart, and BLM retains responsibility for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The State and BLM may decide who will be the lead agency in the plan review process, including preparation of NEPA documents.
(b) Federal land-use planning and other Federal laws. BLM will continue to be responsible for all land-use planning on public lands and for implementing other Federal laws relating to the public lands for which BLM is responsible.
(c) Federal enforcement. BLM may take any authorized action to enforce the requirements of this subpart or any term, condition, or limitation of a notice or an approved plan of operations. BLM may take this action regardless of the nature of its agreement with a State, or actions taken by a State.
(d) Financial guarantee. The amount of the financial guarantee must be calculated based on the completion of both Federal and State reclamation requirements, but may be held as one instrument. If the financial guarantee is held as one instrument, it must be redeemable by both the Secretary and the State. BLM must concur in the approval and release of a financial guarantee for public lands.
(e) State performance. If BLM determines that a State is not in compliance with all or part of its Federal/State agreement, BLM will notify the State and provide a reasonable time for the State to comply.
(f) Termination. (1) If a State does not comply after being notified under paragraph (e) of this section, BLM will take appropriate action, which may include termination of all or part of the agreement.
(2) A State may terminate its agreement by notifying BLM 60 days in advance.
§3809.204 Does this subpart cancel an existing agreement between BLM and a State?
No. A Federal/State agreement or memorandum of understanding in effect on (Insert effective date of the final rule.) will continue while BLM and the State perform a review to determine whether revisions are required under this subpart. BLM and the State must complete the review and make necessary revisions no later than one year from (Insert effective date of the final rule.)
OPERATIONS CONDUCTED UNDER NOTICES
§3809.300Does this subpart apply to my existing notice-level operations?
To see how this subpart applies to your operations conducted under a notice and existing on (Insert effective date of the final rule.), follow this table:
<< Conversion error >>
If you are conducting operations under a notice filed before (Insert effective date of the final rule.) and . . . | Then . . . |
(a) You are the operator identified in the notice on file with BLM on (Insert effective date of the final rule.), | You may conduct operations under the terms of your existing notice for 2 years after (Insert effective date of the final rule.), or longer if your notice is extended under §3809.333. See §3809.503 for financial guarantee requirements applicable to notices. |
(b) You are a new operator, that is, you were not the operator identified in the notice on file with BLM on (Insert effective date of the final rule.), | You must conduct operations under the provisions of this subpart, including §3809.320 for 2 years after (Insert effective date of the final rule.), unless extended under §3809.333. |
(c) Your notice has expired, | You may not conduct operations under an expired notice. You must reclaim your project area immediately or promptly submit a new notice under §3809.301. |
§3809.301Where do I file my notice and what information must I include in it?
(a) If you qualify under §3809.11, you must file your notice with the local BLM office with jurisdiction over the lands involved. BLM does not require that the notice be on a particular form.
(b) To be complete, your notice must include the following information:
(1) Operator Information. The name, mailing address, phone number, social security number or corporate identification number of the operator(s), and the BLM serial number(s) of any unpatented mining claim(s) where the disturbance would occur. If the operator is a corporation, you must identify one individual as the point of contact;
(2) Activity Description, Map, and Schedule of Activities. A description of the proposed activity with a level of detail appropriate to the type, size, and location of the activity. The description must include the following:
(i) The measures that you will take to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation during operations;
(ii) A map showing the location of your project area in sufficient detail for BLM to be able to find it and the location of access routes you intend to use, improve, or construct;
(iii) A description of the type of equipment you intend to use; and
(iv) A schedule of activities, including the date when you will begin operations and the date by which you will complete reclamation;
(3) Reclamation Plan. A description of how you will complete reclamation to the standards described in §3809.420; and
(4) Reclamation cost estimate. An estimate of the cost to fully reclaim your operations as required by §3809.552; and
(c) BLM may require you to provide additional information, if necessary to ensure that your operations will comply with this subpart.
(d) You must notify BLM in writing within 30 days of any change of operator or corporate point of contact, or of the mailing address of the operator or corporate point of contact.
§3809.311What action does BLM take when it receives my notice?
(a) Upon receipt of your notice, BLM will review it within 15 business days to see if it is complete under §3809.301.
(b) If your notice is incomplete, BLM will inform you in writing of the additional information you must submit. BLM may also take the actions described in §3809.313.
(c) BLM will review your additional information within 15 business days to ensure it is complete. BLM will repeat this process until your notice is complete.
§3809.312 When may I begin operations after filing a complete notice?
(a) If BLM does not take any of the actions described in §3908.313, you may begin operations no sooner than 15 business days after the appropriate BLM office receives your complete notice. BLM may send you an acknowledgement that indicates the date we received your notice. If you don't receive an acknowledgement or have any doubt about the date we received your notice, contact the office to which you sent the notice. This subpart does not require BLM to approve your notice or inform you that your notice is complete.
(b) If we complete our review sooner than 15 days after receiving your complete notice, we may notify you that you may begin operations.
(c) You must provide a financial guarantee that meets the requirements of this subpart before beginning operations.
(d) Your operations may be subject to BLM approval under part 3710, subpart 3715, of this title relating to use or occupancy of unpatented mining claims.
§3809.313Under what circumstances may I not begin operations 15 business days after filing my notice?
To see when you may not begin operations 15 business days after filing your notice, follow this table:
<< Conversion error >>
If BLM reviews your notice and, within 15 business days, . . . | Then . . . |
(a) Notifies you that BLM needs additional time, not to exceed 15 business days, to complete its review, | You must not begin operations until the additional review time period ends. |
(b) Notifies you that if you do not modify your notice, your operations will likely cause unnecessary or undue degradation, | You must not begin operations until you modify your notice to ensure that your operations prevent unnecessary or undue degradation. |
(c) Requires you to consult with BLM about the location of existing or proposed access routes, | You must not begin operations until you consult with BLM and satisfy BLM's concerns about access. |
(d) Determines that an on-site visit is necessary, | You must not begin operations until BLM visits the site, and you satisfy any concerns arising from the visit. |
(e) BLM determines you don't qualify under §3809.11 as a notice-level operation, | You must file a plan of operations before beginning operations. See §§3809.400 through 3809.420. |
§3809.320Which performance standards apply to my notice-level operations?
Your notice-level operations must meet all applicable performance standards of §3809.420.
§3809.330May I modify my notice?
(a) Yes, you may submit a notice modification at any time during operations under a notice.
(b) BLM will review your notice modification the same way it reviewed your initial notice under §§3809.311 and 3809.313.
§3809.331Under what conditions must I modify my notice?
(a) You must modify your notice--
(1) If BLM requires you to do so to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation; or
(2) If you plan to make material changes to your operations. Material changes include the addition of planned surface disturbance up to the threshold described in §3809.11, undertaking new drilling or trenching activities, or changing reclamation.
(b) You must submit your notice modification 15 business days before making any material changes. If BLM determines your notice modification is complete before the 15-day period has elapsed, BLM may notify you to proceed. When BLM requires you to modify your notice, it may also notify you to proceed before the 15-day period has elapsed to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation.
§3809.332How long does my notice remain in effect?
If you filed your notice on or after (Insert effective date of the final rule.), it remains in effect for 2 years, unless extended under §3809.333, or unless you notify BLM beforehand that operations have ceased and reclamation is complete. BLM will conduct an inspection to verify whether you have met your obligations, will notify you promptly in writing, and terminate your notice, if appropriate.
§3809.333May I extend my notice, and, if so, how?
Yes. If you wish to conduct operations for 2 additional years after the expiration date of your notice, you must notify BLM in writing on or before the expiration date. You may extend your notice more than once.
§3809.334What if I temporarily stop conducting operations under a notice?
(a) If you stop conducting operations for any period of time, you must--
(1) Maintain public lands within the project area, including structures, in a safe and clean condition;
(2) Take all steps necessary to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation; and
(3) Maintain an adequate financial guarantee.
(b) If the period of non-operation is likely to cause unnecessary or undue degradation, BLM will--
(1) Require you to take all steps necessary to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation; and
(2) Require you, after an extended period of non-operation for other than seasonal operations, to remove all structures, equipment, and other facilities and reclaim the project area.
§3809.335What happens when my notice expires?
(a) When your notice expires, you must--
(1) Cease operations, except reclamation; and
(2) Complete reclamation promptly according to your notice.
(b) Your reclamation obligations continue beyond the expiration or any termination of your notice until you satisfy them.
§3809.336 What if I abandon my notice-level operations?
(a) BLM
may consider your operations to be abandoned if, for example, you leave
inoperable or non-mining related equipment in the project area, remove equipment
and facilities from the project area other than for purposes of completing
reclamation according to your reclamation plan, do not maintain the project
area, discharge local workers, or there is no sign of activity in the project
area over time.
(b) If BLM determines that you abandoned your operations without completing reclamation, BLM may initiate forfeiture under §3809.595. If the amount of the financial guarantee is inadequate to cover the cost of reclamation, BLM may complete the reclamation, and the operator and all other responsible persons are liable for the cost of reclamation.
OPERATIONS CONDUCTED UNDER PLANS OF OPERATIONS
§3809.400Does this subpart apply to my existing or pending plan of operations?
To see how this subpart applies to your existing or pending plan of operations, follow this table:
<< Conversion error >>
If you submitted your plan of operations to BLM before (Insert effective date of final rule.), and . . . | Then . . . |
(a) BLM approved your plan of operations before that date, | The performance standards of this subpart (§3809.420) do not apply to your existing plan of operations. The performance standards in effect at the time BLM approved your plan of operations continue to apply. All other provisions of this subpart apply to your plan of operations. See §3809.505 for applicability of financial guarantee requirements. |
(b) BLM made an environmental assessment or a draft environmental impact statement available to the public before that date, | The plan content requirements (43 CFR 3809.1-5) and performance standards (43 CFR 3809.1-3(d) and 3809.2-2) that were in effect immediately before (Insert effective date of final rule.) apply to your plan of operations. All provisions of this subpart, except §§3809.401 and 3809.420, apply to your plan of operations. |
(c) BLM has not yet made an environmental assessment or a draft environmental impact statement available to the public, | All provisions of this subpart apply to your plan of operations. |
(d) If you want this subpart to apply to any existing plan of operations, where not otherwise required, you may choose to have this subpart apply.
§3809.401Where do I file my plan of operations and what information must I include with it?
(a) If you are required to file a plan of operations under §3809.11, you must file it with the local BLM field office with jurisdiction over the lands involved. BLM does not require that the plan be on a particular form.
(b) Operators or mining claimants must demonstrate that the proposed operations would not result in unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands. Your plan of operations must describe fully the proposed activity and contain the following information with a level of detail appropriate to the type, size, and location of the planned activity:
(1) Operator Information. The name, mailing address, phone number, social security number or corporate identification number of the operator(s), and the BLM serial number(s) of any unpatented mining claim(s) where disturbance would occur. If the operator is a corporation, you must identify one individual as the point of contact. You must notify BLM in writing within 30 days of any change of operator or corporate point of contact or in the mailing address of the operator or corporate point of contact;
(2) Description of Operations. A detailed description of the equipment, devices, or practices you propose to use during operations including, where applicable--
(i) maps of the project area at an appropriate scale showing the location of exploration activities, drill sites, mining activities, processing facilities, waste rock and tailing disposal areas, support facilities, structures, buildings, and access routes;
(ii) preliminary designs, cross sections, and operating plans for mining areas, processing facilities, and waste rock and tailing disposal facilities;
(iii) water management plans;
(iv) rock characterization and handling plans;
(v) quality assurance plans;
(vi) spill contingency plans;
(vii) a general schedule of operations from start through closure; and
(viii) plans for all access roads, water supply pipelines, and power or utility services;
(3) Reclamation Plan. A plan for reclamation to meet the standards in §3809.420, with a detailed description of the equipment, devices, or practices you propose to use including, where applicable, plans for--
(i) drill-hole plugging;
(ii) regrading and reshaping;
(iii) mine reclamation;
(iv) riparian mitigation;
(v) wildlife habitat rehabilitation;
(vi) topsoil handling;
(vii) revegetation;
(viii) isolation and control of acid, toxic or deleterious materials;
(ix) facilities removal; and
(x) post-closure management;
(4) Monitoring Plan. A plan for monitoring the effect of your operations. You must design monitoring plans to meet the following objectives: to demonstrate compliance with the approved plan of operations and other Federal or State environmental laws and regulations, to provide early detection of potential problems, and to supply information that will assist in directing corrective actions should they become necessary. Where applicable, you must include in monitoring plans details on type and location of monitoring devices, sampling parameters and frequency, analytical methods, reporting procedures, and procedures to respond to adverse monitoring results. Examples of monitoring programs which may be necessary include surface- and ground-water quality and quantity, air quality, revegetation, stability, noise levels, and wildlife mortality;
(c) In addition to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, BLM may require you to supply--
(1) Operational and baseline environmental information for BLM to analyze potential environmental impacts as required by the National Environmental Policy Act. BLM will also use this information to determine if your plan of operations will prevent unnecessary or undue degradation. This could include information on public and non-public lands needed to characterize the geology, hydrology, soils, vegetation, wildlife, air quality, cultural resources, and socioeconomic conditions in and around the project area. This may also include requiring static and kinetic testing to characterize the potential for your operations to produce acid drainage or other leachate. BLM can advise you on the exact type of information and level of detail needed to meet these requirements; and
(2) Other information, if necessary to ensure that your operations will comply with this subpart.
(d) Reclamation cost estimate. At a time specified by BLM, you must submit an estimate of the cost to fully reclaim your operations as required by §3809.552.
§3809.411What action will BLM take when it receives my plan of operations?
(a) BLM will review your plan of operations within 30 business days and will notify you that -
(1) BLM approves your plan of operations as submitted (See part 3810, subpart 3814, of this title for specific plan-related requirements applicable to operations on Stock Raising Homestead Act lands.);
(2) Your plan does not contain a complete description of the proposed operations under §3809.401(b). BLM will identify deficiencies that you must address before BLM can continue processing your plan of operations. If necessary, BLM may repeat this process until your plan of operations is complete;
(3) BLM approves your plan subject to changes or conditions that are necessary to meet the performance standards of §3809.420;
(4) The description of the proposed operations is complete, but BLM cannot approve the plan until certain additional steps are completed, including one or more of the following:
(i) You complete collection of adequate baseline data;
(ii) BLM completes the environmental review, required under the National Environmental Policy Act;
(iii) BLM completes the consultation required under the National Historic Preservation Act or Endangered Species Act;
(iv) BLM or the Department of the Interior completes other Federal responsibilities, such as Native American consultation;
(v) BLM conducts an on-site visit;
(vi) BLM completes review of public comments on the amount of the financial guarantee;
(vii) For public lands where BLM does not have responsibility for managing the surface, BLM consults with the surface-managing agency; and
(viii) In cases where the surface is owned by a non-Federal entity, BLM consults with the surface owner; or
(5) BLM disapproves your plan of operations under paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) Pending final approval of your plan of operations, BLM may approve any operations that may be necessary for timely compliance with requirements of Federal and State laws, subject to any terms and conditions that may be needed to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation.
(c) BLM must disapprove, or withhold approval of, a plan of operations if it--
(1) Does not meet the content requirements of §3809.401;
(2) Proposes operations that are in an area segregated or withdrawn from the operation of the mining laws, unless the requirements of §3809.100 are met; or
(3) Proposes operations that would result in unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands.
(d) Before BLM approves your plan of operations, it will publish in a local newspaper of general circulation or in a NEPA document and accept comments for 30 days on the amount of financial guarantee required and an explanation of the basis for the amount. Detailed calculations will remain part of the record, subject to public inspection.
§3809.412 When may I operate under a plan of operations?
You must not begin operations until BLM approves your plan of operations and you provide the financial guarantee required under §§3809.411(d) and 3809.552.
§3809.415 How do I prevent unnecessary or undue degradation while conducting operations on public lands?
You prevent unnecessary or undue degradation while conducting operations on public lands by--
(a) Complying with §3809.420, as applicable; the terms and conditions of your approved plan of operations; the operations described in your notice; and other Federal and State laws related to environmental protection and protection of cultural resources;
(b) Assuring that your operations are "reasonably incident," as defined in §3715.0-5 of this title; and
(c) Attaining the stated level of protection or reclamation required by specific laws in areas such as the California Desert Conservation Area, Wild and Scenic Rivers, BLM-administered portions of the National Wilderness System, and BLM-administered National Monuments and National Conservation Areas.
§3809.420What performance standards apply to my notice or plan of operations?
The following performance standards apply to your notice or plan of operations:
(a) General performance standards.
(1) Technology and practices. You must use MATP to meet the standards of this subpart.
(2) Sequence of operations. You must avoid unnecessary impacts by following a reasonable and customary mineral exploration, development, mining and reclamation sequence.
(3) Land-use plans. Consistent with the mining laws, your operations and post-mining land use must comply with the applicable BLM land-use plans and activity plans, and with coastal zone management plans under 16 U.S.C. 1451, as appropriate.
(4) Mitigation. You must take mitigation measures specified by BLM to protect public lands.
(5) Concurrent reclamation. You must initiate and complete reclamation at the earliest feasible time on those portions of the disturbed area that you will not disturb further.
(b) Environmental performance standards.
(1) Air quality. Your operations must comply with applicable Federal, Tribal, and State laws and requirements.
(2) Water. You must conduct operations to minimize water pollution (source control) in preference to water treatment. You must conduct operations to minimize changes in water quantity in preference to water supply replacement. Your operations must comply with State water law with respect to water use and water quality.
(i) Surface water. (A) Releases to surface waters must comply with applicable Federal, Tribal, and State laws and requirements.
(B) You must handle earth materials and water in a manner that minimizes the formation of acidic, toxic, or other deleterious pollutants of surface water systems.
(C) You must manage excavations and other disturbances to prevent or control the discharge of pollutants into surface waters.
(ii) Ground water. (A) Ground water affected by your operations must comply with State standards and other applicable requirements.
(B) You must handle earth materials and water in a manner that minimizes the formation of acidic, toxic, or other deleterious infiltration to ground water systems and manage excavations and other disturbances to minimize the discharge of pollutants into ground water.
(C) You must conduct operations affecting ground water, such as dewatering, pumping, and injecting, to minimize impacts on surface and other natural resources, such as wetlands, riparian areas, aquatic habitat, and other features that are dependent on ground water.
(3) Wetlands and riparian areas. (i) You must avoid locating operations in wetlands and riparian areas where possible, minimize impacts on wetlands and riparian areas that your operations cannot avoid, and mitigate damage to wetlands and riparian areas that your operations impact.
(ii) Where feasible, you must return disturbed wetlands and riparian areas to a properly functioning condition. Wetlands and riparian areas are functioning properly when adequate vegetation, land form, or large woody debris is present to dissipate stream energy associated with high water flows, thereby reducing erosion and improving water quality; filter sediment, capture bedload, and aid floodplain development; improve floodwater retention and ground-water recharge; develop root masses that stabilize streambanks against cutting action; develop diverse ponding and channel characteristics to provide the habitat and water depth, duration, and temperature necessary for fish production, waterfowl breeding, and other uses, and support greater biodiversity.
(iii) You must take appropriate mitigation measures, such as restoration or replacement, if your operations cause the loss of nonjurisdictional wetland or riparian areas or the diminishment of their proper functioning condition.
(iv) You must mitigate impacts to wetlands under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and other waters of the United States in accord with COE requirements.
(4) Soil and growth material. (i) You must remove, segregate, and preserve topsoil, or where more feasible other suitable growth material, to minimize erosion and sustain revegetation when reclamation begins.
(ii) To preserve soil viability and promote concurrent reclamation, you must directly transport topsoil from its original location to the point of reclamation without intermediate stockpiling, where feasible.
(5) Revegetation. You must--
(i) Revegetate disturbed lands by establishing a stable and long-lasting vegetative cover that is self-sustaining and, considering successional stages, will result in cover that is--
(A) Comparable in both diversity and density to pre-existing natural vegetation of the surrounding area; or
(B) Compatible with the approved BLM land-use plan or activity plan;
(ii) Take all reasonable steps to prevent the introduction of noxious weeds and to limit or reduce any existing infestations;
(iii) Use native species to the extent feasible;
(iv) Achieve success over the time frame approved by BLM; and
(v) Where you demonstrate revegetation is not achievable under this paragraph, you must use other techniques to prevent erosion and stabilize the project area, subject to BLM approval.
(6) Fish and wildlife. (i) You must minimize disturbances and adverse impacts on fish, wildlife, and related environmental values.
(ii) You must take necessary measures to protect threatened or endangered species and their habitat as required by the Endangered Species Act.
(iii) You must take any necessary action to minimize the adverse effects of your operations, including access, on BLM-defined special status species.
(iv) You must rehabilitate fisheries and wildlife habitat affected by your operations.
(7) Cultural, paleontologic, and cave resources. (i) You must not knowingly disturb, alter, injure, or destroy any scientifically important paleontologic remains or any historic, archaeologic, or cave-related site, structure, building, resource, or object unless --
(A) You identify the resource in your notice or plan of operations;
(B) You propose action to protect, remove or preserve the resource; and
(C) BLM specifically authorizes such action in your plan of operations, or does not prohibit such action under your notice.
(ii) You must immediately bring to BLM's attention any previously unidentified historic, archaeologic, cave-related, or scientifically important paleontologic resources that might be altered or destroyed by your operations. You must leave the discovery intact until BLM authorizes you to proceed. BLM will evaluate the discovery and take action to protect, remove, or preserve the resource within 20 business days after you notify BLM of the discovery, unless otherwise agreed to by the operator and BLM, or unless otherwise provided by law.
(iii) BLM has the responsibility for determining who bears the cost of the investigation, recovery, and preservation of discovered historic, archaeologic, cave-related, and paleontologic resources, or of any human remains and associated funerary objects. If BLM incurs costs associated with investigation and recovery, BLM will recover the costs from the operator on a case-by-case basis, after an evaluation of the factors set forth in section 304(b) of FLPMA.
(c) Operational performance standards.
(1) Roads and structures. (i) You must design, construct, and maintain roads and structures to control or prevent erosion, siltation, and air pollution and minimize impacts to resources.
(ii) You must minimize surface disturbance, using existing access where feasible, while maintaining safe design, following natural contour where feasible, and minimizing cut and fill.
(iii) When commercial hauling on an existing BLM road is involved, BLM may require you to make appropriate arrangements for use, maintenance, and safety.
(iv) You must remove and reclaim roads and structures according to BLM land-use plans and activity plans, unless retention is approved by BLM.
(2) Drill holes. (i) You must not allow drilling fluids and cuttings to flow off the drill site.
(ii) You must plug all exploration drill holes to prevent mixing of waters from aquifers, impacts to beneficial uses, downward water loss, or upward water loss from artesian conditions.
(iii) You must conduct surface plugging to prevent direct inflow of surface water into the drill hole and to eliminate the open hole as a hazard.
(3) Acid-forming, toxic, or other deleterious materials. You must incorporate identification, handling, and placement of potentially acid-forming, toxic or other deleterious materials into your operations, facility design, reclamation, and environmental monitoring programs to minimize the formation and impacts of acidic, alkaline, metal-bearing, or other deleterious leachate, including the following:
(i) You must handle, place, or treat potentially acid-forming, toxic, or other deleterious materials in a manner that minimizes the likelihood of acid formation and toxic and other deleterious leachate generation (source control);
(ii) If you cannot prevent the formation of acid, toxic, or other deleterious drainage, you must minimize uncontrolled migration of leachate; and
(iii) You must capture and treat acid drainage, or other undesirable effluent, to the applicable standard if source controls and migration controls do not prove effective. You are responsible for any costs associated with water treatment or facility maintenance after project closure. Long-term, or post-mining, effluent capture and treatment are not acceptable substitutes for source control, and you may rely on them only after all reasonable source control methods have been employed.
(4) Leaching Operations and Impoundments. (i) You must design, construct, and operate all leach pads, tailings impoundments, ponds, and solution-holding facilities according to standard engineering practices to achieve and maintain stability and facilitate reclamation.
(ii) You must construct a low-permeability liner or containment system that will minimize the release of leaching solutions to the environment. You must monitor to detect potential releases of contaminants from heaps, process ponds, tailings impoundments, and other structures and remediate environmental impacts if leakage occurs.
(iii) You must design, construct, and operate cyanide or other leaching facilities and impoundments to contain precipitation from the local 100-year, 24-hour storm event in addition to the maximum process solution inventory. You must also include allowances for snowmelt events and draindown from heaps during power outages in the design.
(iv) You must construct a secondary containment system around vats, tanks, or recovery circuits adequate to prevent the release of toxic solutions to the environment in the event of primary containment failure.
(v) You must exclude access by the public, wildlife, or livestock to solution containment and transfer structures that contain lethal levels of cyanide or other solutions.
(vi) During closure and at final reclamation, you must detoxify leaching solutions and heaps and manage tailings or other process waste to minimize impacts to the environment from contact with toxic materials or leachate. Acceptable practices include natural degradation, rinsing, chemical treatment, or equally successful alternative methods to detoxify solutions and materials. Upon completion of reclamation, all materials and discharges must meet applicable standards.
(vii) In cases of temporary or seasonal closure, you must provide adequate maintenance, monitoring, security, and financial guarantee, and BLM may require you to detoxify process solutions.
(5) Waste rock, tailings, and leach pads. You must locate, design, construct, operate, and reclaim waste rock, tailings, and leach pads to minimize infiltration and contamination of surface water and ground water; achieve stability; and, to the extent feasible, blend with pre-mining, natural topography.
(6) Stability, grading and erosion control. (i) You must grade or otherwise engineer all disturbed areas to a stable condition to minimize erosion and facilitate revegetation.
(ii) You must recontour all areas to blend with pre-mining, natural topography to the extent feasible. You may temporarily retain a highwall or other mine workings in a stable condition to preserve evidence of mineralization.
(iii) You must minimize erosion during all phases of operations.
(7) Pit reclamation. (i) You must partially or fully backfill pits unless you demonstrate to BLM's satisfaction it is not feasible for economic, environmental, or safety reasons.
(ii) You must take mitigation measures if you do not completely backfill a pit or other disturbance.
(iii) Water quality in pits and other water impoundments must comply with applicable Federal, State, and Tribal standards. Where no standards exist, you must take measures to protect wildlife, domestic livestock, and public water supplies and users.
(8) Solid waste. (i) You must comply with applicable Federal and State standards for the disposal and treatment of solid waste, including regulations issued under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.).
(ii) To the extent feasible, you must remove from the project area, dispose of, or treat all non mine garbage, refuse, or waste to minimize their impact.
(9) Fire prevention and control. You must comply with all applicable Federal and State fire laws and regulations, and take all reasonable measures to prevent and suppress fires in the project area.
(10) Maintenance and public safety. During all operations and after mining--
(i) You must maintain structures, equipment, and other facilities in a safe and orderly manner;
(ii) You must mark by signs or fences, or otherwise identify hazardous sites or conditions resulting from your operations to alert the public in accord with applicable Federal and State laws and regulations; and
(iii) You must restrict unaccompanied public access to portions of your operations that present a hazard to the public, consistent with §§3809.600 and 3712.1 of this title.
(11) Protection of survey monuments. (i) To the extent feasible, you must protect all survey monuments, witness corners, reference monuments, bearing trees, and line trees against damage or destruction.
(ii) If you damage or destroy a monument, corner, or accessory, you must immediately report the matter to BLM. BLM will tell you in writing how to restore or re-establish a damaged or destroyed monument, corner, or accessory.
§3809.423How long does my plan of operations remain in effect?
Your plan of operations remains in effect as long as you are conducting operations, unless BLM suspends or revokes your plan of operations for failure to comply with this subpart.
§3809.424What are my obligations if I stop conducting operations?
(a) To see what you must do if you stop conducting operations, follow this table:
<< Conversion error >>
If . . . | Then . . . |
(1) You stop conducting operations for any period of time, | You must-- (i) Maintain the project area, including structures, in a safe and clean condition; (ii) Take all necessary actions to assure that unnecessary or undue degradation does not occur, including those specified at §3809.420(c)(4)(vii); and (iii) Maintain an adequate financial guarantee. |
If . . . | Then . . . |
(2) The period of non-operation is likely to cause unnecessary or undue degradation, | BLM will require you to take all necessary actions to
assure that unnecessary or undue degradation does not occur, including
requiring you, after an extended period of non operation for other than
seasonal operations, to remove all structures, equipment, and other
facilities and reclaim the project area. |
(3) Your operations are inactive for 5 consecutive years, | BLM will review your operations and determine whether BLM should terminate your plan of operations and direct final reclamation and closure. |
(4) BLM determines that you abandoned your operations, | BLM may initiate forfeiture under §3809.595. If the amount of the financial guarantee is inadequate to cover the costs of reclamation, BLM may complete the reclamation, and the operator and all other responsible persons are liable for the costs of such reclamation. See §3809.336(a) for indicators of abandonment. |
MODIFICATIONS OF PLANS OF OPERATIONS
§3809.430May I modify my plan of operations?
Yes. You may request a modification of the plan at any time during operations under an approved plan of operations.
§3809.431When must I modify my plan of operations?
(a) You must modify your plan of operations to reflect proposed operations not described in the approved plan; and
(b) You must modify your plan of operations when required by BLM to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation.
§3809.432What process will BLM follow in reviewing a modification of my
plan of operations?
(a) BLM will review and approve a modification of
your plan of operations in the same manner as it reviewed and approved your
initial plan under §§3809.401 through 3809.420, except that BLM may not obtain
public comment on the financial guarantee amount if the modification does not
change the financial guarantee amount or only changes it minimally; or
(b) BLM will accept the modification without formal approval if it does not constitute a substantive change and does not require additional analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act.
§3809.433 Does this subpart apply to a new modification of my plan of operations?
To see how this subpart applies to a new modification of your plan of operations, see the following table. A "new" modification is one that you submit to BLM after this subpart becomes effective:
<< Conversion error >>
If you have an approved plan of operations on (Insert effective date of the final rule.) and . . . | Then . . . |
(a) New facility. You subsequently propose to modify your plan of operations by constructing a new facility, such as waste rock repository, leach pad, impoundment, drill site, or road, | The plan contents requirements (§3809.401) and performance standards (§3809.420) of this subpart apply to the new facility. Those facilities and areas not included in the modification may continue to operate under the terms of your existing plan of operations. |
(b) Existing facility. You subsequently propose to modify your plan of operations by modifying an existing facility, such as expansion of a waste rock repository, leach pad, or impoundment; layback of a mine pit; or widening of a road, | The plan contents requirements (§3809.401) and performance standards (§3809.420) of this subpart apply to the modified facility, unless you demonstrate to BLM's satisfaction it is not feasible to apply them for environmental, safety, or technical reasons. If you make the demonstration, the plan content requirements (43 CFR 3809.1-5) and performance standards (43 CFR 3809.1-3(d) and 3809.2-2) that were in effect immediately before (Insert effective date of final rule.) apply to your modified facility. Those facilities and areas not included in the modification may continue to operate under the terms of your existing plan of operations. |
§3809.434 Does this subpart apply to a pending modification for a new facility?
To see how this subpart applies to a pending modification for a new facility, see the following table. A "pending" modification is one that you submitted to BLM before this subpart became effective, and BLM has not yet approved it.
<< Conversion error >>
If you have an approved plan of operations on (Insert effective date of the final rule.) and before that date, you submitted to BLM a proposed modification to construct a new facility, such as waste rock repository, leach pad, impoundment, drill site, or road and . . . | Then . . . |
(a) BLM made an environmental assessment or a draft environmental impact statement available to the public before that date, | The plan content requirements (43 CFR 3809.1-5) and performance standards (43 CFR 3809.1-3(d) and 3809.2-2) that were in effect immediately before (Insert effective date of final rule.) apply to the new facility. Those facilities and areas not included in the modification may continue to operate under the terms of your existing plan of operations. |
(b) BLM has not yet made an environmental assessment or a draft environmental impact statement available to the public, | All provisions of this subpart apply to the modified facility. Those facilities and areas not included in the modification may continue to operate under the terms of your existing plan of operations. |
§3809.435 Does this subpart apply to my pending modification for an existing facility?
To see how this subpart applies to your pending modification for an existing facility, follow this table:
<< Conversion error >>
If you have an approved plan of operations on (Insert effective date of the final rule.) and before that date, you submitted to BLM a proposed modification of an existing facility, such as expansion of a waste rock repository, leach pad, or impoundment; layback of a mine pit; or widening of a road, and . . . | Then . . . |
(a) BLM made an environmental assessment or a draft environmental impact statement available to the public before that date, | The plan content requirements (43 CFR 3809.1-5) and performance standards (43 CFR 3809.1-3(d) and 3809.2-2) that were in effect immediately before (Insert effective date of final rule.) apply to the new facility. Those facilities and areas not included in the modification may continue to operate under the terms of your existing plan of operations. |
(b) BLM has not yet made an environmental assessment or a draft environmental impact statement available to the public, | The plan contents requirements (§3809.401) and performance standards (§3809.420) of this subpart apply to the modified facility, unless you demonstrate to BLM's satisfaction it is not feasible to apply them for environmental, safety, or technical reasons. If you make the demonstration, the plan content requirements (43 CFR 3809.1-5) and performance standards (43 CFR 3809.1-3(d) and 3809.2-2) that were in effect immediately before (Insert effective date of final rule.) apply to your plan of operations. Those facilities and areas not included in the modification may continue to operate under the terms of your existing plan of operations. |
FINANCIAL GUARANTEE REQUIREMENTS--GENERAL
§3809.500In general, what are BLM's financial guarantee requirements?
To see generally what BLM's financial guarantee requirements are, follow this table:
<< Conversion error >>
If . . . | Then . . . |
(a) Your operations constitute casual use, | You do not have to provide any financial guarantee. |
If . . . | Then . . . |
(b) You conduct operations under a notice or a plan of operations, | You must provide BLM or the State a financial guarantee that meets the requirements of this subpart before starting operations. For more information, see §§3809.551 to 3809.573. |
§3809.503 When must I provide a financial guarantee for my notice-level operations?
To see how this subpart applies to your notice, follow this table :
If . . . | Then . . . |
(a) Your notice was on file with BLM on (Insert effective date of final rule.), | You do not need to provide a financial guarantee unless you modify the notice or extend the notice under §3809.333. |
(b) Your notice was on file with BLM before (Insert effective date of final rule.) and you choose to modify your notice as required by this subpart on or after that date, | You must provide a financial guarantee before you can begin operations under the modified notice. |
(c) You file a new notice on or after (Insert effective date of final rule.), | You must provide a financial guarantee before you can begin operations under the notice. |
§3809.505 How do the financial guarantee requirements of this subpart apply to my existing plan of operations?
For each plan of operations approved before (Insert effective date of final rule.), you must post a financial guarantee according to the requirements of this subpart no later than (Insert date 180 days after effective date of final rule.) at the local BLM office with jurisdiction over the lands involved.
§3809.551 What are my choices for providing BLM with a financial guarantee?
You must provide BLM with a financial guarantee using any of the 3 options in the following table:
<< Conversion error >>
If . . . | Then . . . |
(a) You have only one notice or plan of operations, or wish to provide a financial guarantee for a single notice or plan of operations, | You may provide an individual financial guarantee that covers only the cost of reclaiming areas disturbed under the single notice or plan of operations. See §§3809.552 to 3809.556 for more information. |
If . . . | Then . . . |
(b) You are currently operating under more than one notice or plan of operations, | You may provide a blanket financial guarantee covering statewide or nationwide operations. See §3809.560 for more information. |
(c) You do not choose one of the options in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, | You may provide evidence of an existing financial guarantee under State law or regulations. See §§3809.570 to 3809.573 for more information. |
§3809.552What must my individual financial guarantee cover?
(a) If you conduct operations under a notice or a plan of operations and you provide an individual financial guarantee, it must cover the estimated cost as if BLM were to contract with a third party to reclaim your operations according to the reclamation plan, including construction and maintenance costs for any treatment facilities necessary to meet Federal and State environmental standards.
(b) BLM will periodically review the estimated cost of reclamation and the adequacy of any funding mechanism established under paragraph (c) of this section and require increased coverage, if necessary.
(c) When BLM identifies a need for it, you must establish a trust fund or other funding mechanism available to BLM to ensure the continuation of long-term treatment to achieve water quality standards and for other long term, post-mining maintenance requirements. The funding must be adequate to provide for construction, long-term operation, maintenance, or replacement of any treatment facilities and infrastructure, for as long as the treatment and facilities are needed after mine closure. BLM may identify the need for a trust fund or other funding mechanism during plan review or later.
§3809.553 May I post a financial guarantee for a part of my operations?
(a) Yes, BLM may authorize you to provide a financial guarantee covering a part of your operations if--
(1) Your operations do not go beyond what is specifically covered by the partial financial guarantee; and
(2) The partial financial guarantee covers all reclamation costs within the incremental area of operations.
(b) BLM will review the amount and terms of the financial guarantee for each increment of your operations at least annually.
§3809.554How do I estimate the cost to reclaim my operations?
(a) You must estimate the cost to reclaim your operations as if BLM were hiring a third-party contractor to perform reclamation of your operations after you have vacated the project area. Your estimate must include BLM's cost to administer the reclamation contract. Contact BLM to obtain this administrative cost information.
(b) Your estimate of the cost to reclaim your operations must be acceptable to BLM.
§3809.555What forms of individual financial guarantee are acceptable to BLM?
You may use any of the following instruments for an individual financial guarantee, provided that the BLM State Director has determined that it is an acceptable financial instrument within the State where the operations are proposed:
(a) Non-cancelable surety bonds, including surety bonds arranged or paid for by third parties;
(b) Cash in an amount equal to the required dollar amount of the financial guarantee, to be deposited and maintained in a Federal depository account of the United States Treasury by BLM;
(c) Irrevocable letters of credit from a bank or financial institution organized or authorized to transact business in the United States;
(d) Certificates of deposit or savings accounts not in excess of the maximum insurable amount as set by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; and
(e) Either of the following instruments having a market value of not less than the required dollar amount of the financial guarantee and maintained in a Securities Investors Protection Corporation insured trust account by a licensed securities brokerage firm for the benefit of the Secretary of the Interior, acting by and through BLM:
(1) Negotiable United States Government, State and Municipal securities or bonds; or
(2) Investment-grade rated securities having a Standard and Poor's rating of AAA or AA or an equivalent rating from a nationally recognized securities rating service.
§3809.556 What special requirements apply to financial guarantees described in §3809.555(e)?
(a) If you choose to use the instruments permitted under §3809.555(e) in satisfaction of financial guarantee requirements, you must provide BLM, before you begin operations and by the end of each calendar year thereafter, a certified statement describing the nature and market value of the instruments maintained in that account, and including any current statements or reports furnished by the brokerage firm to the operator or mining claimant concerning the asset value of the account.
(b) You must review the market value of the account instruments by December 31 of each year to ensure that their market value continues to be not less than the required dollar amount of the financial guarantee. When the market value of the account instruments has declined by more than 10 percent of the required dollar amount of the financial guarantee, you must, within 10 days after its annual review or at any time upon the written request of BLM, provide additional instruments, as defined in §3809.555(e), to the trust account so that the total market value of all account instruments is not less than the required dollar amount of the financial guarantee. You must send a certified statement to BLM within 45 days thereafter describing your actions to raise the market value of its account instruments to the required dollar amount of the financial guarantee. You must include copies of any statements or reports furnished by the brokerage firm to you documenting such an increase.
(c) If your review under paragraph (b) of this section demonstrates that the total market value of trust account instruments exceeds 110 percent of the required dollar amount of the financial guarantee, you may ask BLM to authorize a written release of that portion of the account that exceeds 110 percent of the required financial guarantee. BLM will approve your request only if you are in compliance with the terms and conditions of your notice or approved plan of operations.
BLANKET FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
§3809.560Under what circumstances may I provide a blanket financial guarantee?
(a) If you have more than one notice- or plan-level operation underway, you may provide a blanket financial guarantee covering statewide or nationwide operations instead of individual financial guarantees for each operation.
(b) BLM will accept a blanket financial guarantee if we determine that its terms and conditions are sufficient to comply with the regulations of this subpart.
STATE-APPROVED FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
§3809.570Under what circumstances may I provide a State-approved financial guarantee?
When you provide evidence of an existing financial guarantee under State law or regulations that covers your operations, you are not required to provide a separate financial guarantee under this subpart if--
(a) The existing financial guarantee is redeemable by the Secretary, acting by and through BLM;
(b) It is held or approved by a State agency for the same operations covered by your notice(s) or plan(s) of operations; and
(c) It provides at least the same amount of financial guarantee as required by this subpart.
§3809.571 What forms of State-approved financial guarantee are acceptable to BLM?
You may provide a State-approved financial guarantee in any of the following forms, subject to the conditions in §3809.570:
(a) The kinds of individual financial guarantees specified under §3809.555;
(b) Participation in a State bond pool, if--
(1) The State agrees that, upon BLM's request, the State will use part of the pool to meet reclamation obligations on public lands; and
(2) The BLM State Director determines that the State bond pool provides the equivalent level of protection as that required by this subpart; and
(c) A corporate guarantee if--
(1) The corporate guarantee is acceptable to the State;
(2) The corporate guarantee is redeemable by or guaranteed to the Secretary; and
(3) The BLM State Director determines that the corporate guarantee provides a level of protection equal to the estimated cost of reclamation under §§3809.552 and 3809.554, considering the operator's net income, net working capital and intangible net worth, and total liabilities and assets.
§3809.572What happens if BLM rejects a financial instrument in my State
approved financial guarantee?
If BLM rejects a submitted financial
instrument in an existing State-approved financial guarantee, BLM will notify
you in writing, with a complete explanation of the reasons for the rejection
within 30 days of BLM's receipt of the evidence of State-approved financial
guarantee. You must provide BLM with a financial guarantee acceptable under this
subpart at least equal to the amount of the rejected financial instrument.
§3809.573What happens if the State makes a demand against my financial guarantee?
When the State makes a demand against your financial guarantee, thereby reducing the available balance, you must replace or augment the financial guarantee if the available balance is insufficient to cover the remaining reclamation cost.
MODIFICATION OR REPLACEMENT OF A FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
§3809.580What happens if I modify my notice or approved plan of operations?
In the event you modify a notice or an approved plan under §3809.331 or §3809.431 respectively and your estimated reclamation cost increases, your revised financial guarantee must comply with §3809.552. You must adjust the amount of the financial guarantee to cover the estimated additional cost of reclamation and long-term treatment, as modified.
§3809.581Will BLM accept a replacement financial instrument?
Yes. If you or a new operator have an approved financial guarantee, you may request BLM to accept a replacement financial instrument at any time after the approval of an initial instrument. BLM will review the offered instrument for adequacy and may reject any offered instrument, but will do so by a decision in writing, with a complete explanation of the reasons for the rejection, within 30 days of the offering.
§3809.582How long must I maintain my financial guarantee?
You
must maintain your financial guarantee until you or a new operator replace it,
with BLM's written concurrence, by another adequate financial guarantee, or
until BLM releases the requirement to maintain your financial guarantee after
you have completed reclamation of your operation according to the requirements
of §3809.320 (for notices), including any measures identified as the result of
consultation with BLM under §3809.313, or §3809.420 (for plans of operations).
RELEASE OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
§3809.590When will BLM release or reduce the financial guarantee for my notice or plan of operations?
(a) When you (the mining claimant or operator) have completed all or any portion of the reclamation of your operations in accordance with your notice or approved plan of operations, you may notify BLM that the reclamation has occurred and request a reduction in the financial guarantee or BLM approval of the adequacy of the reclamation, or both.
(b) BLM will then promptly inspect the reclaimed area. We encourage you to accompany the BLM inspector.
(c) BLM will publish notice of final financial guarantee release in a local newspaper of general circulation and accept comments for 30 days. Subsequently, BLM will notify you, in writing, whether you may reduce the financial guarantee under §3809.591, or the reclamation is acceptable, or both.
§3809.591What are the limitations on the amount by which BLM may reduce my financial guarantee?
(a) This section applies to your financial guarantee, but not to any funding mechanism established under §3809.552(c) to pay for long-term treatment of effluent or site maintenance. Calculation of bond percentages in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section does not include any funds held in that kind of funding mechanism.
(b) BLM may release up to 60 percent of your financial guarantee for a portion of your project area when BLM determines that you have successfully completed backfilling; regrading; establishment of drainage control; and stabilization and detoxification of leaching solutions, heaps, tailings, and similar facilities on that portion of the project area.
(c) BLM may release the remainder of your financial guarantee for the same portion of the project area when BLM determines that you have successfully completed reclamation, including revegetating the area disturbed by operations, and when--
(1) Any effluent discharged from the area has met applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards for one year without needing additional treatment; or
(2) If you have established a funding mechanism under §3809.552(c) to pay for long-term treatment, any effluent discharged from the area meets applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards water for one year with or without treatment.
§3809.592Does release of my financial guarantee relieve me of all responsibility for my project area?
(a) Release of your financial guarantee under this subpart does not release you (the mining claimant or operator) from responsibility for reclamation of your operations should reclamation fail to meet the standards of this subpart.
(b) Any release of your financial guarantee under this subpart does not release or waive any claim BLM or other persons may have against any person under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., or under any other applicable statutes or regulations.
§3809.593What happens to my financial guarantee if I transfer my operations?
You remain responsible for obligations or conditions created while you
conducted operations unless a transferee accepts responsibility under §3809.16,
and BLM accepts an adequate replacement financial guarantee. Therefore, your
financial guarantee remains in effect until BLM determines that you are no
longer responsible for all or part of the operation. BLM can release your
financial guarantee on an incremental basis. The new operator must provide a
financial guarantee before BLM will allow the new operator to conduct
operations.
§3809.594What happens to my financial guarantee when my
mining claim is patented?
(a) When your mining claim is patented, BLM will release the portion of the financial guarantee that applies to operations within the boundaries of the patented land. This paragraph does not apply to patents issued on mining claims within the boundaries of the California Desert Conservation Area.
(b) BLM will release the remainder of the financial guarantee, including the portion covering approved means of access outside the boundaries of the mining claim, when you have completed reclamation to the standards of this subpart.
(c) BLM will continue to regulate under this subpart existing access for mining purposes across public lands to patented mining claims, including the requirement to have an adequate financial guarantee.
FORFEITURE OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEE
§3809.595When will BLM
initiate forfeiture of my financial guarantee?
BLM will initiate forfeiture of all or part of your financial guarantee for any project area or portion of a project area if--
(a) You (the operator or mining claimant) refuse or are unable to conduct reclamation as provided in the reclamation measures incorporated into your notice or approved plan of operations or the regulations in this subpart;
(b) You fail to meet the terms of your notice or the decision approving your plan of operations; or
(c) You default on any of the conditions under which you obtained the financial guarantee.
§3809.596How does BLM initiate forfeiture of my financial guarantee?
When BLM decides to require the forfeiture of all or part of your financial guarantee, BLM will notify you (the operator or mining claimant) by certified mail, return receipt requested; the surety on the financial guarantee, if any; and the State agency holding the financial guarantee, if any, informing you and them of the following:
(a) BLM's decision to require the forfeiture of all or part of the financial guarantee;
(b) The reasons for the forfeiture;
(c) The amount that you will forfeit based on the estimated total cost of achieving the reclamation plan requirements for the project area or portion of the project area affected, including BLM's administrative costs; and
(d) How you may avoid forfeiture, including--
(1) Providing a written agreement under which you or another person will perform reclamation operations in accordance with a compliance schedule which meets the conditions of your notice or the decision approving your plan of operations and the reclamation plan, and a demonstration that such other person has the ability to satisfy the conditions; and
(2) Obtaining written permission from BLM for a surety to complete the reclamation, or the portion of the reclamation applicable to the bonded phase or increment, if the surety can demonstrate an ability to complete the reclamation in accordance with the reclamation measures incorporated in your notice or approved plan of operations.
§3809.597What if I do not comply with BLM's forfeiture notice?
If you fail to meet the requirements of BLM's forfeiture notice provided under §3809.596, if you fail to appeal the forfeiture notice under §3809.800, or if the decision appealed is affirmed, BLM will--
(a) Immediately collect the forfeited amount as provided by applicable laws for the collection of defaulted financial guarantees, other debts, or State bond pools; and
(b) Use funds collected from financial guarantee forfeiture to implement the reclamation plan, or portion thereof, on the area or portion of the area to which financial guarantee coverage applies.
§3809.598What if the amount forfeited will not cover the cost of reclamation?
If the amount forfeited is insufficient to pay for the full cost of reclamation, the operators and mining claimants are jointly and severally liable for the remaining costs. BLM may complete or authorize completion of reclamation of the area covered by the financial guarantee and may recover from you all costs of reclamation in excess of the amount forfeited.
§3809.599What if the amount forfeited exceeds the cost of reclamation?
If the amount of financial guarantee forfeited is more than the amount necessary to complete reclamation, BLM will return the unused funds within a reasonable amount of time to the party from whom they were collected.
INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
§3809.600With what frequency will BLM inspect my operations?
(a) At any time, BLM may inspect your operations, including all structures, equipment, workings, and uses located on the public lands. The inspection may include verification that your operations comply with this subpart. See §3715.7 of this title for special provisions governing inspection of the inside of structures used solely for residential purposes.
(b) BLM may authorize a member(s) of the public to accompany a BLM inspector. However, BLM will not authorize a member of the public to accompany an inspector if the presence of the public would materially interfere with the mining operations or with BLM's administration of this subpart, or create safety problems. When BLM authorizes a member of the public to accompany the inspector, the operator must provide access to operations.
(c) At least 4 times each year, BLM will inspect your operations if you use cyanide or other leachate or where there is significant potential for acid drainage.
§3809.601What types of enforcement action may BLM take if I do not meet the requirements of this subpart?
BLM may issue various types of enforcement orders, including the following:
(a) Noncompliance order. If your operations do not comply with any provision of your notice, plan of operations, or requirement of this subpart, BLM may issue you a noncompliance order; and
(b) Suspension orders. (1) BLM may order a suspension of all or any part of your operations after--
(i) You fail to timely comply with a noncompliance order for a significant violation issued under paragraph (a) of this section. A significant violation is one that causes or may result in environmental or other harm or danger or that substantially deviates from the complete notice or approved plan of operations;
(ii) BLM notifies you of its intent to issue a suspension order; and
(iii) BLM provides you an opportunity for an informal hearing before the BLM State Director to object to a suspension.
(2) BLM may order an immediate, temporary suspension of all or any part of your operations without issuing a noncompliance order, notifying you in advance, or providing you an opportunity for an informal hearing if--
(i) You do not comply with any provision of your notice, plan of operations, or this subpart; and
(ii) An immediate, temporary suspension is necessary to protect health, safety, or the environment from imminent danger or harm. BLM may presume that an immediate suspension is necessary if you conduct plan-level operations without an approved plan of operations or conduct operations other than casual use without submitting a complete notice.
(3) BLM will terminate a suspension order under paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section no later than the date by which you correct the violation.
(c) Contents of enforcement orders. Enforcement orders will specify--
(1) How you are failing or have failed to comply with the requirements of this subpart;
(2) The portions of your operations, if any, that you must cease or suspend;
(3) The actions you must take to correct the noncompliance and the time, not exceed 30 days, within which you must start corrective action; and
(4) The time within which you must complete corrective action.
§3809.602Can BLM revoke my plan of operations or nullify my
notice?
(a) BLM may revoke your plan of operations or nullify your
notice upon finding that--
(1) A violation exists of any provision of your notice, plan of operation, or this subpart, and you have failed to correct the violation within the time specified in the enforcement order issued under §3809.601; or
(2) a pattern of violations exists at your operations.
(b) The finding is not effective until BLM notifies you of its intent to revoke your plan or nullify your notice, and BLM provides you an opportunity for an informal hearing before the BLM State Director.
(c) If BLM nullifies your notice or revokes your plan of operations, you must not conduct operations on the public lands in the project area, except for reclamation and other measures specified by BLM.
§3809.603How does BLM serve me with an enforcement action?
(a) BLM will serve a noncompliance order, a notification of intent to issue a suspension order, a suspension order, or other enforcement order on the person to whom it is directed or his or her designated agent, either by--
(1) Offering a copy at the project area to the designated agent or to the individual who, based upon reasonable inquiry, appears to be in charge. If no such individual can be located at the project area, BLM may offer a copy to any individual at the project area who appears to be an employee or agent of the person to whom the notification or order is issued. Service is complete when the notice or order is offered and is not incomplete because of refusal to accept; or
(2) Sending a copy of the notification or order by certified mail or by hand to the operator or his or her designated agent, or by any means consistent with the rules governing service of a summons and complaint under rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Service is complete upon offer of the notification or order or of the certified mail and is not incomplete because of refusal to accept.
(b) BLM may serve a mining claimant in the same manner an operator is served under paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(c) The mining claimant or operator may designate an agent for service of notifications and orders. You must provide the designation in writing to the local BLM field office having jurisdiction over the lands involved.
§3809.604What happens if I do not comply with a BLM order?
(a) If you do not comply with a BLM order issued under §§3809.601 or 3809.602, the Department of the Interior may request the United States Attorney to institute a civil action in United States District Court for an injunction or order to enforce its order, prevent you from conducting operations on the public lands in violation of this subpart, and collect damages resulting from unlawful acts. This relief may be in addition to the enforcement actions described in §§3809.601 and 3809.602 and the penalties described in §§3809.700 and 3809.702.
(b) If you fail to timely comply with a noncompliance order issued under §3809.601(a), and remain in noncompliance, BLM may order you to submit plans of operations under §3809.401 for current and future notice-level operations.
PENALTIES
§3809.700What criminal penalties apply to violations of this subpart?
The criminal penalties established by statute for individuals and organizations are as follows:
(a) Individuals. If you knowingly and willfully violate the requirements of this subpart, you may be subject to arrest and trial under section 303(a) of FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1733(a)). If you are convicted, you will be subject to a fine of not more than $100,000 or the alternative fine provided for in the applicable provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3571, or imprisonment not to exceed 12 months, or both, for each offense; and
(b) Organizations. If an organization or corporation knowingly or willfully violates the requirements of this subpart, it is subject to trial and, if convicted, will be subject to a fine of not more than $200,000, or the alternative fine provided for in the applicable provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3571.
§3809.701What happens if I make false statements to BLM?
Under statute (18 U.S.C. 1001), you are subject to arrest and trial before a United States District Court if, in any matter under this subpart, you knowingly and willfully falsify, conceal, or cover up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact, or make any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations, or make or use any false writings or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry. If you are convicted, you will be fined not more than $250,000 or the alternative fine provided for in the applicable provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3571, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
§3809.702What civil penalties apply to violations of this subpart?
(a)(1) Following issuance of an order under §3809.601, BLM may assess a proposed civil penalty of up to $5,000 for each violation against you if you --
(i) Violate any term or condition of a plan of operations or fail to conform with operations described in your notice;
(ii) Violate any provision of this subpart; or
(iii) Fail to comply with an order issued under §3809.601.
(2) BLM may consider each day of continuing violation a separate violation for purposes of penalty assessments.
(3) In determining the amount of the penalty, BLM must consider your history of previous violations at the particular mining operation; the seriousness of the violation, including any irreparable harm to the environment and any hazard to the health or safety of the public; whether you were negligent; and your demonstrated good faith in attempting to achieve rapid compliance after notification of the violation.
(4) If you are a small entity, BLM will, under appropriate circumstances including those described in paragraph (a)(3) of this section, consider reducing or waiving a civil penalty and may consider ability to pay in determining a penalty assessment.
(b) A final administrative assessment of a civil penalty occurs only after BLM has notified you of the assessment and given you opportunity to request within 30 days a hearing by the Office of Hearings and Appeals. BLM may extend the time to request a hearing during settlement discussions. The Office of Hearings and Appeals will issue a penalty assessment that is final.
(c) If BLM issues you a proposed civil penalty and you fail to request a hearing as provided in paragraph (b), the proposed assessment becomes a final order of the Department, and the penalty assessed becomes due upon expiration of the time allowed to request a hearing.
§3809.703Can BLM settle a proposed civil penalty?
Yes. BLM may negotiate a settlement of civil penalties, in which case BLM will prepare a settlement agreement. The BLM State Director or his or her designee must sign the agreement.
APPEALS
§3809.800What appeal rights do I have?
(a) Any person adversely affected by a decision made under this subpart may appeal the decision under parts 4 and 1840 of this title. Review of a decision by the BLM State Director will take place if consistent with part 1840 of this title.
(b) In order for the Department of the Interior to consider your appeal of a decision, you must file a notice of appeal in writing with the BLM office where the decision was made within 30 days after the date you received the decision. All decisions under this subpart go into effect immediately and remain in effect while appeals are pending unless a stay is granted under §4.21(b) of this title.
(c) Your written appeal must contain:
(1) Your name and address; and
(2) The BLM serial number of the notice or plan of operations that is the subject of the appeal.
(d) You must submit a statement of your reasons for the appeal and any
arguments you wish to present that would justify reversal or modification of the
decision within the time frame specified in part 4 of this chapter (usually
within 30 days after filing your appeal).
CONTENTS
General RequirementsA-71
Air QualityA-71
Hazardous Materials and Waste
Management A-73
Water ResourcesA-74
Cultural ResourcesA-76
American
Indian Resources, Consultation, and CoordinationA-77
Cave
ResourcesA-78
Wildlife ResourcesA-78
Special Status AreasA-79 GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS
The following acts and executive order establish general
review requirements or management objectives that apply to mineral projects on
public lands.
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), P.L. 94-579. Section 302(b) states that "In managing the public lands the Secretary shall, by regulation or otherwise, take any action necessary to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation of the lands."
Executive Order 12088 - Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards, October 13, 1978. Executive Order 12088 directs executive agencies to take all necessary actions to prevent, control, and abate environmental pollution from activities and facilities under their control. This order further directs those agencies to comply, to the same extent as any other person is required to do so, with both the procedural and substantive requirements of pollution control standards, including the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; Clean Water Act; Safe Drinking Water Act; and state and local laws and rules.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), P.L. 91-190. The National Environmental Policy Act directs federal agencies to consider the environmental impact of their decisions. NEPA requires BLM to prepare environmental assessments or environmental impact statements for the approval of Plans of Operations. Some states, such as Montana and California, have state laws similar to NEPA.
The 1970 Mining and Mineral Policy Act and The 1980 Natural Materials and Minerals Policy, Research, and Development Act. Both of these acts direct that the public lands be managed in a manner that recognizes the Nation's need for a domestic source of mineral production.
AIR QUALITY
The federal statutes pertaining to air quality protection are contained in the following acts.
Clean Air Act (CAA), P.L. 84-159 (Air Pollution Control Act; July 14, 1955), 42 USC 7401 et seq., as amended numerous times.
The objectives of the Clean Air Act are (1) to protect and enhance the quality of the Nation's air resources so as to promote the public health, welfare, and productive capacity of its people, (2) to initiate and accelerate a national research and development program to prevent and control air pollution, (3) to provide technical and financial assistance to state and local governments for developing and executing air pollution prevention and control programs, and (4) to encourage and assist the development and operation of regional air pollution prevention and control programs.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for developing standards, rules, guidance, and program oversight. The states have the primary responsibility for enforcing air quality regulations and standards as defined in an EPA-approved "state implementation plan," and may establish more stringent regulations and standards. These responsibilities may be further delegated to local authorities. Tribal governments are responsible for enforcing standards on their lands, based on EPA-approved "tribal implementation plans." BLM is responsible for assuring that all of its activities (either directly or through use authorizations) comply with all local, state, and federal air quality laws, regulations, and standards.
Specifically, under Section 118 of the Clean Air Act, BLM "(1) having jurisdiction over any property or facility, or (2) engaged in any activity ... which may result in the discharge of air pollutants," and each employee "shall be subject to, and comply with, all Federal, State, interstate, and local [air quality] requirements." These regulations apply to any action (whether substantive or procedural), to requirements to pay fees, to the exercise of any administrative authority, and to any process or sanction. In addition, these requirements apply "not withstanding any immunity of such agencies, officers, agents, or employees under any rule of law."
In addition, under Section 176, BLM "shall not engage in, support in any way or provide financial assistance for, license or permit, or approve, any activity which does not conform to an implementation plan..." Further, "The assurance of conformity to such an implementation plan shall be the affirmative responsibility of the head of such department, agency, or instrumentality." In essence, BLM must demonstrate that every decision or action it takes will comply with air quality requirements.
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), P.L. 94-579 (October 21, 1976), 43 USC 1701 et seq., as amended.
An Act; "to establish public land policy; to establish guidelines for its administration; to provide for the management, protection, development, and enhancement of the public land; and for other purposes."
Through the Secretary of the Interior, BLM is responsible for implementing FLPMA. As an "organic" act, FLPMA defines BLM's organization and provides the basic policy guidance for management of the Public Lands. Therefore, FLPMA is the primary law guiding all BLM activities; BLM should implement other legislation in a manner that conforms to FLPMA and its overall intent.
As stated in Section 102: "The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States that ... the public lands be managed in a manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archeological values; that, where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals; and that will provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use ..."
Land use plans (Section 202), which describe how the BLM will manage the public lands, must "... provide for compliance with applicable pollution control laws, including State and Federal air, water, noise, or other pollution standards or implementation plans ..."
A provision for revoking or suspending land use, occupancy, or development authorizations upon "a finding of a violation of ... applicable State of Federal air or water quality standard or implementation plan ..." is required under Section 302.
Finally, under Section 505, "each right-of-way [provision] shall ... require compliance with applicable air and water quality standards established by ... Federal or State law ..."
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), P.L. 94-580, as amended by the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 1980, P.L. 96-482, USC 6901 et seq. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) is the federal law governing management of solid and hazardous waste. RCRA divides wastes on two regulatory tracks: Subtitle D (solid waste) and Subtitle C (hazardous waste). In October 1980 Congress amended RCRA by adding Section 3001(b)(3)(A)(iii) (known as the Bevill exclusion or amendment) for solid waste from the extraction, beneficiation, and processing of ores and minerals. The Bevill amendment excluded such mining waste from regulation as hazardous waste under Subtitle C of RCRA, pending completion of a study and report to Congress. All extraction and beneficiation wastes and 20 special mineral processing wastes are excluded from RCRA Subtitle C regulation by virtue of the Bevill amendment (see 40 CFR 261.4(b)(7)).
RCRA emphasizes the primary role of the states in managing both conventional solid wastes and hazardous wastes. The legislation provided a federal support role with minimal enforcement and regulatory process for conventional solid wastes. Actual regulation and enforcement of solid nonhazardous wastes was left to the states, which were to follow broad guidelines established at the federal level.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) 42 USC 9601 et seq.; as amended by Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), P. L. 99-499, October 17, 1986. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the amendment of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) authorized response to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health, welfare, or the environment. The law outlines the procedures for reporting any environmental releases of a hazardous substance that exceeds a reportable quantity and also incudes provisions for permanent cleanups, known as remedial actions, and other cleanups referred to as removals. SARA created the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), a statute designed to improve community access to information about chemical hazards and to facilitate the development of chemical emergency response plans by state and local governments.
Uranium Mill Tailings Remediation and Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA), P.L. 95-604, Nov. 8, 1978; 92 stat. 3021; as amended by P.L. 95-106 , Nov. 9, 1979, 93 stat. 799; and P.L. 97-415, January 4, 1983, 96 stat. 2078. The Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) regulates mill tailings at active and inactive uranium mills that present a hazard to public health. The act provides that efforts must be made to stabilize, control, and dispose of uranium mill tailings in an environmentally sound and safe manner. UMTRCA provides (1) a program of assessment and remedial action at abandoned mill sites and (2) a program regulating mill tailings during processing at active processing mills.
Regulations for protecting ground water are not specifically included in the Clean Water Act. Authority to protect ground water is vested in the states. But the Clean Water Act clearly delineates the federal role in protecting ground water quality. Section 313 requires federal compliance with valid state and local government requirements to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity. Sections 208 and 106 provide the federal financial assistance and guidance to state and local governments for planning and managing ground water resources. Section 208b.2 requires that individual states develop processes to identify and control the following:
The disposition of residual wastes that could degrade the quality of surface or ground water.
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), P.L. 93-523, as amended by P.L. 95-190, 42 USC 300 et seg. In 1974 Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act, part C of which directed the Environmental Protection Agency to establish minimum requirements for effective state programs to prevent underground injection that endangers ground water resources of public supply systems. This program became known as the Underground Injection Control Program (UIC).
Under the Underground Injection Control Program injection wells are divided into five well classes for the purpose of regulations. Class III wells are used to inject fluids for the recovery of minerals such as solution mining of salts and sulfur and in-situ leaching of uranium, copper, or (experimentally so far) gold. Class V wells and for a while some class I wells have mining application for the disposal of hazardous or nonhazardous waste, including the use of mine wastes to backfill underground mines.
The purpose of the Safe Drinking Water Act is to protect the public health and welfare by assuring that the quality of drinking water provided by public water systems is adequate for human use. To meet this goal, the act provides for the following:
Under the provisions of Section 1447(a) of the act, BLM is required to comply with both the substantive and procedural requirements of the act. Specifically, Section 1447 directs that
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, P.L. 90-548, Oct. 2, 1968, 82 stat. 906 and as amended. Portions of this act provide for control of activities that are on land next to rivers and could cause or contribute to pollution of waters, or could degrade water quality through erosion and siltation of riverbank lands, and contamination of ground water sources feeding the river.
Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, May 24, 1977, 44 FR 1955. Executive Order 11990 directs all agencies to provide leadership and take action to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands according to the National Environmental Policy Act. The order covers aspects of federal activities affecting wetlands, including land management, facilities development, and licensing regulations. Agencies are asked to minimize the impacts of federal actions on wetlands and their related beneficial effects, such as ground water recharge. In carrying out any activities affecting wetlands, federal agencies must consider such factors as public health, safety, and, welfare, including such things as water supply and quality, recharge, and discharge areas for ground water, pollution, etc.
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, P.L. 89-665, as amended by P.L. 94 422, P.L. 94-458, and P.L. 96-515. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is the basic federal mandate for managing and protecting historic properties. Section 106 requires federal agencies to account for the effects of their actions on historic properties on public and private lands and allows the public, the State Historic Preservation Officer, and the President's Advisory Council on Historic Preservation to comment on federal undertakings before authorization. Section 110 requires agencies to systematically inventory all lands for historic properties and protect them through active management. Section 106 compliance has dominated the program. Amendments enacted in 1992 direct agencies to account for the effects of proposed activities on traditional cultural properties of American Indians, ranching communities, and other traditional lifeways. This law is implemented at 36 CFR 800, which is being revised in response to the 1992 amendment. The National Register aspects of the National Historic Preservation Act are implemented at 36 CFR 60, 63, and 68. BLM Manuals 8111 - Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation (Upland), 8141 - Physical and Administrative Protection Measures, and 8143 - Procedures for the Avoidance or Mitigation of Effects on Cultural Resources further implement the National Historic Preservation Act.
Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA) (P.L. 96-96). The Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) requires a permit for any excavation or removal of archaeological resources from public lands and provides civil and criminal penalties for violating permit requirements. Given these penalties, ARPA is the basis for most prosecutions and suits involving archaeological resources and provides the mandate for the Cultural Resources Use Permit System, as well as archaeological resource interpretive and education programs. ARPA requires the systematic inventory of all federal lands to locate and protect archaeological resources. ARPA is implemented at 36 CFR 296: 43 CFR 3 and 7 and in BLM Manual 8151 - Cultural Resource Use Permits.
Executive Order 11593. This order supplements the National Historic Preservation Act and Archaeological Resources Protection Act by directing federal agencies to locate and inventory all cultural resources under their jurisdiction and to ensure that actions do not affect significant cultural resources. It also directs agencies to consider the effects of their actions on nonfederal lands.
The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978, P.L. 95-341, and Executive Order 13007. Both of these require federal agencies to evaluate their policies and procedures to protect the religious freedom of American Indians. In American Indian religious practice any area can contain places that are significant for sacred practices or purposes. Those sacred places embodying spiritual values may have specific land forms, indigenous rock art, medicine wheels, rock cairns and effigy figures, spirit trails and spirit gates, caves, springs and lakes, Indian graves, and contemporary use areas. Although the act has no implementing regulations, it is of great political and cultural significance to American Indians. The act requires consultation with American Indians and consideration of an action's potential affects on religious practices and access to areas of religious importance.
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (P.L. 101-106). The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act pertains specifically to American Indian human remains, funerary items, sacred objects, and items of cultural patrimony removed from public lands. This law has two elements. The first vests ownership of Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act items with American Indians and requires agencies to consult with American Indians to repatriate them. The second requires ongoing consultation and coordination with American Indians about discoveries of Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act items during activities on public lands. BLM is consulting with American Indians on a project specific basis and is working with tribal governments to draft memoranda of understanding dealing programmatically with discoveries. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act regulations are now being written. BLM Manual 8161 and its consultation handbook give guidance for BLM consultation.
Executive Order 94-3175. This order directs federal agencies to deal with American Indian tribal governments on a government-to-government basis and to pay special attention to federal Indian trust responsibilities. Since this is a new order, no specific implementing policies are in place, and this order's implications for land management are being worked out in the field.
CAVE RESOURCES
The Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988 (FCRPA). The Federal Cave Resources Protection Act provides for the designation of significance based upon six criteria: biota, cultural, geologic/mineralogic/paleontologic, hydrologic, recreational, and educational or scientific values. Upon discovery, a cave is evaluated to determine its significance. If a cave is determined to be significant, its entire extent, including passages not mapped or discovered at the time of determination, is deemed significant.
The Endangered Species Act, P.L. 93-205 (1973), P.L. 94-359 (1974), P.L. 95 212 (1977), P.L. 95-632 (1978), P.L. 96-159 (1979), P.L. 97-304 (1982), P.L. 100-653 (1988). The purpose of this act is to identify and conserve species that are threatened or endangered with extinction. The act prohibits the taking of species listed as threatened or endangered, either directly or indirectly through habitat loss or modification. This prohibition applies to all activities regardless of land ownership.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, P.L. 86-732 (1960). This act is an international treaty that prohibits the taking of any migratory bird without permit or authorization. This prohibition applies to situations where, for example, migratory waterfowl land on a tailings pond or process solution pond that contains toxic levels of contaminants. Any resulting wildlife deaths would be (and have been) violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. This prohibition applies to all activities regardless of land ownership.
Executive Order 11987, Exotic Organisms, June 8, 1977. Executive Order 11987 directs all agencies to restrict the introducing of exotic species into natural ecosystems on land and waters that they own, lease, or hold for purposes of administration. This order also encourages states, local governments, and private citizens to prevent the introduction of exotic species into natural ecosystems of the United States.
Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971, P.L. 92-195, as amended by P.L. 94-579 (1976) and P.L. 95-514 (1978). This act protects wild free-roaming horses and burros, directing BLM and the Forest Service to manage such animals on public lands under their jurisdiction.
Bald Eagle Act of 1940, as amended by P.L. 92-535 (1972). This act protects the bald eagle and golden eagle by prohibiting except under certain specified conditions the taking, possession, and commerce of such birds.
SPECIAL STATUS AREAS
Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136) § 1133. Use of wilderness areas 43 CFR Ch. II Subpart 8560-(b) ... wilderness areas shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use. The objective of these regulations is to manage the public lands designated as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System to preserve and protect their wilderness character, provide for their use and enjoyment by the American people in a manner that will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and allow for recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use. Subpart 8560.4-6 describes mining law administration in wilderness areas. These regulations require that mineral operations be conducted to maintain the wilderness character unimpaired consistent with the use of the land for mineral activities and that all facilities must be removed within 1 year after operations cease. This section also requires that validity examinations be conducted before allowing mining operations in wilderness areas to determine if valid existing rights were present as of the date of withdrawal.
Research Natural Areas, 43 CFR Subpart 8223. No person shall
use, occupy, construct, or maintain facilities in a research natural area except
as permitted by law, other federal regulations, or authorized under provisions
of this subpart 8223.
(b) No person shall use, occupy, construct, or maintain
facilities in a manner inconsistent with the purpose of the research natural
area.
(c) Scientists and educators shall use the area in a manner that is
nondestructive and consistent with the purpose of the research natural area.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
Alaska has no "casual use" exemption, nor does it require a permit for disturbances of less than 5 acres. Notification for these operations is similar to BLM requirements. The use of suction dredges with intake diameters of 6 inches or less is exempt from regulation. Information for Notice- and Plan-level operations is submitted to DNR and BLM using the Annual Placer Mining Application (APMA). DNR in turn notifies all other involved agencies‹Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, etc. This notification simplifies the permitting process because the involved agencies are informed by the state, and miners do not have to do the work on their own. In accepting this form, BLM has reserved the right to request more information from the claimant or operator for the NEPA evaluation.
The Alaska definition of "project area" does not include roads and camp areas.
Performance Standards
Alaska has site-specific standards for surface water resources as well as operational and reclamation standards. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) sets ground water requirements on a site-specific basis. These requirements usually consist of standards set by EPA. DEC conducts monitoring. Variances can be granted on a site-specific basis. The state has topsoil and backfilling standards. Revegetation requirements are general, including stabilization of the site that allows for reestablishing the renewable resources on the site within a reasonable period of time by natural processes. The technology-based operational standards used are "best management practices" (BMP).
Alaska requirements governing cyanide operations or acid rock drainage are handled by DEC. The state has the authority to regulate all chemical applications used in mining.
Resource Protection Standards
Alaska does not have a specific statutory provision to protect threatened and endangered species, although Title 16 applies to fish and wildlife. Alaska has no specific regulation of caves and cave resources but offers statutory protection to both historical (National Historic Preservation Act) and archaeological and paleontological resources.
Alaska has no state National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) law or
process. Alaska uses a "large mine project process" for obtaining public input
in reviewing significant mines. No special provisions apply to consultation with
American Indian governments.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Alaska DNR Division of Mining consists of five people, including two inspectors. Operations are inspected when convenient or needed. There is no fixed schedule. The state handles bonding for BLM. Regulations for shut-down operations are similar to those proposed by BLM. Administrative actions are first used against an operator or claimant to remedy a noncompliance. When administrative actions fail, money for reclamation is acquired from the statewide bond pool. The state then pursues the operator or claimant in civil court to recover money spent on reclamation and administrative costs. Alaska statues define no specific criminal or civil penalties for mining.
Significant Differences
Substantive regulatory differences between the Alaska State Program and the existing 3809 regulations are in two areas: (1) Operations using 6-inch or smaller intake diameters are exempted from filing a Notice-type documents for suction dredging, and (2) no regulations provide for the specific control of acid rock drainage and cyanide operations.
While there is no "casual use" exemption as such, Arizona does not require a permit for disturbances under 5 acres. Notification for these operations is similar to BLM requirements. No state criteria exist for suction dredge thresholds.
Arizona's information requirements for Plans and Notices are functionally
equivalent to BLM's. The Arizona term for a project area is "mining facility."
The definition of mining facility appears consistent with the definition of
"project area" in both the existing and proposed regulations. But the State
Mined Land Reclamation Rules apply only to private land.
Performance
Standards
The State Department of Environmental Quality has a monitoring program as part of its Aquifer Protection Permit. The monitoring program applies to both surface and ground water.
The standards require the use of the "best available demonstrated control
technology" (BADCT). resources as well as operational and reclamation standards.
The state has standards for ground water and water quality monitoring under its
Aquifer Protection Permit. There are no standards for backfilling. The Aquifer
Protection Permit has revegetation requirements, but Arizona BLM's opinion is
that BLM should establish revegetation standards for postmining use. The Mining
Summit may resolve perceived conflicts. The State Mined Land Reclamation Rules
have topsoil and revegetation requirements, but the state rules do not apply to
BLM-managed land. The State Mined Land Reclamation Rules allow for variances
from an approved reclamation plan if the variance will not endanger public
safety and will not be inconsistent with the law. The state rules apply only to
private land.
The Arizona Department of Environmental
Quality regulates acid-forming rock and leaching facilities under its Aquifer
Protection Permit. Arizona BLM is unaware of any state-established inspection
frequencies for operations using cyanide or other leachates. Currently Arizona
BLM accepts the Department of Environmental Quality standards in the absence of
a showing that state standards will result in unnecessary or undue degradation.
Resource Protection Standards
The Arizona Department of Agriculture protects listed plant species, and the Arizona Department of Game and Fish protects listed animal species.
Arizona has authority to protect cave resources. There are provisions for environmental review and public participation of submissions to the Arizona State Mine Inspector, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.
Arizona protects state lands in conformance with both the National Historic Preservation Act and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, and burial sites for all lands within the state.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The state handles bonding for reclamation and mine closure. Bond criteria range from accepting a statement of financial capability to posting the required bond. Arizona does not require consultation with American Indian governments.
The state rules provide for a fine not to exceed $1,000 per day and not to exceed $15,000. The penalty for unreclaimed, shut-down operations is forfeiture of the reclamation bond. As previously stated, the state rules apply only to private land.
Significant Differences
Arizona and BLM have similar review and public involvement processes and
rules for controlling cyanide or other leachate and acid rock drainage. But
state rules apply only to private land, and the federal, state, and local
regulators have yet to establish firm policies for joint review of permit
applications. These policies and agreements are under
development.
Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) is based on the Public Resource Code, Division 2, Chapter 9, Section 2710 et seq. This act establishes procedures and standards that affect reclamation and the conduct of surface mining on private, federal, and state lands. The enforcement of SMARA is delegated to a lead agency, usually the county. (It could also be a city.) Additionally, the county can write its own ordinances that exceed the reclamation standards in SMARA.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is the California counterpart to the National Environmental Policy Act. CEQA requires California state and local agencies to determine the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those impacts, if feasible.
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is based on the Water Code 13000 et seq. and regulates the discharge of waste that could affect state waters subject to waste discharge requirements (WDR). One of six Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) reviews a mining proposal, holds public meetings, and requires a separate reclamation bond.
Fish and Game, Code Section 5650 makes it illegal to permit the passage of any substance deleterious to fish, plants, or bird life to the waters of the state, unless authorized by regional board waste discharge requirements or a federal permit for which Clean Water Act, Section 401 state certification is issued.
California Endangered Species Act, Fish and Game Code 2050 et seq., makes it illegal to "take" state-listed endangered, threatened, or candidate species, except as authorized by California Department of Fish and Game.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
Mining operations that disturb less than 1 acre or remove less than 1,000
cubic yards of material are exempt from the SMARA regulations. California has no
state equivalent to the 3809 definitions of casual use or Notice-level mining
activity. Plans are required for all cyanide operations regardless of size.
California's information requirements for permitting are generally more
stringent than BLM's. California's suction dredging regulations do not conflict
with BLM's. The California definition of project area does not include areas
outside the mining facility.
Performance Standards
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) contains detailed performance standards for mining within the state. The SMARA regulations (revised 1/97) are listed at code 3700, article 9, on page 22. The code includes the following:
3701. Definitions
3702.Financial Assurances
3703. Performance Standards
for Wildlife Habitat.
3704.Performance Standards for Backfilling, Regrading,
Slope Stability, and Recontouring.
3705.Performance Standards for
Revegetation
3706.Performance Standards for Drainage, Diversion Structures,
Waterways, and Erosion Control.
3707.Performance Standards for Prime
Agricultural Land Reclamation.
3708.Performance Standards for Other
Agricultural Land.
3709.Performance Standards for Building, Structures, and
Equipment Removal.
3710.Performance Standards for Stream Protection,
Including Surface and Groundwater.
3711.Performance Standards for Topsoil
Salvage, Maintenance, and Redistribution.
3712.Performance Standards for
Tailings and Mine Waste Management.
3713.Performance Standards for Closure of
Surface Openings.
Resource Protection Standards
California Endangered Species Act (Fish and Game Code 2050 et seq) makes it illegal to "take" a state-listed endangered, threatened, or candidate species except as authorized by the California Department of Fish and Game. The taking can lead to a misdemeanor prosecution, fines, and incarceration.
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) agency regulates historical, cultural, and archaeological sites.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
Under the SMARA regulations, enforcement, inspection, and bonding are decentralized to the 58 counties in California. Some of the more populated counties have full-time inspectors, but rural counties usually assign this task to the county planning or engineering department. Because of a lack of funding and trained technical people, some counties have ignored mining on federal lands and concentrated their efforts on private property.
Significant Differences
Substantive regulatory differences between the California state program and the existing 3809 regulations include the following:
1.The allowance for disturbance under 1,000 cubic yards per acre requires no Plan (casual use).
2.California has more stringent data requirements for mining plans.
3.California has no Notice-level operations; an operation requires a mining plan or is "casual use" per 3809.
4.Mandatory Regional Water Control Board reclamation bond can't be jointly held with any other agency, including BLM.
5.Counties charge mining proponents financial fees to review mine plans (actual expenses) and conduct mine inspections.
6.Some of the counties (e.g. Mono) have instituted mining ordinances that are careful to avoid zoning laws but onerous on environmental studies. The result is to discourage mining on both private and federal lands.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
Colorado does not have casual use or Notice thresholds for mining activity. Disturbances involving less than 1,600 square feet are exempt from regulation. Suction dredging is not regulated by DMG; it is presumed to be within the <1,600 sq. ft. exemption. The significant threshold in Colorado regulation is that between prospecting and mining. A notice of intent is required for prospecting, regardless of acreage disturbed. A permit application, and issuance of a Reclamation Permit, is required for all mining activity, regardless of disturbed acreage.
The Colorado information requirements for Plans and Notices are functionally equivalent to BLM's (generally more detailed and comprehensive) except possibly for prospecting involving more than 5 acres. Colorado's definition of project area excludes access, pipelines, and other facilities that lie outside the mine area.
Performance Standards
Colorado has extensive operational and reclamation performance standards but not a concept of best available technology and practices or best management practices. Strict engineering standards have to be met for operations involving cyanide leaching or acid rock drainage. Standards for ground water and surface water are all inclusive. The state conducts or requires water quality monitoring for certain operations, requires backfilling when suitable for site conditions, and has requirements for topsoil, recontouring, and revegetation. Colorado maintains comprehensive testing, control, and monitoring procedures for acid-forming and leaching operations. The state's performance standards are generally more comprehensive than BLM's, especially for operations disturbing less than 5 acres.
Colorado has authority to regulate cyanide and acid rock drainage operations but requires no set inspection schedule.
Resource Protection Standards
Colorado does not have a specific statutory provision to protect threatened and endangered species but does have special protection measures for fish and wildlife. Colorado considers protection to both historical (National Historic Preservation Act) and paleontological resources.
There is no state National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) law although Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board hearings provide a process for public involvement. Colorado does not provide specific statutory or regulatory protection under the National Historic Preservation Act or the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, or to caves or cave resources. No special provisions apply to consultation with American Indian governments, but they can request hearings before the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology consists of 18
people, including 15 inspectors. Operations are inspected as needed, depending
on the type of operation, resources involved, and operator. The state requires
bonding of all operations. Prospecting disturbance is bonded at a minimum of
$2,000/acre. Reclamation permits issued for mining require a bond for 100% of
expected costs of closure and reclamation Regulations pertaining to shut down
operations do not conflict with those proposed by BLM. Operating without a
permit, or in violation of the terms of a Notice/Permit results in civil
penalties and substantial fines. The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board
issues cease and desist orders and can seek injunctive relief in state court.
Significant Differences
Substantive regulatory differences between the Colorado state program and the existing 3809 regulations include disturbance of <1,600 ft2 and suction dredging not being regulated and all prospecting is considered Notice-level activity, regardless of acreage involved. Conversely, all mining is Plan-level activity. Colorado has no set inspection schedule for acid rock drainage and cyanide operations. Colorado requires that prospecting (notices of intent) remain confidential with the Division of Minerals and Geology. The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board issues reclamation permits for all mining operations.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
Idaho does not require a permit for suction dredging or placer mining involving less than half an acre, or for underground mining. The use of suction dredges with intake diameters of 8 inches or less is exempt from regulation. Notice-type documentation is required for exploration involving less than 5 acres, but this notification is required only after the fact.
The information required by Idaho for Plans is generally as comprehensive as that required by BLM. For Notices the state requires less detail. The Idaho definition of project area does not conflict with BLM's. It includes "overburden disposal areas, mined areas, mineral stockpiles, roads, tailings ponds, and other areas disturbed at the surface mining operation site."
Performance Standards
Idaho uses best management practices (BMP) operational standards for water resources. There are generally no variances. The state has specific, detailed standards for ground water and for water quality monitoring. Idaho has topsoil and revegetation standards and requires backfilling for mines where the pit is 2 acres or smaller. Where operations disturb 2 acres or more, all waste piles and depressions must be contoured to the lowest practicable grade. Idaho requires testing, control, and monitoring of acid-forming and leaching operations.
Idaho has requirements for governing testing, control, and monitoring of cyanide operations and acid rock drainage but no set schedule for inspections.
Resource Protection Standards
Idaho has statutory protection for threatened and endangered species as well as for fish and wildlife. Idaho has no state National Environmental Policy Act law, although the decision-making process allows for public involvement and review. Idaho does give statutory protection to historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources but not to caves and cave resources. Native American governments are given the opportunity to comment where affected by a proposed operation.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Surface Mining Section of the Idaho Department of Lands
consists of 10 people, all of whom are involved in field inspections. Operations
are inspected on a case-by-case basis, depending on the sensitivity of the
resources. The state handles bonding, with maximum bond coverage of $2,500/acre.
Regulations for shut-down operations require reclamation after 3 years and do
not conflict with BLM's proposed regulations. Civil penalties for noncompliance
with the rules or an approved plan provide for a penalty of not less than $500
or more than $2,500 for each day of violation after notice of violation. The
Director of the Department of Lands is also authorized to seek injunctive relief
against operators.
Significant Differences
The following provisions of the Idaho state program substantially differ from the existing 3809 regulations: suction dredges under 8 inches in diameter are exempt from permitting; no permit is required for underground mining; documentation for Notice-type operations is required within 7 days of the beginning of operations; no set inspections are required for cyanide and acid rock drainage operations; no specific state protection is given to cave resources; $2,500/acre is the ceiling for bond amounts.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
Montana does not have casual use or Notice thresholds, but the Department of Environmental Quality issues three types of permits under the Montana Metal Mine Reclamation Act (MMRA): an exploration license, a small miner exclusion statement (SMES), and operating permits. Mining of bentonite is covered under the Open Cut Act.
Under the Montana Metal Mine Reclamation Act an exploration license is required for any mechanized exploration, regardless of amount of land involved, including for road building and drilling, trenching, or construction of exploration adits or shafts.
Small-mine operators who disturb less than 5 acres and are not using chemical processing or engaging in placer mining may obtain a small miner exclusion statement.
An operating permit is required for all placer mines, mines using chemical processing, or mines disturbing more than 5 acres. General requirements include mine plans, processing plans, reclamation plans, monitoring plans, rock characterization and handling plans, and environmental baseline data (especially for water).
Performance Standards
All exploration disturbance must be reclaimed.
The small miner exclusion statement (SMES) exempts hardrock operators from performing reclamation. Nevertheless, the SMES operator still must comply with state water quality laws. Suction dredge operators must obtain a 310 permit from the county conservation district, regardless of suction dredge size.
Operating permit requirements vary by size, type, location, and complexity of
the project issues. All disturbed lands must be reclaimed to achieve comparable
stability and utility to adjacent undisturbed lands. Montana does not
automatically require mine pit backfilling, but backfilling is considered during
application review and environmental analysis. Areas not backfilled must be
mitigated to limit impacts as described in the Montana Metal Mine Reclamation
Act.
Under the Open Cut Act, bentonite operators need not reclaim
disturbance or obtain a mining permit (called an open cut contract) for
bentonite exploration or for mining of less than 10,000 cubic yards of material
from any one site. Above that level a mining and reclamation plan is required.
Resource Protection Standards
The issuance of permits to operators under the above acts is considered a state action and requires the Department of Environmental Quality to comply with the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). MEPA is similar to the National Environmental Policy Act, with provisions for public involvement and preparing environmental assessments or EISs. MEPA has no provisions for formal appeals, but Montana law allows for up to 90 days for filing suit in state court.
Montana has no state processes analogous to the National Historic Preservation Act for identifying and mitigating impacts to historic properties. Montana does have a requirement to consider cultural resources.
Montana also has no state law analogous to the federal Endangered Species Act or Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Since takings under these acts are prohibited independently of any BLM requirements, the state project review conditions approval on compliance with these federal statutes.
Montana has no formal requirement for government-to-government consultation between the state and American Indian governments similar to the federal process. As a matter of practice, however, the state involves the tribal governments much as they do the counties, and the MEPA process allows for active participation by any citizen or governmental unit.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Environmental Management Bureau consists of 19 people, including 13 inspectors. All permitted operations are inspected at least once yearly. Larger operations and operations using cyanide are inspected at least four times a year. Operations with potential for acid rock drainage are inspected as determined to be proper by DEQ.
For all exploration a bond must be posted in the amount of the estimated actual cost for the reclamation to be performed by the DEQ. For operating permits reclamation bonds are based on the actual cost for the agency to implement the approved reclamation plan. This bond amount is reviewed at least every 5 years. Several major mines have been required to provide long-term bonding for establishing trust funds. The trust funds are to be used for postclosure water capture and treatment over an indefinite period of time. A reclamation bond must also be posted for bentonite operations.
Violations of the above acts are punishable by fines. Failure to comply with other Montana environmental laws such as the Water Quality Act or Air Quality Act are also punishable by fine, and operations may be enjoined from continuing.
Significant Differences
Montana has no state requirement for reclaiming small operations that do not use chemicals and disturb less than 5 acres [SMES (small miner exclusion statement) Operations]. Montana also does not require small bentonite operators conducting exploration or mining less than 10,000 cubic yards, to reclaim disturbance.
Montana does consider small exploration projects disturbing less than 5 acres as a state action subject to the Montana Environmental Policy Act and requiring a reclamation bond, whereas BLM would not consider the same project a federal action subject to the National Environmental Policy Act and does not require a reclamation bond for Notice-level projects. The state bonds small exploration projects and small chemical processing and placer operations for reclamation. BLM cannot require a reclamation bond for these small projects conducted under Notices.
Locatable mineral activities that will ultimately become mining operations are regulated through a variety of state programs and permits. The Division of Minerals monitors mineral production and manages the State Bond Pool. The Division of Environmental Protection programs regulate air quality, solid waste management, hazardous waste management, ground water, and mining. Permits include air quality, solid waste management, hazardous waste management, ground water, mining, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge, storm water under NPDES, general permits, and underground injection control. The Division of Water Resources regulates the appropriation of public waters, tailings dam permits, and mineral exploration hole plugging. The Division of Wildlife monitors endangered wildlife, industrial artificial pond permits, and dredging permits. The Division of Health issues permits for sanitation facilities and radioactive materials licenses. The State Fire Marshal Division issues hazardous materials permits and monitors fire and life safety.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
Nevada does not require a reclamation permit for Notice-level operations under 5 acres or operations that mine less than 36,500 tons per year. Water pollution control permits (PCP) are issued for any size of operation that uses process fluids. Leaching operations require a PCP regardless of size.
Nevada does not have a "casual use" threshold or no specific criteria for suction dredging at a casual use level.
Information required for state permits is generally the same as that required
by BLM, except for riparian and wildlife habitat
information.
Performance Standards
Nevada has performance standards for ground water as well as monitoring requirements. The state has revegetation standards consistent with BLM and considers a requirement for backfilling open pits on a case-by-case basis. Open pits and rock faces, however, can be excluded by regulation. The state has the authority to regulate the testing, control, and monitoring of acid-forming materials (for pit lakes and dumps) and to control operations that use process fluids. Nevada performance standards cover air, water, and other resources and allow variances through a permit modification process.
Nevada generally inspects large mines that use cyanide or produce acid-forming materials three times per year or more, medium-sized mines three times per year, and small mines yearly.
Resource Protection Standards
Nevada does not have a specific statutory provision to protect threatened and endangered species and does not offer statutory protection to historical, archaeological, paleontological, or cave resources.
Nevada has no state NEPA law but uses a process for public involvement in the review and permitting process for mines. No special provisions require consultation with American Indian governments, but these governments can comment through the state's public comment process.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Bureau of
Mining Regulation and Reclamation consists of 18 people, including three
inspectors. Operations are inspected one to three times per year with no fixed
schedule unless problems are found. Then the frequency is increased. The state
handles bonding through a state bond pool for small operators up to
$1
million. The state also allows for corporate guarantees and holds bonds for
private lands. There is no bonding for Notice-level operations. Regulations
pertaining to shut-down operations differ from those proposed by BLM. Operators
are required to file a final permanent closure plan 2 years before shutting
down. Operations are allowed to shut down temporarily but must maintain site
integrity.
Significant Differences
Substantive regulatory differences between the Nevada state program and the existing 3809 regulations include no state equivalent for Notices for exploration less than 5 acres and no baseline information required for riparian or wildlife habitat for permits. Nevada accepts corporate guarantees in lieu of a bond, and BLM Nevada accepts the state's corporate guarantees. Nevada has no specific state statutes for threatened and endangered species, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, or cave resources protection.
Locatable mineral activities on
BLM lands in New Mexico are regulated by the Mining and Minerals Division (MMD)
of the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department under the
authority of the New Mexico Mining Act of 1993. The New Mexico Mining Act Rules
are published in New Mexico Statutes, Section 69-36-1, et. seq.
Permits are required for various levels of mining and exploration on the basis of the area of proposed surface disturbance, the volume of material to be removed, or both. The New Mexico Mining Act distinguishes between new and existing operations. Existing operations, those grandfathered at the time of the effective date of the act, are subject to less regulation than new operations. BLM surface management regulation standards are most comparable to the state's "new operations" standards. The state regulatory program applies to federal, state, and private land. It does not apply to Indian land.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
New Mexico has a casual use type exemption for "prospectors, gold panners, and rock collectors causing no or very little surface disturbance and not using mechanized sluices or dredges." To be exempt, excavations must involve less than 2 cubic yards/year.
New Mexico's Notice-type mining permit is called a general permit. A general permit is issued upon application, with the operator's agreeing to the permit terms upon signing it. A General permit (wet) is for operations in water, including all suction dredging, regardless of hose intake size. Wet operations must not exceed 2 cubic yards/day and 100 cubic yards/year. Dry operations must not exceed 200 cubic yards/year, with no more than 25/cubic yards and 2 acres unreclaimed at one time.
Plan-type permits (i.e. require an application, review, and approval) include
both exploration and mining and are categorized as minimal impact and other than
minimal impact. The minimal/ nonminimal impact threshold is based on the total
area of proposed surface disturbance, the total volume of material to be
removed, or both. Additionally, any permit, including a general permit, may be
upgraded to a nonminimal impact permit if the operation falls within or exhibits
at least one of nine disqualifying characteristics, which include disturbing
environmentally sensitive areas and other specifically listed environmental
risks, such as leaching operations and potential for release of acid or toxic
substances.
Information requirements and performance standards for state
permits are equivalent to those required by BLM regulations. The state's "permit
area" is equivalent to BLM's "project area."
Performance Standards
Operations must meet New Mexico State water quality standards as enforced by the State Environmental Department (ED), which regulates both surface and ground water quality. In conjunction with Mining and Minerals Division, the Environment Department, under state water quality regulations, can regulate the testing, control, and monitoring of acid-forming materials and control leaching operations.
The New Mexico Mining Act Rules include standards for topsoil and
revegetation. Backfilling
is required "only when needed to achieve
reclamation objectives that cannot be met through other mitigating measures."
The most appropriate technology and the best management practices must be used
in mining and reclamation. At least two inspections per year are required under
the Mining Act for all active mining operations. Under certain conditions, a
variance from a performance standard may be granted.
Resource Protection Standards
Under various authorities the State of New Mexico protects game animals and migratory birds. The State Wildlife Conservation Act protects state-designated threatened and endangered species, but this law lacks the enforcement authority of the federal Endangered Species Act.
The State of New Mexico has a cave protection law that protects caves, including those on federal land.
A variety of state historic and prehistoric resources protection acts (including protection of ancient burial sites) apply to state and private lands only. The National Historic Preservation Act and Archaeological Resources Protection Act apply to federal lands. BLM coordinates with the State Historic Preservation Division in enforcing these laws on federal land.
No state statutes are specific to protecting paleontological resources.
New Mexico has no state National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) law, but the Mining Act requires an "environmental evaluation" as well as public notification and participation as part of the permitting process. The Mining Act does not include any special provision for consulting with American Indian governments. Locatable-type mining activities on Indian lands are not regulated under the act.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Mining Act Reclamation, Bureau of Mining and Minerals Division consists of seven persons, five of whom perform inspections along with their other duties. Active operations are inspected twice a year.
Financial assurance (bonding) is required of all new operations except operations under a general permit and certain minimal impact operations. The amount of financial assurance is the cost of a third party to reclaim the operation.
An operator may qualify for a permit for standby status if operations are inactive for more than 180 days.
The state may issue a notice of violation (NOV) if the violation does not cause imminent danger to health and safety or significant imminent environmental harm. A NOV fixes a time for abatement and may involve a civil penalty. A cessation order (CO) is issued if a violation causes imminent danger to health and safety or significant imminent environmental harm or if a NOV is not timely abated. A cessation order may also involve a civil penalty.
Significant Differences
The state issues seven permits, depending upon whether an operation is new or existing; minimal impact or nonminimal impact; mining or exploration. The minimal/nonminimal impact thresholds are based on total surface disturbance, the amount of material extracted, or both. Additionally, nine specific resource and environmentally sensitive criteria can place a minimal impact permit into a nonminimal status. These factors preclude a direct comparison of the state permitting system with BLM's two-tier system.
New Mexico's Plan-type permits require financial assurance (bonding), but not all Notice-type permits require bonding. No financial assurance is required for general permits, minimal impact exploration permits, and minimal impact mining permits of less than 2 acres total disturbance.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
An Operating Permit is not required for mining less than 50 cubic yards within streambeds and streambanks or if an operation moves less than 5,000 cubic yards or disturbs less than 1 acre per year. All other operations require a permit and approval. Oregon's requirements for Plans and Notices are generally the same as BLM's. The Oregon definition of project area does not conflict with BLM's.
Performance Standards
Oregon has a chemical mining rule (Chapter 632, Division 37) governing operations that use leaching methods.
Oregon standards for ground water protection require that the operator maintain premine quantity and quality. Monitoring and reporting programs include surface and ground water, water balance of the process system, leak detection system, and fish and wildlife injury and mortality. The reclamation and closure plan section includes about 18 provisions for protecting public health, safety, and the environment. Backfilling is considered on a case-by-case basis. The technology based operational standards used are "best available, practicable, and necessary technology" for chemical processing.
Resource Protection Standards
The following provisions to protect fish and wildlife are developed by the Department of Fish and Wildlife: zero mortality, covering and containing wastewater facilities to preclude wildlife access, no overall net loss of habitat value, and no loss of existing critical habitat. Oregon offers statutory protection to historical (National Historic Preservation Act) and cultural sites (Archaeological Resources Protection Act), but not to paleontological or cave resources.
No state National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) law or process applies to mining operations. No special provisions apply to consultation with Native American governments.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Oregon Mined Land Reclamation Program/Department of Geology
and Mineral Industry consists of eight people, including four inspectors. Oregon
imposes civil penalties of not less than $200 per day and not more than $50,000
per day for any violation.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
Utah has a "casual use" type exemption. A permit is not required if no significant surface resource disturbance and no mechanized earth-moving equipment are involved. Recreational dredging and sluicing application provisions do not conflict with BLM's.
The DOGM issues three types of permits under the Utah Mined Land Reclamation Act: Notice of Intention to Conduct Exploration, Notice of Intention to Commence Small Mining Operations, and Notice of Intention to Commence Large Mining Operations. A Notice of Intention to Conduct Exploration does not require DOGM approval unless the proposed activity involves more than 5 acres. A Notice of Intention to Conduct Small Mining Operations does not require DOGM approval but may not exceed 5 acres at any time. A Notice of Intention to Conduct Large Mining Operations is filed on operations that disturb more than 5 surface acres at any time and must be approved by DOGM before mining begins. In addition, a reclamation contract must be executed before mining can begin.
The definition of "project area" is functionally equivalent to BLM's. Filing requirements are similar to the information BLM requires. An annual permit fee is required.
Performance Standards
Utah encourages the use of best available technology (BAT) for mining activity and best management practices (BMP) for water quality protection. The state has specific standards for ground water quality and may require ground water monitoring. Utah also requires suitable soil material to be stockpiled for later redistribution and recontouring. In addition, the site must be revegetated to 70% of premining vegetative ground cover. Roads, pads, dams, impoundments, trenches, pits, waste piles, and spoil piles must be reclaimed. Highwalls must be reduced, but open pits need not be backfilled.
Utah has authority to regulate the testing, control, and monitoring of
acid-forming materials or operations that use leaching. Utah also has standards
for ground water (BMP) that BLM does not have and provides variances for
operational and reclamation standards. Standards for Notice- and Plan of
Operations-type operations are similar to those required by BLM. DOGM requires
inspections of all mining operations but on an as-needed basis.
Resource
Protection Standards
Utah state law protects fish and wildlife, specifically threatened and endangered species, but not plant species. Utah offers statutory protection for archeological and paleontological resources but not caves and cave resources.
Utah has no state National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) law. The public is given notice and may appeal Board of Oil, Gas and Mining decisions only for large mining operations.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Utah Minerals Reclamation Program consists of five people, including three inspectors. Operations are inspected on an as-needed basis. Utah bonds Plan-type operations and exploration that disturbs more than 5 acres. Regulations for shutting down mining operations require state notification. Mining operations may have to be reclaimed after 5 years of continued suspension and must be reclaimed when the suspension periods exceed 10 years.
The Board of Oil, Gas and Mining may take any enforcement action authorized by law, including requiring the operator to comply, abate, mitigate, cease operations, forfeit surety, or reclaim an operation. In addition, a civil suit or any other lawful action may be taken.
Significant Differences
Substantive differences exist between the Utah state program and the existing 3809 regulations. Utah requires no set schedule for inspecting any mining operations, no protection for caves and cave resources, no protection for threatened and endangered plant species, and the collection of permit fees. Utah's archeological and paleontological resource statutes, while helpful, are not considered equivalent to federal laws.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
Washington does not require a permit for disturbing less than 3 acres, nor does it have special provisions for leaching operations.
The information that the State of Washington requires for plans is generally
equivalent to that required by BLM. The Washington definition of project area
does not conflict with BLM's, but surface mine access roads are not included in
the state definition of "disturbed areas."
Performance Standards
Washington State has a general requirement for preserving topsoil and for revegetation but no requirement for backfilling. The state does not require the testing, control, and monitoring of acid forming materials, and there is no state authority relating to operations that use leaching. Washington has no technology-based operational standards, such as best management practices or best available technology. Washington also has no requirements governing cyanide operations or acid rock drainage resulting from mining.
Resource Protection Standards
Washington has no state protection for caves and cave resources. It offers statutory protection to cultural resources (NHPA) but not to paleontological resources.
Washington has a State Environmental Policy Act, which is functionally equivalent to the National Environmental Policy Act and allows for public comment in the environmental review and decisionmaking process for mining. No special provisions apply to consulting with American Indian governments.
Significant Differences
The Washington State program and the existing 3809 regulations differ in that Washington has a 3 acre exemption on "casual use" type operations; has no specific requirements relating to cyanide or acid rock drainage; has no state protection for caves, cave resources, or paleontological resources; and has no technology-based performance standards.
Plan Threshold and Submission Requirements
The level of
noticeability of a perceived impact or disturbance dictates whether written
authorization is required by BLM or the Department of Environmental Quality. The
use of mechanical equipment or other methods that noticeably disturb the land
will always initiate permit, license, notice, plan, or other use authorization.
The Land Quality Division issues the following authorizations:
Wyoming has no acreage threshold per se for locatable mineral operations. Information required for Land Quality Division (LQD) authorizations is functionally equivalent to Notices and Plans required by BLM, except LQD requires information in much greater detail. The Wyoming definition of project area does not conflict with BLM's. The BLM and LQD cooperative agreement states the following: "Consistency must be maintained in the application of criteria for delineating the project areas. All lands included in a permit to mine, including roads, are part of the project area, but only the federal surface estate is subject to BLM review."
Performance Standards
Wyoming has standards for ground water resources as well as a monitoring program. The state requires topsoil preservation, revegetation, and partial backfilling. Wyoming also has authority to test, control, and monitor acid-forming materials for their impact to water quality but not operations that use leaching since Wyoming has no leaching operations. In situ uranium leaching is heavily regulated. The technology-based operational standards used are "best technology currently available."
Wyoming's performance standards for ground water are not covered by BLM. The state has a process to obtain variances to its performance standards. Notice-type operations are subject to the same performance standards as are Plan-type operations. The state has no specific requirements governing cyanide operations or acid rock drainage, but these operations would be permitted and inspected like other operations that could contaminate the land and surface and ground waters.
Resource Protection Standards
Wyoming has no specific statutory provision to protect threatened and endangered species, although fish and wildlife are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. Wyoming also has no state law like the National Historic Preservation Act for identifying and mitigating impacts to historic properties. But the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) is consulted before surface-disturbing operations. Wyoming offers no statutory protection to caves or cave resources unless they contain historic or cultural values.
Wyoming has a state National Environmental Policy Act law but uses a public process for obtaining input in the environmental review and decisionmaking process for mine approval. Wyoming has no special provisions for consulting with American Indian governments.
Enforcement, Shut Down, and Bonding
The staff of the Wyoming LQD consists of 45 people, including 24 inspectors. Permitted operations are inspected at least annually with other inspections as deemed proper by LQD.
The state has a bonding program for full reclamation of all mining operations. The bond is basically either $1,000 per acre of affected land or the estimated cost of reclamation as outlined in a written proposal computed by established engineering principles. Bond amount can be modified with justification.
If an operator is in noncompliance with the requirements of the permit to mine, a notice of noncompliance (NON) is issued. If the NON requirements are not met in the prescribed time action will be initiated to pull the bond, terminate the operation, and have the Wyoming Attorney General bring suit to recover cost of reclamation if the bond is inadequate. Persons violating the provisions of the Environmental Quality Act are subject to a temporary or permanent injunction and a penalty not to exceed $10,000 for each violation for each day during which the violation continues.
Regulations for shut-down operations allow for temporary cessation of
operations
for periods up to 5 years. State regulations do not conflict with
BLM regulations.
Significant Differences
The Wyoming Land Quality Division requires the bonding of all noticeable surface-disturbing operations whereas BLM cannot require a bond for Notice-level operations.
Regulatory differences between the Wyoming State program and the existing 3809 regulations include the following. Wyoming exercises some control of casual use-type operations; requires bonding for all operations; has no specific program for cyanide, acid rock drainage, and leaching (except in situ) operations; does not inspect cyanide operations since there are none; and offers no protection for cave resources.
APPENDIX E
CHANGES IN MINERAL
ACTIVITY
The following assumptions were used to project the amount of activity that might be reasonably foreseeable.
1. The rate of exploration will remain about the same in the United States. Dollars will continue to increase worldwide but overall remain constant within the United States.
2. Most domestic exploration will be for expansion of existing mines (satellites) rather than for new discoveries.
3. Existing mines will expand to take advantage of new technology and will increasingly extract refractory-grade ores. Technology will continue to advance.
4. Land/mineral base under federal ownership will remain the same in the
lower 48 states. In Alaska, claimants on lands that were or will be selected by
the State of Alaska have the option of maintaining a federal claim or switching
to a state claim. Virtually all placer mining in Alaska will eventually move off
public land.
5. The gold price trend will remain relatively
stable, based on 10-year averages. But an extended period of lower or higher
prices will affect short-term decisions.
6. The past trend in the number of mining Notices and Plans of Operations is an indicator of future level of activity.
7. The current geographic distribution of activity will stay the same. For example, large open pit gold mining will remain concentrated in Nevada. Placer mining will be concentrated in Alaska. Arizona will dominate large open pit copper mining. And industrial mineral mining will remain more evenly distributed across the study area.
8. Domestic industrial minerals production will continue to increase. The portion of total domestic production on public land will increase at a faster rate than the overall domestic rate of increase because previously patented lands will be mined out and production will continue to shift from the eastern to the western United States, where public lands are concentrated.
9. Gold production will remain constant on the basis of production over the 5-year period from 1992 to 1996, during which gold production has been more or less constant. Generally the number of mining operations will also remain constant. More mines are starting to close than open, but mining for industrial minerals will increase.
10. Industrial mineral operations will cause a comparable amount of surface disturbance as precious metals mines, but the degree of impacts will be lower, e.g. fewer water quality impacts.
11. Overall mineral activity on public lands, including the number of Notices and Plans of Operations filed with BLM, will remain steady or slightly decline. Projections on the number of Notices and Plans and acres of disturbance expected under current management are discussed in the Mineral Resource Development section of Chapter 3.
The changes in mineral activity estimates were based on interpretations by EIS team members of several information sources. These information sources include impact matrixes and mine cost models (discussed below) developed for this EIS, in addition to team member expertise, knowledge, and experiences. The processes for interpreting these information sources were not standardized. Each team member independently interpreted the impact matrices and mine cost model results. The team then compiled and discussed the estimates of change. At several other rounds estimates of change were collected, compiled, and discussed. Through this iterative process a group estimate was reached for each of the 10 mine types and sizes.
The process used by the EIS team to estimate change in mineral activity and also to construct the impact matrixes is generally referred to as the Delphi Method. The Delphi Method is a decision making or forecasting process designed to address highly complex or ambiguous issues where factual data is absent. The process was originally developed by the Rand Corporation, a U.S. intelligence "think tank." The process is widely accepted and used to forecast future events and outcomes.
Changes in mineral activity can be manifested in a several ways, including changes in exploration and mining operations, acres disturbed, mine life, cutoff grade, and annual production. The response to changes in the regulations will be unique for each operation. As such, the following discussion is limited to change in activity without attempting to define how that change may be manifested. Table E-1 gives a breakdown of the expected changes by type of mineral activity for each alternative except Alternative 1, where no change in activity is expected.
Table E-1. Percent Change in Mineral Activity | ||||||||||
Alternative | Recreational Mining | Exploration | Placer | Open Pit | Underground | Strip Mine | ||||
Small | Large | Small | Large | Small | Large | Small | Large | |||
2 | 0 | +<5 | +5 | +<5 | +5 | +<5 | +5 | +<5 | +<5 | +<5 |
3 | -<5 | -5 | -<5 | -5 | -<5 | -5 | -5 | -5 | -<5 | -<5 |
4 | -5 | -20 | -15 | -15 | -10 | -25 | -30 | -15 | -10 | -5 |
Alternative 2. The State Management Alternative would eliminate BLM's role in regulating activity under the Mining Law on public lands. In most states this regulatory approach is expected to reduce the regulatory burden to mining operations, thus increasing the level of mineral activity. Except for recreational mining, overall mineral activity on public lands is assumed to increase by 5% or less under Alternative 2. The greatest increase in activity is expected in larger mining operations, specifically those now requiring EISs with extensive baseline studies. But this reduction in regulatory burden and associated increase in activity would not occur uniformly in all states. For example, California and Montana have state versions of the National Environmental Policy Act. Proposed operations in those two states would not avoid the costs and time delays of preparing EISs. For a better understanding of the types of state programs in place, see Appendix D.
Alternative 3. For the proposed regulations it is assumed that the overall level of mineral activity on public lands under the Mining Law will decline by 5% or less. The proposal would likely have negligible affects on recreational mining or large exploration, placer, underground, and strip mining operations. The proposed regulations would, however, have a greater effect on small exploration and mining operations in addition to large open pit mines. Specifically, the financial guarantee and Notice/Plan threshold provisions would likely raise operating costs at small operations by about 30%. For large open pit mines the backfilling provision could greatly increase operating costs and reduce activity. But because of the discretion given BLM in the proposed backfilling provision, changes in costs and activity levels are extremely difficult to estimate and would likely vary by office.
Alternative 4. The alternative that is likely to most reduce overall mineral activity would also give the greatest level of environmental protection. Depending on the type of activity, Alternative 4 is assumed to reduce mineral activity by from 5 to 30%. Many of the provisions would reduce activity levels, including eliminating the Notice provision, requiring claim validity before mining, mandatory penalties and enforcement, automatic stays of all appealed decisions, mandatory backfilling, and establishing specific unsuitability criteria.
IMPACT MATRIXES
The regulatory provisions were grouped into 25 regulation components (e.g. Notice-Plan Threshold, Appeals Process and Stay Provisions, Performance Standards: Pit Backfilling), and 10 mine types and sizes (e.g. small placer, large open pit). Specialists on the EIS team independently rated the effect each regulation component would have on the different types and sizes of mines, using the following scale: negligible or none = N, low positive or negative = L±, medium positive or negative = M±, and high positive or negative = H±. The team then compiled and discussed the ratings. At several other rounds ratings were collected, compiled, and discussed. Through this iterative process a group rating was reached for each of the 25 regulation components. Tables E-2, E-3, and E-4 show the ratings for each of the provisions.
A similar process was used to obtain a weight for each of the regulation components. A weight (1 through 5) was intended to scale the relative importance of each of the regulation components. For example, the weight for the regulatory provision category covering Pit Backfilling was considered to have one of the highest relative importance, and was given a weight of 5. The Stability, Grading, and Erosion Control category, although important, was considered relatively less important and assigned a weight of 3. Definition of the Project Area was assigned a weight of 1, as it was considered one of the least important provisions relative to the other issues being considered in its potential to affect mining operations. The weights can be found in the second column, following the description of the regulation component, in each of the impact matrices.
The ratings and weighs were then used to estimate the anticipated effects of the 25 regulatory categories on each sector of the industry, the "score." To simplify the scoring, a numerical value category was assigned to a particular sector of the industry. Tables E-2, E-3, and E-4 show the scores for each of the regulatory provision categories.
Table E-5 presents a summary of the scores for all alternatives, broken down by the effects of administrative requirements and effects attributable to the environmental performance standards. To help put these scores in context, the greatest possible score for each alternative is a positive or negative 395.
Alternative 2 - Using this methodology, Alternative 2 received a relatively small positive score for both the administrative and performance standard requirements for all categories of commercial mineral activity. None of the provisions of Alternative 2 were expected to have any effect on recreation and hobby activities.
Several provisions of Alternative 2 were projected to benefit mining on public lands (Table E-2). Provisions with the highest positive scores include Notice and Plan of Operations content and processing requirements; fish and wildlife protection and restoration; wetland and riparian protection and restoration; and cultural, paleontological, and cave resource protection. These positive effects on mining mainly relate to reductions in the following: time delays for reviews and approvals, costs of content and analysis requirements, habitat restoration costs, and costs of documenting and salvaging cultural and paleontological resources.
Because Alternative 2 would rely entirely on the state programs to regulate mining on public lands, this positive effect would not be uniform across all states. For example, California and Montana have state National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) laws requiring comprehensive environmental review and public participation in the decisionmaking process similar to that currently required on public lands under NEPA. For these two states Notice and Plan content and processing requirements would likely have minimal benefits.
Alternative 3 - For most types and sizes of mining activities the proposed regulations received a relatively small negative score (Table E-3). For small mining operations, specifically Notice-level operations, adverse effects are expected to be somewhat higher than for the larger operations.
The Notice/Plan threshold and financial guarantee provisions are the administrative requirements with the greatest likelihood of adversely affecting mining operations. Except for financial guarantee requirements, large operations would not be affected by these proposed regulation changes.
The pit backfilling provision in the proposed regulations is the
environmental performance standard most likely to harm mining operations.
Because implementing this provisions would depend on site-specific conditions
and the discretion allowed BLM, it is difficult to even qualify the magnitude of
the effect across the industry. Clearly, this provision could greatly harm
individual open pit mines.
Table E-5. Impact Score Summary on Mineral Activity by Type and Size of Operation | ||||||||||
-
|
Recreation and Hobby Activity |
Exploration | Placer Mining | Open Pit Metal Mine | Underground Metal Mine | Industrial Mineral Mine | ||||
Small <5 ac. |
Large >5 ac. |
Small <5 ac. | Large >5 ac. |
Small< 5 ac. | Large >5 ac. |
Small <5 ac. | Large >5 ac. |
All Sizes | ||
Alternative 1 - No Action (Existing Regulations) | ||||||||||
Admin. Impact Subtotal | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Perf. Std. Impact Subtotal | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Alternative 1 - Total | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Alternative 2 - State Management | ||||||||||
Admin. Impact Subtotal | 0 | 16 | 29 | 16 | 29 | 16 | 29 | 16 | 23 | 23 |
Perf. Std. Impact Subtotal | 0 | 27 | 27 | 39 | 39 | 33 | 39 | 24 | 39 | 45 |
Alternative 2 - Total | 0 | 43 | 56 | 55 | 68 | 49 | 68 | 40 | 62 | 68 |
Alternative 3 - Proposed Regulations (Proposed Action and Preferred Alternative) | ||||||||||
Admin. Impact Subtotal | -13 | -49 | -27 | -55 | -30 | -80 | -27 | -71 | -24 | -31 |
Perf. Std. Impact Subtotal | -9 | -23 | -14 | -34 | -22 | -43 | -49 | -28 | -22 | -34 |
Alternative 3 - Total | -22 | -72 | -41 | -89 | -52 | -123 | -76 | -99 | -46 | -65 |
Alternative 4 - Maximum Protection | ||||||||||
Admin. Impact Subtotal | -41 | -75 | -50 | -109 | -80 | -115 | -82 | -121 | -82 | -95 |
Perf. Std. Impact Subtotal | -9 | -69 | -69 | -64 | -58 | -154 | -166 | -108 | -99 | -94 |
Alternative 4 - Total | -50 | -144 | -119 | -173 | -138 | -269 | -248 | -229 | -181 | -189 |
Both administrative and performance standards under Alternative 4 would have a moderate to high adverse effect. The administrative requirements with the greatest negative effect on mining under Alternative 4 include the Notice/Plan threshold, financial guarantees, claim validity, appeals process, and applying the new regulations to existing operations. The change to the Notice/Plan threshold would affect only operations that would be Notice-level operations under the existing regulations. The other provisions would harm operations regardless of size. Most all of the environmental performance standards would have a moderate to high adverse effect on at least some segment of the industry. Mandatory pit backfilling, for example, would have an extremely high negative effect on open pit mining. At the same time the backfilling provision would at most only slightly affect other forms of mineral activity.
MINE COST MODELS
The following data and assumptions are used to develop these models.
1.The operating and capital costs were developed from reference models presented in Mining Cost Services (Western Mine Engineering, Inc. 1997), section CM, Cost Models.
A. The following items are included in operating and capital costs:
B. The following items are not included in operating and capital costs:
*
Exploration
* Permitting and environmental analysis costs
*
Contingencies
* Access roads, powerlines, pipelines, or railroads to the mine
and mill site
* Home office overhead
* Taxes (except sales taxes)
2. Permitting, environmental, and reclamation costs are estimated from BLM experience in Nevada, Alaska, and Montana.
3. The equipment used to develop and extract ore from the mine will also be used in reclamation.
4. The costs of these regulations will be borne by the industry and not BLM. Costs are estimated for analysis purposes in these models.
5. Placer model costs are derived from Montana Placer Mining BMPs (best management practices) SP 106.
6. Time delays are not added to cost figures. It is assumed that operators will submit complete documents in a timely manner and that BLM will process projects on time. Time is given no monetary value.
7. Operators will comply with the regulations.
8. Acres disturbed are averages based on actual mine plans and notices submitted to BLM.
9. Costs for equipment were derived from Rental Rate Blue Book by K-III, Mine and Mill Equipment Cost by Western Mine Engineering, Inc. (1997a) and from bond calculations accepted by BLM.
10. Labor costs were derived from Mining Cost Service by Western Mine Engineering, Inc. (1997b), Davis and Bacon Wage Grade tables, and bond calculations accepted by BLM.
11. This analysis assumes that these costs will not be affected by regulation
changes. Regulation changes for this analysis will affect permit authorizations
and reclamation and closure aspects of mining.
12. Reclamation costs for
this analysis include chemical stabilization, removal of equipment and
structures, earth work, erosion and water controls, and revegetation.
13. Permit and environmental costs are averages obtained from the mining industry, environmental consultants, and BLM offices. These costs include all costs of preparing environmental documents under the National Environmental Policy Act, cultural work under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, and other acts as required to permit operations under existing regulations.
14. Bond costs are based on BLM policy. No bonding is required for Notice-level operations. Exploration Plans of Operation are bonded at cost or $1,000/acre, whichever is lower. Mining Plans of Operations are bonded at 100% of the cost for closing and reclaiming mines that have used chemicals and cost of reclamation or $2,000/acre, whichever is lower.
15. Stream restoration costs were derived from the Handbook for Reclamation of Placer Mined Stream Environments in Western Montana (INTER-FLUVE, Inc. 1991), prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The "stream and floodplain reconstruction" was used as the cost figures in these models.
16. All operations are assumed to be economically viable.
17. The amount of material (topsoil, waste rock) has been estimated for analysis purposes. The estimates will be used from model to model to show estimated changes in cost.
18. The mine models do not spread costs through the years of the project but assume that the capital costs will be accrued in years 1 and 2, operating costs over the life of the project, reclamation costs in the last 2 years of the project, and environmental and permitting costs in the first year.
19. The cost of a validity exam will be used for the cost of conducting a feasibility study under Alternative 4.
As discussed above, the main areas of impacts to the industry are in reclamation and permit/ environmental compliance. To better understand these relationships, the following theoretical costs have been derived for the models above. These costs were used as a basis for estimating economic changes in mining.
The following assumptions and models were used to address the analysis of the impacts from the regulations. These models were developed for comparison and theoretical purposes and will be used only for that purpose.
Project size: 4 acres disturbed
Project life: Less than 6
months
Proposed evaluation methods: Drilling (50 holes) and trenches (5) @
100'x5'x0'
Equipment: Truck-mounted self-contained drills, tracked
excavator (Cat 231D), dozer (Cat D7H)
Permitting: Notice-level, 15 days
to complete; no federal/state joint
Permitting and environmental costs are difficult to determine by a
generalized method. The costs of permit authorizations and environmental
documentation vary greatly because of site-specific conditions. Depending on the
ore body sought, its location, and other local environmental conditions, the
costs can cover a broad range. For the following costs, several mining companies
and consultant firms were contacted, and average costs were derived. These costs
are described below and are detailed in Table E-6.
This
exploration operation would file a Notice, and no bond or environmental
documents would be required. All actions would be handled by the local BLM
office with which the Notice is filed. The only cost to the operator would be to
prepare the document to be submitted to BLM. Two people would need 3 days with
AutoCAD support to complete the documentation for the Notice, at a cost of
$1,000.
Reclamation Costs
Earthwork would include ripping all roads and drill pads, recontouring roads and pads, and plugging drill holes. The work would take 20 hours to complete. Each piece of equipment would operate for 10 hours. The 50 dry drill holes, 200 feet deep, would be backfilled with drill cuttings. This work would take one operator an extra half hour to complete. Equipment needs include a bulldozer and a tracked excavator at a cost of $2,200. Labor costs are estimated to total $1,600 for two equipment operators. Drill hole plugging is estimated to result in additional labor costs of $100. For revegetation, no ground preparation is needed for seeding. The model assumes that the project is completed during good seeding times of the year. The seed mixture would be a combination of native and exotic plants as outlined in the open pit model. The priority is to stabilize the soil. An estimated 4 hours would be needed for seeding. Because of the nature of this operation, chemical stabilization and removal of structures would not be needed.
Table E-6. Exploration Model Costs | |||
Description of Activity | Cost Item | Unit Cost | Total Cost |
Permitting (Notice Preparation) |
2 people, 3 days each | $500 ea | $1,000 |
Exploration Activity: Operating Cost - Labor Operating Cost - Equipment Exploration Activity Total |
50,000 150,000 200,000 | ||
Reclamation: Earthwork Equipment Labor |
1 dozer (Cat D7H) - 10 hrs 1 tracked excavator (Cat 231D) - 10 hrs 2 equipment operators, 20 hrs each 1 operator, 2.5 hrs 4 acres 1 laborer, 4 hrs 2 vehicles ton 4X4 pickup, 1 day environmental manager, 8 hours |
120/hr 100/hr 40/hr each 40/hr 56/ac 28/hr 500/vehicle 40/day 25/hr |
1,200 1,000 1,600 100 225 112 1,000 40 160 5,437 |
Total Cost of Exploration Project | $207,33 7 |
Miscellaneous Costs
The equipment to complete reclamation is
assumed not to be located at the site. Therefore, mobilizing and demobilizing
the equipment would involve more costs to industry. The operation usually would
require 8 hours of supervision (employed by the company) to ensure that
reclamation is completed correctly.
Alternative 1 - Current Management
Costs would not change under Alternative 1 since the regulations would not change.
Alternative 2 - State Management
Alternative 2 is based on individual states taking over the surface management of mining on public lands. Estimating costs for this alternative for each of the 12 states in the study area would be impractical for this exercise. Therefore, the following cost calculations assume that the state program is based on current BLM regulations, with a few differences. A review of state programs found that most states appear to be similar in posting bonds for reclamation and in reclamation and surface and ground water requirements. States appear generally not to review operations smaller than 5 acres but to require reclamation. The states do not generally review documents for such matters as cultural resources, cave resources, and wildlife.
This analysis assumes that the state will not require any information to be submitted because the project occupies less than 5 acres. The state will still require reclamation and monitor the activity area for compliance.
Permitting and Environmental Costs. The operator would not have to submit a Notice to BLM and usually would not have to submit anything to the state. The operator would therefore save the direct cost of document preparation. An operator making project changes would save time by not having to contact BLM. By not having to prepare a Notice, the operator would save about $1,000 (assuming Notice preparation would take two people 3 days to complete).
Reclamation Costs. This analysis assumes that the state requires reclamation. The company would have to reclaim any disturbance from its operation. The analysis also assumes that reclamation would not require restoring wildlife and fisheries habitat. For exploration operations this restoration could be represented by the types of seed mixtures used. The analysis assumes that the state will require only grasses to stabilize soils. Using the seed mixture in the open pit model and using only the grasses in the mixture would bring the cost to only $28/acre instead of $56/acre. A total of $112 would be saved on revegetation costs (assuming per-acre savings of $28 for seed mixture).
Total Estimated Cost Changes. Total cost savings for this exploration project under Alternative 2 are summarized in Table E-7.
Table E-7. Alternative 2: Changes in Costs for Small Exploration Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 1 (Existing regulations) | $207,337 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 2 due to Elimination of Notice preparation Change in Seed Mixture Total Change in Costs under Alternative 2 |
(1,000) (112) (1,112) |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 2 (State Management) | $206,225 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 2 | - 1 % |
Table E-8. Alternative 3: Change in Costs for Small Exploration Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 3 | $207,337 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due to Bonding Total Change in Costs under Alternative 3 |
106106 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 3 | 207483 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 3 | 0% |
Change in Costs Assuming Plan of Operations
Required and Validity Exam is Conducted | |
Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due
to Bonding Plan Preparation Environmental Assessment Validity Exam Total Change in Costs under Alternative 3 |
106 2,500 80,000 10,000 92,606 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 3 | $299,943 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 3 | + 31% |
Table E-9. Alternative 4: Change in Costs for Small Exploration Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 4: | $207,337 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 4 due
to: Bonding Plan Preparation Environmental Assessment Third-Party Monitoring Drill hole Plugging Topsoil Management Revegetation with Natives Validity Exam Total Change in Costs under Alternative 4: |
129 2,500 80,000 1,500 17,400 300 155 10,000 111,984 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 4: | $319,321 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 4: | + 35% |
Resource size: 1,000,000 bcy
Production rate: 500 lcy per day
Mine
life: 10+ years
Average grade: $4 per bcy @ $300/oz.
Overburden: < 14
feet
Pay gravel: <4 feet
Equipment used:Dozer (D8), Excavator (235),
mobile washplant (hopper, vibrating screen, 4' x 30' single sluice, 1200 g.p.m.
water use)
Crew: 3 workers
Camp: one-site small trailers and temporary
sheds
Fuel storage:1,000 gallons in portable tanks with spill containment,
bio- treatment facility onsite
Permitting:Environmental assessment completed,
2 months to complete, joint state coordination
Reclamation: Recontouring and
revegetation, stream restoration, concurrent with mining
Note: This operation would require some recontouring of the waste rock. The waste piles would be both in the old part of the pit and out of the pit at a 2:1 slope.
Permitting and Environmental Costs. Permitting and environmental costs are hard to determine in a generalized way. The costs of permit authorizations and environmental documentation greatly vary with site-specific conditions. Depending on the ore body and its location and other local environmental conditions, the cost can cover a board range. For the following costs several mining companies and consultant firms were contacted. These costs are averaged and are shown in Table E-10.
Plans of Operations. The operation would be filed under a Plan of Operations. The operator would pay for the environmental analysis, which would include a wetlands study, steam restoration/reclamation plan, cultural survey, and a wildlife/fisheries field study.
Bonding. The model assumes that the operator is buying from an agency
an annuity bond, for which the operator would pay an insurance premium, which
would cost an estimated 2% of the bond amount per year. The model further
assumes that the operator has a good credit rating and has the assets to back
the bond. The bond would be for reclaiming the site at $2,000/acre or for
$24,000. The bond would be assessed at 2% for 10 years and would cost
$2,400.
Reclamation Cost Estimation. Placer mining is a
form or strip mining that usually operates within stream channels. The area
would be recontoured concurrently with the production of the gravels. The
overall size of the operation would be 12 acres, but at the end of the operation
only 6 acres should be reclaimed. The operation would require more reclamation
for repairing any stream channels and restoring habitat. The mine would include
sediment ponds and other sediment and control structures.
Stream Restoration. There are very few references for the costs of stream restoration. This model used published data from EPA's Handbook for Reclamation of Placer Mined Stream Environments in Western Montana (INTER-FLUVE, Inc. 1991). The figures listed in this document are assumed to cover regrading and stream recontouring, topsoil placement, revegetation, and wildlife work. Topsoil is required only on the floodplain and would not be spread in the channel. Seeds would be broadcast by hand. Stream restoration would include establishing vegetation, reconstruction, and building structures for habitat. The channel dimensions would be 2 feet deep by 8 feet wide by 1 mile long at a 3% slope.
The documentation for reclamation shows several costs, depending on the type of work completed. Table 12 of EPA's Handbook for Reclamation of Placer Mined Stream Environments in Western Montana (INTER-FLUVE, Inc. 1991) shows the cost of stream and floodplain reconstruction to be $7 to $17/foot. This model assumes $10/ft for wildlife and fish restoration.
Chemical Stabilization. The mine would use no chemicals that involve closure issues. Sediments would be reclaimed during recontouring.
Structure Removal. Structure removal would consist mainly of removing process buildings, office trailers, maintenance shop, and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipelines used by the project. The model assumes that three workers would take 10 days to remove the facilities. The complete operation is portable and can be easily transported.
Table E-10. Placer Model Costs | |||
Description of Activity | Cost Item | Unit Cost | Total Cost |
Permitting Plan Preparation EA preparation
|
Two People 5 Days with Computer Support
Includes Wetlands study Restoration/reclamation plan Wildlife/fisheries studies Cultural survey Bond Cost |
5,000 5,000 10,000 10,000 2% for 10 yrs |
2,500 80,000 2,400 84,900 |
Placer Mining Activity: Capital Cost Operating Cost - Labor Operating Cost - Equipment Exploration Activity Total |
250,000 425,000 300,000 $975,000 | ||
Reclamation: Stream Restoration Structural removal Mob/Demob Reclamation Total |
Based on EPA Reference 2.5 Ton Truck for 10 Days 1 Tracked Excavator (Cat 231d) -20 Hrs 2 Vehicle 3 Person Crew for 10 Days at 10 Hours/day |
10/foot 60/day 100/hr 500 27/hr |
52,800 600 2000 1000 8,100 64,500 |
Total Cost of Placer Project | $1,124,4 00 |
Alternative 2: State Management
Alternative 2 is based on the
states taking over the surface management of mining on public lands. Determining
costs for this alternative for all of the states involved in mining would not be
practical for this exercise. Therefore, the following cost calculations would be
based on the assumptions that the state program would based on current BLM
regulations. A review of the state programs reveals that they are similar in
posting bonds for reclamation and in surface water, ground water, and
reclamation requirements.
This analysis assumes that the state would require a Plan of Operations,
reclamation, the posting of bond, and monitoring for compliance, but no
environmental review for such aspects of the project as cultural resources, cave
resources, and wildlife.
Permitting and Environmental Costs.
Plan of Operations Preparation. The operator would have to submit a Plan to the state but not to BLM. The operator would still produce a Plan of Operations, but the plan would not be subject to environmental review, and the operator would not have to pay for an environmental assessment.
Reclamation Costs.
Stream Restoration. This analysis assumes that the state would require reclamation. The company would have to reclaim any disturbance resulting from their operation, but reclamation would not require restoring wildlife and fisheries habitat.
The documentation for restoration shows several costs, depending on the type of work completed. Table 12 in EPA's Handbook for Reclamation of Placer Mined Stream Environments in Western Montana (INTER-FLUVE, Inc. 1991) shows stream and floodplain reconstruction to be $7 to 17/foot. Assuming that wildlife and fisheries habitat would not be restored, the cost would be $7/foot.
Total Estimated Cost Changes. Total cost savings for this Placer project under Alternative 2 are summarized in Table E-11.
Table E-11. Alternative 2 -- Changes in Costs for Placer Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 1 (Existing Regulations) | $1,124,400 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 2 Due to Elimination of Environmental Review Change in Stream Restoration Cost Total Change in Costs under Alternative 2 |
(80,000) (15,840) (95,840) |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 2 (State Management) | $1,028,560 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 2 | - 1 % |
Table E-12. Alternative 3 -- Change in Costs for Placer Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 3 | $1,124,400 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due to Bonding
Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due to Reclamation Total Change in Costs under Alternative 3 |
100 003690046900 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 3 | 1171300 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 3 | +4% |
Change in Costs Assuming Validity Exam is Conducted | |
Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due to Validity Exam | 10000 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 3 | $1,174,100 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 3 | + 5% |
Table E-13. Alternative 4 -- Change in Costs for Placer Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 4: | $1,124,400 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 4 due to: Stream Restoration Third-Party Monitoring Bond Validity Exam Total Change in Costs under Alternative 4 |
110,880 20,000 10,000 10,000 150,880 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 4 | 1275280 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 4 | + 13% |
Resource size: 1 million tons
Production rate: 250 tons per day
Mine
life: 10+ years
Overburden: 4 feet, no waste rock expected
Pay layer: 4
feet
Equipment used:Dozer (D8), excavator (235), front-end loaders, rear dump
trucks, road graders, percussion drill, stationary washplant (hopper, vibrating
screen, concentration/flotation mill, 1200 gpm water use)
Crew: 15 workers
Housing: nearby towns
Fuel: 5,000 gallons in portable
tanks
Permitting: Environmental assessment completed, 3 months to complete,
joint state federal coordination
Reclamation: Recontouring and revegetation
concurrent with mining
Note: This model assumes an industrial mineral and
little overburden that is not reclaimed in the strip mining process and that a
petroleum biotreatment facility is onsite for cleaning up petroleum spills. A
construction waste landfill is also onsite.
Permitting and Environmental Cost
Permitting and Environmental costs are hard to determine by a generalized method. The cost of permit authorizations and environmental documentation greatly vary by site-specific conditions. Depending on the ore body and its location and other local environmental conditions, the cost can cover a broad range. The following costs were derived from information obtained from several mining companies and consultant firms. These costs were averaged and are described below.
Processing Cost. The operation would file a Plan of Operations. The
operator would pay for the environmental analysis, which would include a
wetlands study, steam restoration/ reclamation plan, cultural survey, and a
wildlife/fisheries field study.
Bonding. This model assumes that
the operator is purchasing an annuity bond for which it would pay an annual
insurance premium of 2% per year for 10 years. The model further assumes that
the operator has a good credit rating and has the assets to back up the bond.
The bond amount for this project is $24,000.
Reclamation
Cost
Earthwork. The model assumes that strip mining methods
are used to extract most industrial minerals even though strip mining is only
one of several ways industrial minerals are mined. The basic model is for
bentonite- and gypsum-type deposits. No chemicals would be used to process the
material, and the material's final processing is off site. The earthwork would
consist of recontouring and covering with topsoil the roads, ancillary
facilities, and the last strip pit. Strip mining applies ongoing concurrent
reclamation, with each mined strip being refilled with the waste rock from the
next pit and covered with topsoil. The calculations, therefore, address only the
final phase of earth work and revegetation for the operation.
Cost of regrading.
Production rate
Equipment = D9N. and U Blade
Average dozing distance =
270 ft
Production = 300 yd3/hr
Correction factors
Operator average =
0.75
Material - loose stockpile/.ripped or blasted = 1.20 or .08
Type
dozing - slot to side by side = 1.20
Job efficiency = 0.83
Weight
correction = 0.83
Hourly Production rate = 223 yd3/hr
Cost
Rates
Bulldozing (D9N) = $155/hr
Operator = $40/hr
Using the above data, the following table estimates equipment and labor costs for regrading.
Acres | Cubic Yards | Hours | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 10 | 1200 | 54 | $18,390 | $2,160 |
Roads* | 40 | 10000 | 448 | $69,440 | $17,920 |
Ancillary Facilities | 15 | 15000 | 67 | $19,385 | $2,680 |
Cost of Recontouring | $107,215 | $22,760 |
Production rate
Equipment = 615 Scraper
Capacity = 16 yd3
Average
haul distance = 1000 ft
Cycle time
Cycles per hour = 13.33 cycles per
minute
Correction factors
Load factor = 0.9
Job efficiency =
0.83
Eff. Load capacity = 14.4 yd3
Hourly production= 159.4 yd3/hr
Cost
Rates
615 scraper = $100/hr
Operator = $ 40/hr
From the above data, the following table estimates equipment and labor costs for applying topsoil.
Acres | Cubic yards | Hours | Equipment cost | Labor cost | |
Waste Rock | 10 | 24200 | 152 | $15,200 | $6,080 |
Roads | 40 | 96800 | 608 | 60800 | 24320 |
Ancillary Facilities | 15 | 36300 | 228 | 22800 | 9620 |
Cost of applying topsoil | $98,800 | 40020 |
Acres | Hours | Equipment Cost ($) | Labor Cost ($) | |
Waste Rock | 10 | 10 hrs grader 3 hrs drill |
800150563 | 400162 |
Roads | 40 | 40 hrs 13 hrs |
32006502252 | 1600202 |
Ancillary Facilities | 15 | 15 hrs 5 hrs |
1200250844 | 600270 |
Revegetation Cost | 9909 | 3234 |
Table E-14. Strip Mine Model Costs | |||
Description of Activity | Cost Item | Unit Cost | Total Cost |
Permitting Plan Preparation
|
Two people five days, w/ computer support Includes: Wetlands study Restoration and reclamation Wildlife/fisheries studies Cultural survey Estimated bond $24,000 |
$5,000 $5,000 $10,000 $10,000 2% for 10 yrs |
$2,500 $80,000 $2,400 $84,900 |
Open Pit Operation: Capital Cost Operating Cost - Labor Operating Cost - Equipment Exploration Activity Total |
$400,000 $1,800,000 $240,000 $2,440,00 0 | ||
Reclamation: Earth Work Regrading Equipment*: Labor*: Applying top soil Equipment*: Labor*: Revegetation Equipment* Labor*: Total earth work and revegetation Structural removal Equipment Labor Total Structural removal Reclamation Total |
D9N Dozer operator 615 Scraper operator : 14-G Grader Small Tractor and seed drill Seed mixture Grader operator 2 laborers 2.5 ton truck for 80 days Ho-lift equipment, 24ft boom-7.7mt lift D9N Dozer for 2 days 5 person crew for 80 days at 8 hours/day |
$155/hr $40/hr $100/hr $40/hr $80/hr $50/hr $56.30/ac $40/hr $27/hr $60/day $165/day $155/hr $27/hr |
$107,000 $22,760 $98,800 $40,080 $10,000 $3,234 $282,000 $7,370 $32,400 $39,770 $321,800 |
Total Cost of Open Pit Project | $2,846,70 0 |
Alternative 2: State Management
Determining the costs of the
State Management Alternative for all of the states in the EIS study area would
not be practical for this exercise. Therefore, the following cost calculations
assume that the state program is based on current BLM regulations. A review of
the state programs reveals that they are similar in requirements for posting
bond for reclamation, surface and ground water, and reclamation.
This analysis assumes that the state would require that a plan of operations be submitted. The state would still require reclamation, the posting of bond, and monitoring for compliance. The analysis further assumes that no environmental review of the project would be required for cultural resources, cave resources, or wildlife.
Permitting and Environmental Cost.
Processing Cost. The operator would have to submit a plan of operations to the state but not to BLM. The project would not undergo environmental review, and the operator would not have to pay for an environmental assessment.
Reclamation Cost. The state requires reclamation. The company would have to reclaim any disturbance caused by the operation.
Reflecting general state programs, reclamation is required for soil and slope stabilization only. Therefore, this analysis assumes that the state would require only grasses for soil stability and that wildlife and fisheries habitat would not have to be restored.
The seed mixture under Alternative 2 would contain the following grasses:
Seed Mixture.
Species $/lb (PLS) Drilled rate Price/ac
Slender Wheatgrass $1.25/lb 3 lbs $3.75/ac
Western Wheatgrass $3.00/lb 2
lbs $6.00/ac
Basin Wildrye $5.60/lb 1 lb $5.60/ac
Thickspike Wheatgrass
$8.25/lb 0.5 lb $4.15/ac
Sandberg Bluegrass $26.00/lb 0.25 lb
$13.00/ac
Total $32.50/ac
The following cost calculations show the cost for the seed mixture under Alternative 2.
Waste Rock 10 acres 325.00
Roads 40 acres 1,300.00
Ancillary Facilities
15 acres 487.50
Total $2,112.50
Total Estimated Cost
Changes. Total cost savings for this strip mine project under
Alternative 2 are summarized in Table E-15.
Table E-15. Alternative 2 -- Changes in Costs for a Strip Mine Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 1 (Existing regulations) | $2,846,700 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 2 due to Elimination of Environmental review Change in Seed cost Total Change in Costs under Alternative 2 |
(80,000) (1,500) (81,500) |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 2 (State Management) | $2,765,200 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 2 | - 3 % |
Table E-16. Alternative 3 -- Change in Costs for a Strip Mine Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 3 | $2,846,700 |
Change in Costs due to Bonding Total Change in Costs |
6194261942 |
Total Project Costs | 2911642 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 3 | +2% |
Change in Costs Assuming Validity Exam Is Conducted | |
Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due to
Bonding Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due to Validity Exam |
6194230000 |
Total Project Costs | $2,941,642 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 3 | +3% |
Acres | Quantity | Hours | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 10 | 24200 | 168 | $16,800 | $6,720 |
Roads | 40 | 96800 | 672 | 67200 | 26880 |
Ancillary Facilities | 15 | 36300 | 252 | 25200 | 10080 |
Cost of Applying Topsoil | 109200 | 43680 |
Using the above data, the following table estimates equipment and labor costs for revegetation.
Acres | Time | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 10 | 10 hrs grader 3 hrs drill total |
$800 150 950 |
$400 162 |
Roads | 40 | 40 hrs 13 hrs total |
32006503800 | 1600202 |
Ancillary Facilities | 15 | 15 hrs 5 hrs total |
12002501425 | 600270 |
Cost of Revegetation | 12425 | 3234 |
Wetlands. Alternative 4 requires that all wetlands be restored within 10 years after final closure and reclamation of the operation. If this restoration is not possible, then 1.5 times the amount disturbed or lost would need to be replaced. Reclamation is usually successful in restoring wetlands to proper functioning condition within 10 years. But open pit operations do remove wetlands in placing the pit and waste rock dumps. This model assumes that 10 acres of wetlands would be lost with the replacing of waste rock dumps.
Offsite mitigation is estimated to cost the same as stream restoration under Alternative 4 of the placer mining model. For alternative 4 the model assumes $2,500/acre (INTER-FLUVE, Inc. 1991), which is needed to meet the 10-year requirement for properly functioning condition for wetlands. A stream restoration cost of $2,500/acre was used for this alternative. The project would reclaim 15 acres at a cost of $37,500.
Total Estimated Cost Changes. If the exploration operation is not in an area withdrawn for minerals, the project would incur the costs shown in Table E-17.
Table E-17. Alternative 4 -- Change in Costs for a Strip Mine Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 4: | $2,846,700 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 4 due to: Bond Cost Third-Party Monitoring; 40 hrs at $50/hr/year for 10 years Applying Top Soil Revegetation Cost Soil Stabilization Validity Exam Wetland Restoration Total Change in Costs under Alternative 4: |
61,942 20,000 152,880 2,516 87,120 30,000 37,500 391,958 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 4: | $3,238,658 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 4: | + 12% |
Resource size: 7,000,000 tons
Production rate: 4,000 tons per day
mine life: 6 years mining and 4 years reclamation
Average grade: 0.053
oz. per ton @ $300/oz. Strip ratio: 2:1
Pit dimensions: 1000 ft x 900 ft x
130 ft deep
Equipment used:Rotary drill (GD-25C), hydraulic crawler drill
(HDR12E), air compressor, 4 loaders (988-B), four 50-ton rear-dump trucks (733),
dozer (D-8) dozer (TD-25), grader, 4,000 gal water truck , two maintenance
trucks, and two pickups
Fuel: 10,000 gallon portable tank gasoline, 50,000
gallon portable tanks for diesel and propane
Processing:The operation uses
conventual heap leach technology. Chemicals used for this process are on the
site. A construction material dump is onsite, and a bioremediation facility is
onsite to process minor petroleum spills.
Crew: 60 workers
Housing:
Nearby towns
Permitting:Environmental impact statement (EIS) completed in 18
months, high public interest, baseline studies required to complete EIS,
extensive joint federal/state coordination, cultural field
studies
Reclamation:Post mining recontouring and revegetation, stream
restoration, water stabilization and recharge, chemical stabilization, wildlife
reclamation projects
Note: Waste rock dumps were built to the grade standards outlined for each alternative, i.e. Alternative 3 states a 2:1 slope or a stable system, whereas Alternative 4 states a 3:1 slope. Roads would be built to meet standards for the alternative. The pit would have a small pit lake. Ground water would flow into the pit lake and evaporate. The pit lake would not overflow seasonally. Material at the site has been tested and shows no acid generation potential. The waste rock would have a 30% swell factor.
The model was derived from Mining Cost Services (Western Mine Engineering, Inc. 1997b), CM Appendix D4. The difference between the cost index for the original model development and the cost index for this model development was slight. Therefore, adjustments would not need to be made.
Permitting and Environmental Cost
Plan of Operation
Processing. Permitting and environmental costs are hard to determine in a
generalized way. The costs of permit authorizations and environmental
documentation highly vary with site-specific conditions. Depending on the ore
body and its location and other local environmental conditions, the cost can
cover a broad range. The operator would pay for the environmental impact
statement, which would include hydrological and hydrogeology reports, acid rock
drainage analysis, cultural surveys, soil and vegetation field surveys, fish and
wildlife field surveys, Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation, and pit
water quality analysis. The costs developed for this model and alternatives were
derived from several mining companies and consultant firms.
Bonding. The operation would require a Plan of Operations. The bond would be for 100% cost of the reclamation. Closing the heap leach pads and the rest of the mine would cost $2,000/acre. This model assumes that the operator is purchasing an annuity bond from an agency and would pay an insurance premium for the bond at an estimated 2% of the bond amount per year. The model further assumes that the operator has a good credit rating and has the assets to back the bond.
Reclamation Cost
Earthwork. The earthwork would consist of recontouring the waste rock dump, leach pads, roads, and ancillary facilities and covering all these features with topsoil. The dump had been built to easily conform to the slope requirement. The amount of material moved and the amount of time needed to move the material is estimated below for analysis purposes.
Regrading.
Production rate
Equipment = D9N and U Blade
Average Dozing distance =
300 ft
Final slope configurations = 2.5H:10V(40%)
Production = 500
yd3/hr
Correction factors
Operator average = 0.75
Material - loose
stockpile = 1.20
Type dozing - slot to side by side = 1.20
Job efficiency
= 0.83
Weight correction = 0.83
Hourly Production rate = 372 cu.
yd./hr
Cost Rates
Bulldozing (D9N) = $155/hr
Operator = $40/hr
Using the above data, the following table estimates equipment and labor costs for regrading.
Acres | Quantity (yd3) | Time (hours) | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 120 | 2800000 | 7526 | $1,166,530 | $301,040 |
Roads* | 200 | 250000 | 672 | 104160 | 26880 |
Ancillary Facilities | 150 | 150000 | 403 | 62465 | 16120 |
Leach Pads | 125 | 200000 | 536 | 83080 | 21440 |
Total Cost for Regrading | $1,416,235 | $365,480 |
Applying Top Soil.
The growth medium would be applied to an average thickness of 6 inches, using a scraper.
Production rate
Equipment = 615 Scraper
Capacity = 16 yd3
Average
haul distance = 1000 ft
Cycle time
Cycles per hour = 13.33 cycles per
minute
Correction factors
Load factor = 0.9
Job efficiency =
0.83
Eff. Load capacity = 14.4 yd3
Hourly production= 159.4 yd
Cost
Rates
615 scraper = $100/hr
Operator = $ 40/hr
Using the above data, the following table estimates equipment and labor costs for applying top soil.
Acres | Quantity (yd3) | Hours | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 120 | 290400 | 1821 | $182,100 | $72,840 |
Roads | 200 | 484000 | 3036 | 303600 | 121440 |
Ancillary Facilities | 150 | 363000 | 2277 | 227700 | 91080 |
Leach Pads | 125 | 302500 | 1897 | 189700 | 75880 |
Total Cost of Applying Top Soil | $903,100 | $361,240 |
Production rates
Equipment = 14-G Grader with scarifier
Scarifying
width = 10 feet
Operating speed = 1.0 mph
Production rate = 1.0
hr/ac
Equipment = Small tractor and seed drill
Seeding width = 10
feet
Operating speed = 2.5 mph
Production rate = 0.33hr/ac
Travel
length = 4356.0 ft/ac
Cost rates
Tractor and seed drill = $50/hr
14-G
Grader = $80/hr
Operator - grader = $40/hr
Labor (2) = $27/ac
Slender Wheatgrass $1.25/lb 3.0 lbs $3.75/ac
Western Wheatgrass $3.00/lb
2.0 lbs $6.00/ac
Fourwing Saltbrush $8.00/lb 1.0 lb $8.00/ac
Yellow
Sweetclover $0.60/lb 0.5 lb $0.30/ac
Basin Wildrye $5.60/lb 1.0 lb
$5.60/ac
Shadscale $6.50/lb 2.0 lbs $13.00/ac
Small Burnett $0.90/lb 2.0
lbs $1.80/ac
Thickspike Wheatgrass $8.25/lb 0.5 lb $4.15/ac
Prostrate
Kochia $17.50/lb 0.25 lb $4.40/ac
Sainfoin $1.40/lb 2.0 lbs
$2.80/ac
Sandberg Bluegrass $26.00/lb 0.25 lbs $13.00/ac
Total
$56.30/ac
Using the above data, the following table estimates equipment and labor costs for reseeding.
Acres | Hours | Equipment Cost ($) | Labor Cost ($) | |
Waste Rock | 120 | 120 (grader) 39 (drill) |
$9,600 1,950 6,756 |
$ 4,800 2,106 |
Roads | 200 | 20066 | 16,000 3,300 11,260 |
8,000 3,564 |
Ancillary Facilities | 150 | 15050 | 12,000 2,500 8,445 |
6,000 2,700 |
Leach pads | 125 | 12541 | 10,000 2,050 7,038 |
5,000 2,214 |
Cost of Reseeding | $90,899 | $34,384 |
Removal of Structures. Structure removal would consist mainly of removing powerlines, process buildings, office trailers, maintenance shops, and high-density polyethylene pipelines used by the project. The model assumes that five workers would take 80 days to remove the facilities and bury the foundations.
Total Open Pit Costs.
Table E-18 lists total costs for the open pit mining model.
Table E-18. Open Pit Model Costs | |||
Description of Activity | Cost Item | Unit Cost | Total Cost |
Permitting Plan Preparation
|
Environmental and Engineering Departments Several Weeks
|
$5,000 $200,000 $5,000 $10,000 $5,000 $20,000 2% for 10yrs |
$10,000 600,000 578,363 1,188,368 |
Reclamation Capital Cost Operating Cost - Labor Operating Cost - Equipment Exploration Activity Total |
14,000,000 10,368,000 1,382,400 $25,750,4 00 | ||
Reclamation: Earth Work Regrading Equipment*: Labor*: Applying top soil Equipment*: Labor*: Revegetation Equipment*
Chemical Stabilization Total Chem. Stabilization Structural removal
|
D9N Dozer operator 615 Scraper operator : 14-G Grader Small Tractor and seed drill Seed mixture Grader operator 2 laborers Operating Cost Materials Cost Labor: 2 people, 12 hours/day, 5 days/wks 2.5 ton truck for 80 days Ho-lift equipment, 24ft boom-7.7mt lift D9N Dozer for 2 days 5 person crew for 80 days at 8 hours/day |
155/hr 40/hr 100/hr 40/hr 80/hr 50/hr 56.30/ac 40/hr 27/hr 0.07/ton 0.05/ton 27/hr 60/day 165/day 155/hr 27/hr |
1,416,235 365,480 903,100 361,240 90,899 34,384 3,171,338 490,000 350,000 505,440 1,345,440 20,480 8,100 106,880 4,623,558 |
Total Cost of Open Pit Project | $31,562,4 26 |
Alternative 1: No Action
Costs would not change under Alternative 1 because the regulations would not change.
Alternative 2: State Management
Determining costs for Alternative 2 for all of the states in the EIS study area would not be practical for this exercise. Therefore, the following cost calculations assume that the state programs are based on current BLM regulations. A review of state programs reveals that they are similar in requirements for posting reclamation bonds, for surface and ground water, and for reclamation.
This analysis assumes that the state would require a submission of a Plan of Operations. The state would still require reclamation, the posting of bond, and monitoring for compliance, but not environmental review for such values as cultural, cave, and wildlife resources.
Permitting and Environmental Costs.
Plan of Operations Processing. The operator would have to submit a Plan of Operations to the state but not to BLM. The project would not undergo environmental review, and the operator would not pay for an environmental impact statement.
Reclamation Cost.
This analysis assumes that the state requires
reclamation and that the company would have to reclaim any disturbance resulting
from its operation. Reflecting general state programs, the purpose of
reclamation would be only to stabilize soil and slopes. Therefore, this analysis
assumes that the state would require only grasses for soil stability and that
reclamation would not require restoring wildlife and fisheries habitat.
Seed Mixture
Species $/lb (PLS) Drilled rate Price/ac
Slender Wheatgrass $1.25/lb 3 lbs $3.75/ac
Western Wheatgrass $3.00/lb 2
lbs $6.00/ac
Basin Wildrye $5.60/lb 1 lb $5.60/ac
Thickspike Wheatgrass
$8.25/lb 0.5 lb $4.15/ac
Sandberg Bluegrass $26.00/lb 0.25
$13.00/ac
Total $32.50/ac
The following cost calculations show the cost for the seed mixture under Alternative 2.
Waste Rock 120 acres $3,900.00
Roads 200 acres $6,500.00
Ancillary
Facilities 150 acres $4,875.00
Leach pads 125 acres $4,062.50
Total
$19,337.50
Total Estimated Cost Changes. Total cost savings for this open pit project under Alternative 2 are summarized in Table E-19.
Table E-19. Alternative 2 -- Changes in Costs for a Open Pit Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 1 (Existing Regulations) | $31,562,462 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 2 due to Elimination of Environmental Review Change in Seed cost Total Change in Costs under Alternative 2 |
(600,000) (14,161) (614,161) |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 2 (State Management) | 30948300 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 2 | - 2 % |
Acres | Quantity (yd3) | Time (hours) | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 120 | 2100000 | 5645 | $874,975 | $225,800 |
Roads* | 200 | 250000 | 672 | 104160 | 26880 |
Ancillary Facilities | 150 | 150000 | 403 | 62465 | 16120 |
Leach Pads | 125 | 200000 | 536 | 83080 | 21440 |
Total for Recontouring | $1,124,700 | $290,200 |
Total cost of recontouring work for Alternative 3 = $1,414,920
The cost under Alternative 1 would amount to $1,781,715, and the cost under Alternative 3 would be $1,414,920. Alternative 3 would thus save $366,795 over Alternative 1 by recontouring less material and returning more to the pit.
$2,625,000 for backfilling minus the cost saving of recontouring‹$366,795
For a total cost of backfilling operation at 25% = $2,258,205.
Total Estimated Cost Changes. Estimated cost changes for an open pit mine are summarized in Table E-20.
Table E-20. Alternative 3 -- Change in Costs for an Open Pit Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 3 | $31,562,426 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due to
Bonding Reclamation Total Change in Costs under Alternative 3 |
364 7002258200 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 3 | 34185326 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 3 | 8% |
Change in Costs Assuming Validity Exam is Conducted | |
Change in Costs under Alternative 3 due
to Bonding Reclamation Validity Exam |
364,700 2,258,200 10,000 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 3 | 34195326 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 3 | 8% |
Acres | Quantity (yd3) | Hours | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 50 | 175000 | 470 | $72,850 | $18,800 |
Roads* | 200 | 250000 | 672 | 104160 | 26880 |
Ancillary Facilities | 150 | 150000 | 403 | 62465 | 16120 |
Leach Pads | 125 | 200000 | 536 | 83080 | 21440 |
Total Cost To Recontour | $322,600 | $83,200 |
The cost of recontouring under Alternative 1 would amount to $1,781,715, and the cost of recontouring under Alternative 4 would amount to $405,800. Alternative 4 would save $1,375,920 in recontouring costs because less material would be recontoured and more would be returned to the pit.
$7,875,000 for backfilling minus the cost saving of recontouring‹$1,375,920
For a total cost of backfilling operation at 25% =
$6,499,080.
Topsoil. Under Alternative 4 the topsoil would
be removed by soil horizons. Operations would remove the topsoil as under other
alternatives, but increased travel time to stockpile sites would decrease the
efficiency of the earth moving equipment by not allowing the blade to take as
deep a cut as possible. But the increased travel times would not be so great as
to double the time needed to remove topsoil.
Under the other alternatives earth moving equipment would mix the soil and colluvium together as it moves them in one or two passes. Under Alternative 4 the material would be removed to different locations on either side of the road or drill pads. The travel distance would remain the same, but the efficiencies of the equipment would decrease. Efficiencies were estimated from the Caterpillar Performance Handbook (Caterpillar Inc. 1996) as 0.83. For Alternative 4 the efficiency would be estimated at 0.75, about 1 hour more needed to complete the dirt work under the other alternatives.
Production rate
Equipment = 615 Scraper
Capacity = 16 yd3
Average
haul distance = 1000 ft
Cycle time
Cycles per hour = 13.33 cycles per
minute
Correction factors
Load factor = 0.9
Job efficiency =
0.75
Eff. Load capacity = 10.8 yd3
Hourly production= 144 yd3/hr
Cost
Rates
615 scraper = $100/hr
Operator = $ 40/hr
Using the above data, the following table estimates equipment and labor costs of earthwork.
Acres | Quantity (yd3) | Hours | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 50 | 90750 | 630 | $63,000 | $25,200 |
Roads | 200 | 484000 | 3361 | 336100 | 134440 |
Ancillary Facilities | 150 | 363000 | 2520 | 252000 | 100800 |
Leach Pads | 125 | 302500 | 2100 | 210000 | 84000 |
Total Cost for Earthwork | $861,100 | $344,500 |
Seed Mixture (Mining Cost Service)
Species Amount
Sanberg Bluegrass 20%
Indian Rice Grass
20%
Blue Grama 20%
Thickspike Wheatgrass 10%
Sand Dropseed 10%
Blue
Flax 10%
Purple Coneflower 5%
Prairie Coneflower 5%
Scarlet Globemallow
5%
Utah Sweet Vetch 5%
Total $9.50/lb @ 10lbs/ac $95/ac
Using the above data, the following table estimates equipment and labor costs of revegetation.
Acres | Hours | Equipment Cost | Labor Cost | |
Waste Rock | 50 | 50 grader 25 drill |
$4,000 1,250 4,750 |
$2,000 1,350 |
Roads | 200 | 20066 | 16000330019000 | 80003564 |
Ancillary Facilities | 150 | 15050 | 12000250014250 | 60002700 |
Leach pads | 125 | 12541 | 10000205011875 | 50002214 |
Total Revegetation Cost | $100,975 | $30,828 |
Fish and Wildlife. Under Alternative 4 within 10 years some areas of the mine might not return to the fish and wildlife habitat of premining status. Some offsite mitigation would be required to offset this loss. The common type of mitigation is vegetation manipulation. These types of actions take marginal habitat and change the vegetation to a more suitable habitat. Conversations with BLM biologists reveal that the average cost of such manipulation amounts to $1,000/acre. This analysis assumes that the pit and some of the haul roads would not be reclaimed within the 10 years and that 100 acres of vegetation would be manipulated at a cost of $100,000.
Wetlands. Alternative 4 would require that any wetlands would have to be restored within 10 years after a mine closes and is reclaimed. If this goal cannot be reached, then 1.5 times the amount of disturbed or lost land would need to be replaced. Reclamation is usually successful in restoring wetlands to proper functioning condition within 10 years. But open pit mines do remove wetlands in placing the pit or the waste rock dumps. This model assumes that 10 acres of wetlands would be lost to waste rock dumps.
The cost of offsite mitigation is estimated at the same cost as stream restoration under Alternative 4 of the placer mining model. For Alternative 4 the model assumes $2,500/acre (INTER-FLUVE, Inc. 1991), which is needed to meet the 10-year requirement for wetlands in properly functioning conditions. This analysis assumes stream restoration cost to be $2,500/acre for 15 acres for a total cost of $37,500.
Total Estimated Cost Changes. If the exploration operation is not within an area withdrawn for minerals, the project would incur the costs shown in Table E-21.
Table E-21. Alternative 4 -- Change in Costs for an Open Pit Project | |
Total Project Cost under Alternative 4: | $31,562,426 |
Change in Costs under Alternative 4 Due To: Bond Cost Third Party Monitoring Backfill Cost Minus Earthwork Cost Applying Top Soil Revegetation Cost Soil Stabilization Habitat Restoration Validity Exam Wetland Restoration Total Change in Costs under Alternative 4: |
418,400 35,500 6,499,080 (58,740) 6,520 174,240 100,000 10,000 37,500 7,215,980 |
Total Project Costs under Alternative 4: | 38778400 |
Percent Change in Costs from Alternative 1 to Alternative 4: | + 19% |
Table E-22. Total Cost of Mine Models | |||||||
Alternative 1 | Alternative 2 | % Change | Alternative 3 | % Change | Alternative 4 | % Change | |
Exploration | $207,370 | $206,200 | -1 | $207,500 300,000 |
0 +31 |
$319,300 | 35 |
Placer | 1124400 | 1028500 | 0 | 1 1 7 1 3001174100 | +4 +5 |
1275300 | 13 |
Strip Mining | 2846700 | 2765200 | -3 | 2 9 1 1 6002941600 | +2 +3 |
3238700 | 12 |
Open Pit | $31,562,462 | $30,948,300 | -2 | 34,185,300 $34,195,300 |
+8 +8 |
$38,778,400 | 19 |
Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Fish and Wildlife Species
on
BLM-Managed Lands170
Amphibians and Reptiles Designated as Sensitive Species by BLM State Offices180
Matrix of Regional Priority Bat Species Developed by the Bat Working Group (1998)181
Priority Bird Species in the Western U.S.184
Arizona
E -- Arizona agave (Agave arizonica)
E --
Kearney's blue-star (Amsonia kearneyana)
T -- Welsh's milkweed
(Asclepias welshii)
E -- Sentry milk-vetch (Astragalus
cremnophylax var. cremnophylax)
T -- Navajo sedge (Carex
specuicola)
T -- Cochise pincushion cactus (Coryphantha
(=Escobaria) robbinsorum)
E -- Pima pineapple cactus (Coryphantha
scheeri var. robustispina)
T -- Jones cycladenia (Cycladenia
humilis var. jonesii)
E -- Nichol's Turk's head cactus
(Echinocactus horizonthalonius var. nicholii)
E -- Arizona
hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var.
arizonicus)
E -- Huachuca water-umbel (Lilaeopsis schaffneriana
ssp. recurva)
E -- Brady pincushion cactus (Pediocactus
bradyi)
E -- Peebles Navajo cactus (Pediocactus peeblesianus var.
peeblesianus)
T -- Siler pincushion cactus (Pediocactus
sileri)
E -- Arizona cliffrose (Purshia subintegra)
T -- San
Francisco Peaks groundsel (Senecio franciscanus)
E -- Canelo Hills
ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes delitescens)
C -- Goodding's onion
(Allium gooddingii)
C -- Holmgren milk-vetch (Astragalus
holmgreniorum)
C -- Arizona bugbane (Cimicifuga arizonica)
C --
Arizona leatherflower (Clematis hirsutissima var. arizonica)
C
-- Gentry's indigobush (Dalea tentaculoides)
C -- Acuna cactus
(Echinomastus erectocentrus var. acunensis)
C -- Lemmon
fleabane (Erigeron lemmonii)
C -- Kaibab plains cactus (Pediocactus
paradinei)
C -- Fickeisen plains cactus (Pediocactus peeblesianus var.
fickeiseniae)
PE -- Parish's alkali grass (Puccinella
parishii)
C -- Blumer's dock (Rumex orthoneurus)
California
E -- San Mateo thornmint (Acanthomintha obovata
ssp. duttonii)
T -- San Diego thornmint (Acanthomintha
ilicifolia)
E -- Mun's onion (Allium munzii)
E -- Sonoma
alopecurus (Alopecurus aequalis var. sonomensis)
E --
Large-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia grandiflora)
E -- Hoffmann's
rock-cress (Arabis hoffmannii)
E -- McDonald's rock-cress (Arabis
mcdonaldiana)
T -- Morro manzanita (Arctostaphylos morroensis)
E -- Presidio (=Raven's) manzanita (Arctostaphylos hookeri var. ravenii)
E -- Del Mar manzanita (Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp.
crassifolia)
E -- Santa Rosa Island manzanita (Arctostaphylos
confertiflora)
T -- Pallid manzanita (Arctostaphylos pallida)
E -- Marsh sandwort (Arenaria paludicola)
T -- Bear Valley
sandwort (Arenaria ursina)
E -- Cushenbury milk-vetch (Astragalus
albens)
E -- Braunton's milk-vetch (Astragalus brauntonii)
E
-- Clara Hunt's milk-vetch (Astragalus clarianus)
E -- Lane Mountain
(=Coolgardie) milk-vetch (Astragalus jaegerianus)
E -- Coachella
Valley milk-vetch (Astragalus lentiginosus var. coachellae)
T
-- Fish Slough milk-vetch (Astragalus lentiginosus var.
piscinensis)
T -- Peirson's milk-vetch (Astragalus magdalenae
var. peirsonii)
E -- Coastal dunes milk-vetch (Astragalus tener
var. titi)
E -- Triple-ribbed milk-vetch (Astragalus
tricarinatus)
E -- San Jacinto Valley crownscale (=saltbush) (Atriplex
coronata var. notatior)
T -- Encinitis baccharis (=Coyote bush)
(Baccharis vanessae)
E -- Nevin's barberry (Berberis
nevinii)
E -- Island barberry (Berberis pinnata ssp.
insularis)
E -- Truckee barberry (Berberis sonnei)
E --
Sonoma sunshine (=Baker's stickyseed) (Blennosperma bakeri)
T --
Thread-leaved brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia)
T -- Chinese Camp brodiaea
(Brodiaea pallida)
T -- Tiburon mariposa lily (Calochortus
tiburonensis)
T -- Mariposa pussypaws (Calyptridium
pulchellum)
E -- Stebbins' morning-glory (Calystegia
stebbinsii)
T -- San Benito evening-primrose (Camissonia
benitensis)
E -- White sedge (Carex albida)
E -- Tiburon
paintbrush (Castilleja affinis ssp. neglecta)
T -- Fleshy
owl's-clover (Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta)
T --
Ash-gray paintbrush (Castilleja cinerea)
E -- San Clemente Island
Indian paintbrush (Castilleja grisea)
E -- Soft-leaved paintbrush
(Castilleja mollis)
E -- California jewelflower (Caulanthus
californicus)
E -- Coyote ceanothus (=Coyote Valley California-lilac)
(Ceanothus ferrisae)
T -- Vail Lake ceanothus (Ceanothus
ophiochilus)
E -- Pine Hill ceanothus (Ceanothus roderickii)
T
-- Spring-loving centaury (Centaurium namophilum)
E -- Catalina
Island mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus traskiae)
T -- Hoover's spurge
(Chamaesyce hooveri)
E -- Howell's spineflower (Chorizanthe
howellii)
E -- Orcutt's spineflower (Chorizanthe
orcuttiana)
E -- Ben Lomond spineflower (Chorizanthe pungens
var. hartwegiana)
T -- Monterey spineflower (Chorizanthe
pungens var. pungens)
E -- Robust spineflower (includes Scotts
Valley spineflower) (Chorizanthe robusta)
E -- Sonoma spineflower
(Chorizanthe valida)
E -- Chorro Creek bog thistle (Cirsium
fontinale obispoense)
E -- Fountain thistle (Cirsium fontinale
var. fontinale)
E -- Suisun thistle (Cirsium hydrophilum
var. hydrophilum)
E -- Presidio clarkia (Clarkia
franciscana)
E -- Vine Hill clarkia (Clarkia imbricata)
E --
Pismo clarkia (Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata)
T --
Springville clarkia (Clarkia springvillensis)
E -- Salt marsh
bird's-beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus)
E --
Palmate-bracted bird's-beak (Cordylanthus palmatus)
E -- Pennell's
bird's-beak (Cordylanthus tenuis ssp. capillaris)
E -- Soft
bird's-beak (Cordylanthus mollis ssp. mollis)
E -- Santa Cruz
cypress (Cupressus abramsiana)
T -- Gowen cypress (Cupressus
goveniana ssp. goveniana)
E -- San Clemente Island larkspur
(Delphinium variegatum ssp. kinkiense)
E -- Slender-horned
spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras)
T -- Conejo dudleya (Dudleya
abramsii ssp. parva)
T -- Marcescent dudleya (Dudleya
cymosa ssp. marcescens)
T -- Santa Monica Mountains dudleya
(Dudleya cymosa ssp. ovatifolia)
T -- Santa Cruz Island dudleya
(Dudleya nesiotica)
E -- Santa Clara Valley dudleya (Dudleya
setchellii)
T -- Laguna Beach liveforever (Dudleya
stolonifera)
E -- Santa Barbara Island liveforever (Dudleya
traskiae)
T -- Verity's dudleya (Dudleya verityi)
E -- Kern
mallow (Eremalche kernensis)
E -- Santa Ana River woolly-star
(Eriastrum densifolium ssp. sanctorum)
T -- Hoover's
woolly-star (Eriastrum hooveri)
T -- Parish's daisy (Erigeron
parishii)
E -- Indian Knob mountain balm (Eriodictyon altissimum)
T -- Southern mountain wild-buckwheat (Eriogonum kennedyi var.
austromontanum)
E -- Cushenbury buckwheat (Eriogonum
ovalifolium var. vineum)
E -- San Mateo woolly sunflower
(Eriophyllum latilobum)
E -- San Diego button-celery (Eryngium
aristulatum var. parishii)
E -- Loch Lomond coyote-thistle
(Eryngium constancei)
E -- Contra Costa wallflower (Erysimum
capitatum var. angustatum)
E -- Menzies' wallflower (Erysimum
menziesii)
E -- Ben Lomond wallflower (Erysimum teretifolium)
E -- Pine Hill flannelbush (Fremontodendron californicum ssp.
decumbens)
E -- Mexican flannelbush (Fremontodendron
mexicanum)
E -- Island bedstraw (Galium buxifolium)
E -- El
Dorado bedstraw (Galium californicum ssp. sierrae)
E --
Monterey gilia (Gilia tenuiflora ssp. arenaria)
E -- Hoffmann's
slender-flowered gilia (Gilia tenuiflora ssp. hoffmannii)
T --
Ash Meadows gumplant (Grindelia fraxino-pratensis)
T -- Island
rush-rose (Helianthemum greenei)
T -- Otay tarplant (Hemizonia
conjugens)
T -- Marin dwarf-flax (Hesperolinon congestum)
T --
Water howellia (Howellia aquatilis)
E -- Burke's goldfields
(Lasthenia burkei)
E -- Contra Costa goldfields (Lasthenia
conjugens)
E -- Beach layia (Layia carnosa)
E -- San Joaquin
wooly-threads (Lembertia congdonii)
E -- San Bernardino Mountains
bladderpod (Lesquerella kingii ssp. bernardina)
E -- San
Francisco lessingia (Lessingia germanorum (=L. g. var.
germanorum)
E -- Western lily (Lilium occidental)
E --
Pitkin Marsh lily (Lilium pardalinum ssp. pitkinense)
E --
Butte County meadowfoam (Limnanthes floccosa ssp.
californica)
E -- Sebastopol meadowfoam (Limnanthes
vinculans)
E -- San Clemente Island woodland-star (Lithophragma
maximum)
E -- San Clemente Island broom (Lotus dendroideus ssp.
traskiae)
E -- Clover lupine (Lupinus tidestromii)
E -- San
Clemente Island bush-mallow (Malacothamnus clementinus)
E -- Santa
Cruz Island bush-mallow (Malacothamnus fasciculatus var.
nesioticus)
E -- Santa Cruz Island malocothrix (Malacothrix
indecora)
E -- Island malacothrix (Malacothrix squalida)
E --
Willowy monardella (Monardella linoides ssp. viminea)
T --
Navarretia, spreading (=prostrate, =no-named) (Navarretia fossalis)
E
-- Navarretia, few-flowered (Navarretia leucocephala ssp.
pauciflora (=N. pauciflora))
E -- Navarretia, many-flowered
(Navarretia leucocephala ssp. plieantha)
T -- Colusa grass
(Neostapfia colusana)
E -- Amargosa niterwort (Nitrophila
mohavensis)
E -- Eureka Valley evening-primrose (Oenothera avita ssp.
eurekensis)
E -- Antioch Dunes evening-primrose (Oenothera deltoides
ssp. howellii)
E -- Bakersfield cactus (Opuntia treleasei)
E -- California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica)
T -- San
Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass (Orcuttia inaequalis)
E -- Hairy (=pilose)
Orcutt grass (Orcuttia pilosa)
T -- Slender Orcutt grass (Orcuttia
tenuis)
E -- Sacramento Orcutt grass (Orcuttia viscida)
E --
Cushenbury oxytheca (Oxytheca parishii var. goodmaniana)
E --
Lake County stonecrop (Parvisedum leiocarpum)
E -- White-rayed
pentachaeta (Pentachaeta bellidiflora)
E -- Lyon's pentachaeta
(Pentachaeta lyonii)
E -- Island phacelia (Phacelia insularis
ssp. insularis)
E -- Yadon's piperia (Piperia yadonii)
E --
Calistoga allocarya (Plagiobothrys strictus)
E -- San Bernardino bluegrass
(Poa atropurpurea)
E -- Napa bluegrass (Poa napensis)
E --
San Diego mesa mint (Pogogyne abramsii)
E -- Otay mesa mint
(Pogogyne nudiuscula)
E -- Hickman's potentilla (Potentilla
hickmanii)
E -- Hartweg's golden sunburst (Pseudobahia
bahiifolia)
T -- San Joaquin adobe sunburst (Pseudobahia
peirsonii)
E -- Gambel's watercress (Rorippa gambellii)
T --
Layn's butterweed (Senecio layneae)
E -- Santa Cruz Island rockcress
(Sibara filifolia)
E -- Kenwood Marsh checker-mallow (Sidalcea
oregana ssp. valida)
E -- Pedate checker-mallow (Sidalcea
pedata)
E -- Metcalf Canyon jewelflower (Streptanthus albidus ssp.
albidus)
E -- Tiburon jewelflower (Streptanthus niger)
E --
California seablite (Suaeda californica)
E -- Eureka Dune grass
(Swallenia alexandrae)
E -- California taraxacum (Taraxacum
californicum)
E -- Slender-petaled mustard (Thelypodium
stenopetalum)
T -- Hidden Lake bluecurls (Trichostema
austromontanum ssp. compactum)
E -- Showy Indian clover
(Trifolium amoenum)
E -- Monterey (=Del Monte) clover (Trifolium
trichocalyx)
E -- Greene's orcutt grass (Tuctoria greenei)
E
-- Solano grass (Tuctoria mucronata)
T -- Red Hills vervain
(Verbena californica)
T -- Big-leaved crownbeard (Verbesina
dissita)
C -- Ramshaw Meadows sand-verbena (Abronia alpina)
PE
-- San Diego thornmint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia)
PE -- Munz's onion
(Allium munzii)
PT -- Rawhide Hill onion (Allium
tuolumnense)
PE -- Sonoma alopecurus (Alopecurus aequalis var.
sonomensis)
PT -- Johnston's rock-cress (Arabis
johnstonii)
PT -- lone manzanita (Arctostaphylos myrtifolia)
PT
-- Pallid manzanita (Arctostaphylos pallida)
PT - Bear Valley sandwort
(Arenaria ursina)
PE - Clara Hunt's milk-vetch (Astragalus
clarianus)
PE - Lane Mountain milk-vetch (Astragalus
jaegerianus)
PE - Coachella Valley milk-vetch (Astragalus
lentiginosus var. coachellae)
PT - Shining milk-vetch
(Astragalus lentiginosus var. micans)
PE - Fish Slough
milk-vetch (Astragalus lentiginosus var. piscinensis)
PT -
Sodaville milk-vetch (Astragalus lentiginosus var.
sesquimetralis)
PE - Peirson's milk-vetch (Astragalus magdalenae
var. peirsonii)
PE - Coastal dunes milk-vetch (Astragalus
tener var. titi)
PE - Triple-ribbed milk-vetch (Astragalus
tricarinatus)
PE - San Jacinto Valley crownscale (Atriplex
coronata var. notatior)
PE - Nevin's barberry (Berberis
nevinii)
PT - Thread-leaf brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia)
PE -
Chinese Camp brodiaea (Brodiaea pallida)
PE -- Mariposa pussy-paws
(Calyptridium pulchellum)
PE -- White sedge (Carex
albida)
PT -- Carpenteria (Carpenteria californica)
PT --
Ash-gray paintbrush (Castilleja cinerea)
PT -- Vail Lake ceanothus
(Ceanothus ophiochilus)
C -- Purple amole (Chlorogalum
purpureum var. purpureum)
C -- Camatta Canyon amole
(Chlorogalum purpureum var. reductum)
PE -- Suisun thistle
(Cirsium hydrophilum var. hydrophilum)
C -- La Graciosa thistle
(Cirsium loncholepis)
PE -- Vine Hill clarkia (Clarkia
imbricata)
PT -- Springville clarkia (Clarkia
springvillensis)
PE -- Soft bird's-beak (Cordylanthus mollis ssp.
mollis)
PE -- Baker's larkspur (Delphinium bakeri)
PE --
Yellow larkspur (Delphinium luteum)
PE -- Laguna Beach liveforever
(Dudleya stolonifera)
C -- Lompoc yerba santa (Eriodictyon
capitatum)
PE -- lone buckwheat (Eriogonum apricum (incl. vars.
apricum and prostratum)
C -- Red Mountain buckwheat
(Eriogonum kelloggii)
PE -- Southern Mountain wild buckwheat
(Eriogonum kennedyi var. austromontanum)
PE -- Mexican
flannelbush (Fremontondendron mexicanum)
PT -- Greenhorn adobe-lily
(Fritillaria striata)
PE -- Otay tarplant (Hemizonia
conjugens)
C -- Gaviota tarplant (Hemizonia increscens ssp. villosa)
C
-- Santa Cruz tarplant (Holocarpha macradenia)
C -- Two-flowered lathyrus
(Lathyrus biflorus)
PE -- Pitkin Marsh lily (Lilium pardalinum ssp.
pitkinense)
PE -- Mariposa lupine (Lupinus citrinus var.
deflexus)
C -- Nipomo Mesa lupine (Lupinus nipomensis)
PE --
Kelso Creek monkey-flower (Mimulus shevockii)
PE -- Willowy monardella
(Monardellla linoides ssp. viminea)
PT -- Spreading navarretia
(Navarretia fossalis)
PT -- Piute Mountains navarretia (Navarretia
setiloba)
PT -- Dehesa bear grass (Nolina interrata)
C -- Yreka phlox
(Phlox hirsuta)
PE -- Yardon's piperia (Piperia yadonii)
PE
-- Calistoga allocarya (Plagiobothrys strictus)
PE -- San Bernadino
bluegrass (Poa atropurpurea)
PE -- Napa bluegrass (Poa
Napensis)
PE -- Hickman's potentilla (Potentilla hickmanii)
PE
-- Parish's alkali grass (Puccinella parishii)
C -- Red Mountain
stonecrop (Sedum eastwoodiae)
C -- Parish's checkerbloom (Sidalcea
hickmanii ssp. parishii)
PE -- Keck's checkermallow (Sidalcea
keckii)
PE -- Kenwood Marsh checkermallow (Sidalcea oregana ssp.
valida)
C -- Red Mountain catchfly (Silene campanulata ssp.
campanulata)
PE -- California dandeloin (Taraxacum
californicum)
C -- Kneeland Prairie penny-cress (Thlaspi
californicum)
PT -- Hidden Lake bluecurls (Trichostema
austromontanum ssp. compactum)
PE -- Showy Indian clover
(Trifolium amoenum)
PE -- Monterey clover (Trifolium
trichocalyx)
PT -- Red Hills vervain (Verbena californica)
PT
-- Gowen cypress (Cupressus goveniana ssp. goveniana)
Colorado
E -- Mancos milk-vetch (Astragalus humillimus)
E
-- Osterhout milk-vetch (Astragalus osterhoutii)
E -- Clay-loving
wild-buckwheat (Eriogonum pelinophilum)
T -- Penland alpine fen
mustard (Eutrema penlandii)
T -- Dudley Bluffs bladderpod
(Lesquerella congesta)
E -- Knowlton cactus (Pediocactus
knowltonii)
E -- Penland beardtongue (Penstemon penlandii)
E --
North Park phacelia (Phacelia formosula)
T -- Dudley Bluffs twinpod
(Physaria obcordata)
T -- Uinta Basin hookless cactus (Sclerocactus
glaucus)
T -- Mesa Verde cactus (Sclerocactus mesae-verdae)
T
-- Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis)
C - Sleeping Ute
milk-vetch (Astragalus tortipes)
C -- Colorado butterfly plant
(Gaura neomexicana ssp. coloradensis)
C -- Parachute
beardtongue (Penstemon debilis)
C -- Graham beardtongue (Penstemon
grahamii)
C -- White River beardtongue (Penstemon scariosus var.
albifluvus)
C -- DeBeque phacelia (Phacelia
submutica)
Idaho
T -- Water howellia (Howellia
aquatilis)
T -- MacFarlane's four-o'clock (Mirabilis macfarlanei)
T -- Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis)
C -- Christ's
paintbrush (Castilleja christii)
Nevada
T -- Ash
Meadows milk-vetch (Astragalus phoenix)
T -- Spring-loving centaury
(Centaurium namophilum)
T -- Ash Meadows sunray (Enceliopsis
nudicaulis var. corrugata)
E -- Steamboat buckwheat (Eriogonum
ovalifolium var. williamsiae)
T -- Ash Meadows gumplant
(Grindelia fraxino-pratensis)
T -- Ash Meadows ivesia (Ivesia
kingii var. eremica)
T -- Ash Meadows blazing-star (Mentzelia
leucophylla)
E -- Amargosa niterwort (Nitrophila
mohavensis)
PT - Sodaville milk-vetch (Astragalus lentiginosus
var. sesquimetralis)
C - Clokey's egg-vetch (Astragalus
oophorus var. clokeyanus)
C -- Sulphur Springs buckwheat
(Eriogonum argophyllum)
C -- Blue Diamond cholla (Opuntia whipplei
var. multigeniculata)
Montana
T -- Water howellia (Howellia aquatilis)
T
-- Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis)
New Mexico
E -- Sacramento prickly-poppy (Argemone
pleiacantha ssp. pinnatisecta)
E -- Mancos milk-vetch
(Astragalus humillimus)
T -- Sacramento Mountains thistle (Cirsium
vinaceum)
T -- Lee pincushion cactus (Coryphantha sneedii var.
leei)
E -- Sneed pincushion cactus (Coryphantha sneedii var.
sneedii)
E -- Kuenzler hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri
var. kuenzleri)
E -- Lloyd's hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus
lloydii)
T -- Lloyd's Mariposa cactus (Echinomastus (=
Sclerocactus) mariposensis)
T -- Zuni (=rhizome) fleabane
(Erigeron rhizomatus)
T -- Gypsum wild-buckwheat (Eriogonum
gypsophilum)
E -- Todsen's pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii)
E --
Holy Ghost ipomopsis (Ipomopsis sancti-spiritus)
E -- Knowlton cactus
(Pediocactus knowltonii)
T -- Mesa Verde cactus (Sclerocactus
mesae-verdae)
C -- Goodding's onion (Allium gooddingii)
C --
Puzzle sunflower (Helianthus paradoxus)
PE -- Parish's alkali grass
(Puccinella parishii)
Oregon
E -- Marsh sandwort
(Arenaria paludicola)
E -- Applegate's milk-vetch (Astragalus
applegatei)
T -- Golden paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta)
T --
Water howellia (Howellia aquatilis)
E -- Western lily (Lilium
occidental)
E -- Bradshaw's desert-parsley (=lomatium) (Lomatium
bradshawii)
T -- MacFarlane's four-o'clock (Mirabilis
macfarlanei)
T -- Nelson's checker-mallow (Sidalcea nelsoniana)
E -- Malheur wire-lettuce (Stephanomeria malheurensis)
C -- Umpqua
mariposa lily (Calochortus umpquaensis)
C -- Willamette daisy
(Erigeron decumbens var. decumbens)
C -- Gentner's fritillaria
(Fritillaria gentneri)
C -- Large-flowered wooly meadowfoam
(Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora)
C -- Cook's lomatium
(Lomatium cookii)
C -- Rough popcornflower (Plagiobothrys
hirtus)
C -- Howell's spectacular thelpody (Thelypodium howelii
var. spectabilis)
Utah
E -- Dwarf bear-poppy (Arctomecon humilis)
T --
Welsh's milkweed (Asclepias welshii)
T -- Heliotrope milk-vetch
(Astragalus montii)
T -- Navajo sedge (Carex specuicola)
T
-- Jones cycladenia (Cycladenia humilis var. jonesii)
T --
Maguire daisy (Erigeron maguirei)
E -- Barneby ridge-cress
(=peppercress) (Lepidium barnebyanum)
E -- Kodachrome bladderpod
(Lesquerella tumulosa)
E -- San Rafael cactus (Pediocactus
despainii)
T -- Siler pincushion cactus (Pediocactus sileri)
T
-- Winkler cactus (Pediocactus winkleri)
E -- Clay phacelia
(Phacelia argillacea)
T -- Maguire primrose (Primula
maguirei)
E -- Autumn buttercup (Ranunculus acriformis var.
aestivalis)
T -- Clay reed-mustard (Schoenocrambe
argillacea)
E -- Barneby reed-mustard (Schoenocrambe
barnebyi)
E -- Shrubby reed-mustard (=toad-flax cress) (Schoenocrambe
suffrutescens)
T -- Uinta Basin hookless cactus (Sclerocactus
glaucus)
E -- Wright fishhook cactus (Sclerocactus
wrightiae)
T -- Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis)
T
-- Last Chance townsendia (Townsendia aprica)
C - Deseret milk-vetch
(Astragalus desereticus)
C - Horseshoe milk-vetch (Astragalus
equisolensis)
C - Shem milk-vetch (Astragalus eremiticus
var.ampullariodes)
C - Holmgren milk-vetch (Astragalus
holmgreniorum)
C -- Aquarius paintbrush (Castilleja
aquariensis)
C -- Wonderland alice-flower (Gilia caespitosa)
PE
-- Winkler cactus (Pediocactus winkleri)
C -- Graham beardtongue
(Penstemon grahamii)
C -- White River beardtongue (Penstemon
scariosus var. albifluvus)
Washington
E -- Marsh sandwort (Arenaria paludicola)
T --
Golden paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta)
T -- Water howellia
(Howellia aquatilis)
E -- Bradshaw's desert-parsley (=lomatium)
(Lomatium bradshawii)
T -- Nelson's checker-mallow (Sidalcea
nelsoniana)
T -- Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis)
C
-- Basalt daisy (Erigeron basalticus)
PE --Wenatchee Mountains
checkermallow (Sidalcea oregana ssp. calva)
Wyoming
T -- Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes
diluvialis)
C -- Small rock-cress (Arabis pusilla)
C --
Colorado butterfly plant (Gaura neomexicana ssp.
coloradensis)
C -- Desert yellowhead (Yermo
xanthocephalus)
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Amphibians | Boreal toad | Bufo boreas boreas | C |
California red-legged frog | Rana aurora draytonii | FT | |
California tiger salamander | Ambystoma californiense | C | |
Chiricahua leopard frog | Rana chiricahuensis | C | |
Columbia Frog (East and West) | Rana luteiventris | C | |
Desert slender salamander | Batrachoseps aridis | FE | |
Oregon spotted frog | Rana pretiosa | C | |
Sonora tiger salamander | Ambystoma tigrinum stebbinsi | FE | |
Wyoming toad | Bufo hemiophrys baxteri | FE | |
Birds | Aleutian Canada goose | Branta canadensis leucopareia | FT |
American peregrine falcon | Falco peregrinus anatum | FE | |
Audubon's crested caracara | Polyborus plancus audubonii | FT | |
Bald eagle | Haliaeetus leucocephalus | FT | |
Brown pelican | Pelecanus occidentalis | FE | |
Cactus ferrunginous pygmy-owl | Glaucidium brasilianum cactorum | FE | |
California condor | Gymnogyps californianus | FE | |
Coastal California gnatcatcher | Polioptila californica californica | FT | |
Eskimo curlew | Numenius borealis | FE | |
Florida scrub jay | Aphelocoma coerulescens | FT | |
Inyo California (brown) towhee | Pipilo crissalis eremophilus | FT | |
Least Bell's vireo | Vireo bellii pusillus | FE | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Least tern | Sterna antillarum | FE | |
Marbled murrelet | Brachyramphus marmoratus marmoratus | FT | |
Mexican spotted owl | Strix occidentalis lucida | FT | |
Birds | Mountain plover | Charadrius montanus | C |
Northern aplomado falcon | Falco femoralis septentrionalis | FE | |
Northern spotted owl | Strix occidentalis caurina | FT | |
Peregrine falcon | Falco peregrinus | FE | |
Piping plover | Charadrius melodus | FE/FT | |
Red-cockaded woodpecker | Picoides borealis | FE | |
Short-tailed albatross | Diomedea albatrus | FE | |
Southwestern willow flycatcher | Empidonax traillii extimus | FE | |
Spectacled eider | Somateria fischeri | FT | |
Steller's eider | Polystricta stelleri | FT | |
Western snowy plover | Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus | FT | |
Whooping Crane | Grus americana | FE | |
Wood stork | Mycteria americana | FE | |
Yuma clapper rail | Rallus longirostris yumaensis | FE | |
Crustaceans | Conservancy fairy shrimp | Branchinecta conservatio | FE |
Illinois cave amphipod | Gammarus acherondytes | PE | |
Socorro isopod | Exosphaeroma thermophilus | FE | |
Vernal pool tadpole shrimp | Lepidurus packardi | FE | |
Vernal pool fairy shrimp | Brachinecta lynchi | FT | |
Fish | Arctic grayling | Thymallus arcticus | C |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Arkansas darter | Etheostoma cragini | C | |
Arkansas river shiner | Notropis girardi | PE | |
Ash Meadows Amargosa pupfish | Cyprinodon nevadensis mionectes | FE | |
Ash Meadows speckled dace | Rhinichthys osculus nevadensis | FE | |
Beautiful shiner | Cyprinella formosa | FT | |
Big Spring spinedace | Lepidomeda mollispinis pratensis | FT | |
Fish | Bonytail chub | Gila elegans | FE |
Borax Lake Chub | Gila boraxobius | FE | |
Bull trout | Salvelinus confluentus | PT/PE | |
Chihuahua chub | Gila nigrescens | FT | |
Clover Valley speckled dace | Rhinichthys osculus oligoporus | FE | |
Coho salmon (Oregon) | Oncorhynchus kisutch | FT | |
Coho salmon (Central CA) | Oncorhynchus kisutch | FT | |
Colorado squawfish | Ptychocheilus lucius | FE | |
Cowhead Lake tui chub | Gila bicolor vaccaceps | C | |
Cui-ui | Chasmistes cujus | FE | |
Desert dace | Eremichthys acros | FT | |
Desert pupfish | Cyprinodon macularius | FE | |
Devil's Hole pupfish | Cyprinodon diabolis | FE | |
Fall chinook salmon | Oncorhynchus tshawytscha | FT | |
Foskett speckled dace | Rhinichthys osculus spp. 3 | FT | |
Gila chub | Gila intermedia | C | |
Gila trout | Oncoryhnchus gilae | FE | |
Gila topminnow | Poeciliopsis occidentalis | FE | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Greenback cutthroat trout | Oncorhynchus clarki stomias | FT | |
Gulf sturgeon | Acipenser oxyrhynchus desotoi | FT | |
Hiko White River springfish | Crenichthys baileyi grandis | FE | |
Humpback chub | Gila cypha | FE | |
Hutton tui chub | Gila bicolor spp. 1 | FT | |
Independence Valley speckled dace | Rhinichthys osculus lethoporus | FE | |
June sucker | Chasmistes liorus | FE | |
Fish | Kendall Warm Springs dace | Rhinichthys osculus thermalis | FE |
Kootenai River white sturgeon | Acipenser transmontanus | FE | |
Lahontan cutthroat trout | Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi | FT | |
Least chub | Lotichthys phlegethontis | PE | |
Little Colorado spinedace | Lepidomeda vittata | FT | |
Loach minnow | Rhinichthys (Tiaroga) cobitis | FT | |
Lost River sucker | Deltistes (Catostomus) luxatus | FE | |
Moapa dace | Moapa coriacea | FE | |
Modoc sucker | Catostomus microps | FE | |
Mohave tui chub | Gila bicolor mohavensis | FE | |
Nevada speckled dace | Rhinichthys osculus nevadensis | FE | |
Okaloosa darter | Etheostoma okaloosae | FE | |
Oregon chub | Oregonichtys (Hybopsis) crameri | FE | |
Owens pupfish | Cyprinodon radiosus | FE | |
Owens tui chub | Gila bicolor snyderi | FE | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Pahranagat roundtail chub | Gila robusta jordani | FE | |
Pahrump killifish | Empetrichthys latos | FE | |
Paiute cutthroat trout | Oncorhynchus clarki seleniris | FT | |
Pallid sturgeon | Scaphirhynchus albus | FE | |
Pecos bluntnose shiner | Notropis simus pecosensis | FT | |
Pecos gambusia | Gambusia nobilis | FE | |
Pecos pupfish | Cyprinodon pecosensis | PE | |
Railroad Valley springfish | Crenichthys nevadae | FT | |
Razorback sucker | Xyrauchen texanus | FE | |
Rio Grande silvery minnow | Hybognathus amarus | FE | |
Shortnose sucker | Chasmistes brevirostris | FE | |
Fish | Sicklefin chub | Macrhybopsis meeki | C |
Sockeye salmon | Oncorhynchus nerka | FE | |
Sonora chub | Gila ditaenia | FT | |
Spikedace | Meda fulgida | FT | |
Spring/summer chinook salmon | Oncorhynchus tschawytscha | FT | |
Steelhead trout | Oncorhynchus mykiss | FE/FT | |
Sturgeon chub | Macrhybopsis gelida | C | |
Umpqua River cutthroat trout | Oncorhynchus clarki clarki | FE | |
Unarmored three-spine stickleback | Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni | FE | |
Virgin River chub | Gila robusta seminuda | FE | |
Warm Springs Amargosa pupfish | Cyprinodon nevadensis pectoralis | FE | |
Warner sucker | Catostomus warnerensis | FT | |
White River spinedace | Lepidomeda albivallis | FE | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
White River springfish | Crenichthys baileyi baileyi | FE | |
Winter-run Chinook Salmon | Oncorhynchus tschawytscha | FE | |
Woundfin | Plagopterus argentissimus | FE | |
Yaqui catfish | Ictalurus pricei | FT | |
Yaqui chub | Gila purpurea | FE | |
Yaqui topminnow | Poeciliopsis occidentalis sonoriensis | FE | |
Insects and Arthropods | American burying beetle | Nicrophorus americanus | FE |
Ash Meadows naucorid bug | Ambrysus amargosus | FT | |
Coral pink sand dunes tiger beetle | Cicindela limbata albissima | C | |
Delta sands flower loving fly | Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis | FE | |
Fender's blue butterfly | Icaricia icarioides fenderi | PE | |
Holsinger's cave beetle | Pseudanophthalmus holsingeri | C | |
Insects and Arthropods | Karner blue butterfly | Lycaeides melissa samuelis | FE |
Kern primrose sphinx moth | Euproserpinus euterpe | FT | |
Kincaid's lupine | Lupinus sulphureus ssp. Kincaidii | PT | |
Oregon's silverspot butterfly | Speyeria zerene hippolyta | FT | |
Pawnee montane skipper | Hesperia leonardus montana | FT | |
Uncomphagre fritillary butterfly | Boloria acrocnema | FE | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Valley elderberry longhorn beetle | Desmocerus californicus dimorphus | FT | |
Mammals | Alabama beach mouse | Peromyscus polionotus ammobates | FE |
Amargosa vole | Microtus californicus scirpensis | FE | |
Black-footed ferret | Mustela nigripes | FE | |
Blue whale | Balaenoptera musculus | FE | |
Chocawhatchee beach mouse | Peromyscus polionotus allophrys | FE | |
Columbian white-tailed deer | Odocoileus virginianus leucurus | FE | |
Finback whale | Balaenoptera physalus | FE | |
Florida black bear | Ursus americanus floridanus | C | |
Florida panther | Felis concolor coryi | FE | |
Fresno kangaroo rat | Dipodomys nitratoides exilis | FE | |
Giant kangaroo rat | Dipodomys ingens | FE | |
Gray bat | Myotis grisescens | FE | |
Gray whale | Eschrichtius robustus | FE | |
Gray wolf | Canis lupis | FE | |
Grizzly (brown) bear | Ursus arctos | FT | |
Hualapai Mexican vole | Microtus mexicanus hualapaiensis | FE | |
Humpback whale | Megaptera novaeangliae | FE | |
Idaho ground squirrel | Spermophilus brunneus | PT | |
Mammals | Indiana bat | Myotis sodalis | FE |
Jaguar | Panthera onca | FE | |
Jaguarundi | Felis yagouaroundi | FE | |
Lesser long-nosed bat | Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae | FE | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Lower Keys marsh rabbit | Sylvalagus palustirs hefneri | FE | |
Manatee (West Indian) | Trichechus manatus | FE | |
Mexican gray wolf | Canis lupus baileyi | FE | |
Mexican long-nosed bat | Leptonycteris nivalis | FE | |
North American wolverine | Gulo gulo luscus | C | |
North American lynx | Lynx canadensis | C | |
Ocelot | Felis pardalis | FE | |
Perdido Key beach mouse | Peromyscus polioonotus trissyllepsis | FE | |
Peninsular bighorn sheep | Ovis canadensis cremnobates | FE | |
Peninsular pronghorn | Antilocapra americana peninsularis | FE | |
Right whale | Balaena glacialis | FE | |
Saint Andrew's beach mouse | Peromyscus polionotus penninsularis | PE | |
San Joaquin kit fox | Vulpes macrotis mutica | FE | |
San Joaquin Valley woodrat | Neotoma fuscipes riparia | PE | |
Sei whale | Balaenoptera borealis | FE | |
Silver rice rat | palustris natator | FE | |
Sonoron pronghorn | Antilocapra americana sonoriensis | FE | |
Southern sea otter | Enhydra lutris nereis | FT | |
Sperm whale | Physeter macrocephalus | FE | |
Steller (Northern) sea lion | Eumetopias jubatus | FT | |
Stephen's kangaroo rat | Dipodomys stephensi | FE | |
Swift fox | Vulpes velox | C | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Tipton kangaroo rat | Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides | FE | |
Utah prairie dog | Cynomys parvidens | FT | |
Woodland caribou | Rangifer tarandus caribou | FE | |
Reptiles | American alligator | Alligator mississippiensis | FT |
Black legless lizard | Anniella pulchra nigra | PE | |
Blunt-nosed leopard lizard | Gambelia silus | FE | |
Bog turtle | Clemmys muhlenbergii | FT | |
Coachella Valley fringe toed lizard | Uma inornata | FT | |
Desert tortoise (Mojave) | Gopherus agassizii | FT | |
Eastern indigo snake | Drymarchon corais couperi | FT | |
Giant garter snake | Thamnophis gigas | FT | |
Gopher tortoise | Gopherus polyphemus | FT | |
Green sea turtle | Chelonia mydas | FE/FT | |
Lake Erie water snake | Nerodia sipedon insularum | PT | |
Leatherback sea turtle | Dermochelys coriaccea | FE | |
Loggerhead sea turtle | Caretta caretta | FT | |
New Mexican ridge nosed rattlesnake | Crotalus willardi obscurus | FT | |
Northern copperbelly water snake | Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta | FT | |
Olive-Ridley sea turtle | Lepidochelys olivacea | FT | |
Wyoming toad | Bufo hemiophyrs baxteri | FE | |
Mussels and Snails | Alamosa springsnail | Tryonia alamosae | FE |
Banbury Springs limpet | Lanx spp. | FE | |
Bliss Rapids snail | Taylorconcha serpenticola | FT | |
Bruneau Hot Springsnail | Pyrgulopsis bruneauensis | FE | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Mussels and Snails | Cave snail | Antrobia culveri | C |
Chipola slabshell | Elliptio chipolaensis | FT | |
Chupadera springsnail | Prygulopsis chupaderae | C | |
Clubshell mussel | Pleuobema clava | FE | |
Cumberland elktoe | Alasmindonta atropurpurea | FE | |
Cumberlandian combshell | Epioblasma brevidans | FE | |
Cylindrical lioplax | Lioplax cyclostomaformis | PE | |
Fat three ridge mussel | Amblema meislerii | FE | |
Fat-whorled pondsnail | Stagnicola bonnevillensis | C | |
Flat pebblesnail | Lepyrium showalteri | PE | |
Gila springsnail | Prygulopsis gilae | C | |
Gulf moccainshell | Medionidus penicillatus | FE | |
Huachuca springsnail | Pyrgulopsis thompsoni | C | |
Idaho springsnail | Fontelicella idahoensis | FE | |
Kanab ambersnail | Oxyloma haydeni kanabensis | FE | |
Koster's tryonia | Tryonia kosteri | C | |
Lacy elimia | Elimia crenatella | PT | |
New Mexico hotspringsnail | Prygulopsis thermalis | C | |
Ochckonee moccainshell | Medionidus simpsonianus | FE | |
Ogden Deseret mountainsnail | Oreohelix peripherica wasatchensis | C | |
Oval pigtoe | Pleurobema pyeiforme | FE | |
Oyster mussel | Epionlasma capsaeformis | FE | |
Page springsnail | Pyrgulopsis morrisoni | C | |
Painted rocksnail | Leptoxis taeniata | PT | |
Pecos assiminea snail | Assiminea pecos | C | |
TYPE | COMMON NAME | GENUS, SPECIES | STATUS |
Mussels and Snails | Plicate rocksnail | Leptoxis plicata | PE |
Purple bankclimber | Elliptoideus sloatianus | FT | |
Purple bean | Villosa perpurpurea | FE | |
Roswell springsnail | Prygulopsis roswellensis | C | |
Rough rabbitsfoot | Quadrula cylindrica strigillata | FE | |
Round rocksnail | Leptoxis ampla | PT | |
San Xavier talussnail | Sonorella eremita | PE | |
Shiny-rayed pocketbook | Lampsilis subangulata | FE | |
Snake River physa snail | Physa natricina | FE | |
Socorro springsnail | Prygulopsis neomexicana | FE | |
Utah valvata snail | Valvata utahensis | FE | |
Wet Canyon talussnail | Sonorella macrophallus | C |
Amargosa toad | Glen Canyon chuckwalla | Ringneck snake |
Arizona toad | Gray-checkered whiptail | Rosy boa |
Arizona skink | Great Plains rat snake | Sacramento Mountain salamander |
Banded Gila monster | Jemez Mountain salamander | Smooth green snake |
Blanchard's cricket frog | Larch Mountain salamander | Snapping turtle |
California king snake | Longnose leopard lizard | Sonora lyre snake |
Canadian toad | Lowland leopard frog | Sonora tiger salamander |
Canyon spotted whiptail | Massasauga | Southern torrent salamander |
Canyon whiptail | Mexican garter snake | Southwestern black snake |
Cascades frog | Midget-faded rattlesnake | Southwestern speckled rattlesnake |
Chuckwalla | Milk snake | Spiny softshell turtle |
Coeur d'Alene salamander | Mojave black-collard lizard | Spotted frog |
Collard lizard (Mojave black) | Mojave Desert sidewinder | Tailed frog |
Common kingsnake | Mojave patch-nosed snake | Tarahumara frog |
Cowles fringe-toed lizard | Narrow-headed garter snake | Texas horned lizard |
Desert night lizard | Narrowhead garter snake | Utah banded gecko |
Desert spiny lizard | Northern leopard frog | Utah blind snake |
Desert iguana | Northern red-legged frog | Utah milk snake |
Desert tortoise (Sonoran Desert) | Northern sagebrush lizard | Utah mountain king snake |
Desert glossy snake | Northwestern pond turtle | Western toad |
Desert horned lizard | Pacific chorus frog | Western chuckwalla |
Dunes sagebrush lizard | Painted Desert glossy snake | Western ground snake |
Eastern short-horned lizard | Plains leopard frog | Wood frog |
Flat-tailed horned lizard | Plateau striped whiptail |
Matrix of Regional Priority Bat Species Developed by the Bat Working Group (1998) | ||||||
Species | Region 1 | Region 2 | Regions 3, 4, 9, 10 | Region 5 | Region 6 | Regions 7, 8 |
MULTIPLE HABITAT BATS | ||||||
Southwestern myotis | M | |||||
California myotis | L | M | L | L | M | L |
Western small-footed myotis | P | M | L | M | M | M |
Long-eared myotis | M | M | L | M | M | M |
Keen's myotis | H | |||||
Little brown bat | L | L | L | M | M | M |
Arizona myotis | M | |||||
Northern myotis | L | |||||
Fringed myotis | H | H | M | H | H | M |
Long-legged myotis | M | M | L | H | L | M |
Yuma myotis | L | M | L | L | M | L |
Big brown bat | L | L | L | L | L | L |
Lappet-eared bat | H | H | ||||
Pallid bat | H | M | L | H | M | L |
Mexican free-tailed bat | L | L | L | M | L | |
TREE-ROOSTING BATS | ||||||
Western red bat | H | H | H | |||
Eastern red bat | L | |||||
Hoary bat | M | M | M | M | M | M |
Western yellow bat | H | H | ||||
Silver-haired bat | M | M | M | M | M | M |
H = high priority; M = medium priority; L = low priority; P = periphery (species on the edge of its range). | ||||||
Matrix of Regional Priority Bat Species Developed by the Bat Working Group (1998) | ||||||
Species | Region 1 | Region 2 | Regions 3, 4, 9, 10 | Region 5 | Region 6 | Regions 7, 8 |
CLIFF-ROOSTING BATS | ||||||
Western pipestrelle | P | L | L | L | M | L |
Spotted bat | P | H | M | H | H | M |
Pocketed free-tailed bat | M | M | ||||
Big free-tailed bat | L | M | H | M | ||
Western mastiff bat | H | H | M | |||
Underwood's mastiff bat | M | |||||
CAVE-ROOSTING BATS | ||||||
Ghost-faced bat | M | |||||
California leaf-nosed bat | H | H | ||||
Mexican long-tongued bat | M | H | ||||
Lesser long-nosed bat | H | |||||
Big long-nosed bat | H | |||||
Cave myotis | L | M | ||||
Townsend's big-eared bat | H | H | H | H | H | H |
H = high priority; M = medium priority; L = low priority; P = periphery (species on the edge of its range). |
Figures G-1-G-4, Maps Showing Distribution of Mineral Commodities Across
the United StatesA-187
Table G-1. Gross State Product (GSP) for Study Area 1982-1996A-191
Table G-2. Personal Income and Employment in Study Area, 1980, 1990, 1996 A-193
Table G-3. Employment Trends in Study Area, 1980-1996 A-194
Methodology for Estimating the Contribution of Locatable Mineral Production
to the
Economies of the 12 Western States A-196
Table G-1. Gross State Product (GSP) for Study Area 1982-1996 (millions of chained 1996 dollars) | |||||||
State |
1982 | % of 1982 State Total |
1990 | % of 1990 State |
1996 | % of 1996 State Total |
Percent Change 1982-1996 |
Alaska | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $25,800 | 1.000 | $28,400 | 1.000 | $24,200 | 1.000 | -0.063 |
Mining | $6,070 | 23.5% | $9,640 | 0.339 | $5,420 | 0.224 | -0.106 |
Metal mining | $6 | 0.000 | $197 | 0.007 | $176 | 0.007 | 26.167 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $7 | 0.000 | $10 | 0.000 | $19 | 0.001 | 1.571 |
Arizona | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $54,400 | 1.000 | $79,200 | 1.000 | $112,000 | 1.000 | 1.049 |
Mining | $494 | 0.009 | $839 | 0.011 | $1,480 | 0.013 | 1.994 |
Metal mining | $438 | 0.008 | $719 | 0.009 | $1,260 | 0.011 | 1.879 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $27 | 0.001 | $38 | 0.000 | $83 | 0.001 | 2.037 |
California | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $623,000 | 1.000 | $925,000 | 1.000 | $963,000 | 1.000 | 0.545 |
Mining | $6,350 | 0.010 | $6,340 | 0.007 | $5,780 | 0.006 | -0.090 |
Metal mining | $70 | 0.000 | $214 | 0.000 | $289 | 0.000 | 3.108 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $382 | 0.001 | $697 | 0.001 | $903 | 0.001 | 1.365 |
Colorado | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $73,800 | 1.000 | $85,900 | 1.000 | $116,000 | 1.000 | 0.574 |
Mining | $1,450 | 0.020 | $1,750 | 0.020 | $1,940 | 0.017 | 0.338 |
Metal mining | $211 | 0.003 | $90 | 0.001 | $114 | 0.001 | -0.459 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $41 | 0.001 | $49 | 0.001 | $140 | 0.001 | 2.450 |
Idaho | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $15,900 | 1.000 | $19,900 | 1.000 | $27,900 | 1.000 | 0.755 |
Mining | $153 | 0.010 | $206 | 0.010 | $174 | 0.006 | 0.136 |
Metal mining | $85 | 0.005 | $114 | 0.006 | $95 | 0.003 | 0.115 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $63 | 0.004 | $95 | 0.005 | $77 | 0.003 | 0.222 |
Montana | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $15,100 | 1.000 | $15,200 | 1.000 | $18,500 | 1.000 | 0.225 |
Mining | $719 | 0.048 | $737 | 0.048 | $903 | 0.049 | 0.256 |
Metal mining | $85 | 0.006 | $161 | 0.011 | $272 | 0.015 | 2.190 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $40 | 0.003 | $72 | 0.005 | $66 | 0.004 | 0.667 |
Nevada | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $23,400 | 1.000 | $36,800 | 1.000 | $53,700 | 1.000 | 1.295 |
Mining | $314 | 0.013 | $1,090 | 0.030 | $1,970 | 0.037 | 5.265 |
Metal mining | $216 | 0.009 | $967 | 0.026 | $1,830 | 0.034 | 7.477 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $94 | 0.004 | $91 | 0.002 | $133 | 0.002 | 0.409 |
New Mexico | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $26,600 | 1.000 | $29,500 | 1.000 | $42,700 | 1.000 | 0.607 |
Mining | $2,860 | 0.108 | $2,710 | 0.092 | $3,050 | 0.071 | 0.066 |
Metal mining | $169 | 0.006 | $216 | 0.007 | $180 | 0.004 | 0.064 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $124 | 0.005 | $176 | 0.006 | $319 | 0.007 | 1.569 |
Oregon | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $50,900 | 1.000 | $66,500 | 1.000 | $87,000 | 1.000 | 0.708 |
Mining | $59 | 0.001 | $87 | 0.001 | $104 | 0.001 | 0.750 |
Metal mining | $8 | 0.000 | $5 | 0.000 | $3 | 0.000 | -0.600 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $42 | 0.001 | $75 | 0.001 | $99 | 0.001 | 1.333 |
Utah | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $28,300 | 1.000 | $36,000 | 1.000 | $50,400 | 1.000 | 0.777 |
Mining | $682 | 0.024 | $1,360 | 0.038 | $1,620 | 0.032 | 1.375 |
Metal mining | $163 | 0.006 | $285 | 0.008 | $684 | 0.014 | 3.185 |
Table G-1. Gross State Product (GSP) for Study Area 1982-1996 (millions of chained 1996 dollars) | |||||||
State |
1982 | % of 1982 State Total |
1990 | % of 1990 State |
1996 | % of 1996 State Total |
Percent Change 1982-1996 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $51 | 0.002 | $87 | 0.002 | $30 | 0.001 | -0.408 |
Washington | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $99,800 | 1.000 | $136,000 | 1.000 | $160,000 | 1.000 | 0.599 |
Mining | $111 | 0.001 | $251 | 0.002 | $332 | 0.002 | 1.983 |
Metal mining | $30 | 0.000 | $66 | 0.000 | $53 | 0.000 | 0.750 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $67 | 0.001 | $136 | 0.001 | $222 | 0.001 | 2.318 |
Wyoming | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $13,900 | 1.000 | $14,200 | 1.000 | $16,800 | 1.000 | 0.208 |
Mining | $3,250 | 0.233 | $4,460 | 0.313 | $5,320 | 0.316 | 0.637 |
Metal mining | $117 | 0.008 | $27 | 0.002 | $19 | 0.001 | -0.838 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $369 | 0.026 | $589 | 0.041 | $754 | 0.045 | 1.044 |
Study Area | |||||||
Total Gross State Product | $1,050, 000 | 1.000 | $1,470, 000 | 1.000 | $1,670,000 | 1.000 | 0.590 |
Mining | $22,100 | 0.021 | $28,900 | 0.020 | $28,100 | 0.017 | 0.273 |
Metal mining | $1,590 | 0.002 | $3,060 | 0.002 | $4,970 | 0.003 | 2.121 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $1,310 | 0.001 | $2,110 | 0.001 | $2,850 | 0.002 | 1.177 |
Metals, nonmetals combined | $2,900 | 0.003 | $5,170 | 0.004 | $7,820 | 0.005 | 1.696 |
U.S. (GDP) | |||||||
Total Gross Domestic Product | $5,030, 000 | 1.000 | $6,660, 000 | 1.000 | $7,630,000 | 1.000 | 0.518 |
Mining | $87,800 | 0.017 | $108,000 | 0.016 | $114,000 | 0.015 | 0.294 |
Metal mining | $2,350 | 0.000 | $3,970 | 0.001 | $6,840 | 0.001 | 1.909 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | $5,070 | 0.001 | $7,830 | 0.001 | $10,200 | 0.001 | 1.006 |
Metals, nonmetals combined | $7,420 | 0.001 | $11,800 | 0.002 | $17,000 | 0.002 | 1.292 |
Study Area as % of U.S. Total | |||||||
Total GSP | 0.209 | N/A | 0.221 | N/A | 0.219 | N/A | 0.047 |
Mining | 0.251 | N/A | 0.268 | N/A | 0.247 | N/A | -0.016 |
Metal mining | 0.678 | N/A | 0.771 | N/A | 0.727 | N/A | 0.073 |
Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels | 0.258 | N/A | 0.270 | N/A | 0.280 | N/A | 0.085 |
Metals, nonmetals combined | 0.391 | N/A | 0.439 | N/A | 0.460 | N/A | 0.176 |
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis 1998. |
Table G-2. Personal Income and Employment in Study
Area, 1980, 1990, 1996 (million 1996 dollars) | |||
Category | 1980 | 1990 | 1996 |
PERSONAL INCOME | |||
Total Personal Income | |||
Study Area Total | $891,000 | $1,240,000 | $1,390,000 |
U.S. Total | $4,350,000 | $5,750,000 | $6,480,000 |
Study Area as Percent of U.S. Total | 0.205 | 0.215 | 0.215 |
Personal Income - Metal Mining | |||
Study Area Total | $3,660 | $1,940 | $2,360 |
U.S. Total | $6,030 | $2,740 | $3,260 |
Study Area as Percent of U.S. Total | 0.606 | 0.709 | 0.725 |
Personal Income - Nonmetallic Minerals, except fuels | |||
Study Area Total | $1,320 | $1,140 | $1,110 |
U.S. Total | $5,110 | $5,070 | $4,900 |
Study Area as Percent of U.S. Total | 0.258 | 0.224 | 0.226 |
Personal Income - Metals, Nonmetals combined | |||
Study Area Total | $4,980 | $3,080 | $3,470 |
U.S. Total | $11,100 | $7,810 | $8,160 |
Study Area as Percent of U.S. Total | 0.447 | 0.394 | 0.425 |
EMPLOYMENT (000) | |||
Total Employment | |||
Study Area Total | 22,300 | 29,500 | 32,700 |
U.S. Total | 114,000 | 139,000 | 152,000 |
Study Area as Percent of U.S. Total | 0.196 | 0.212 | 0.215 |
Employment - Mining | |||
Study Area Total | 245 | 203 | 181 |
U.S. Total | 1,280 | 1,040 | 880 |
Study Area as Percent of U.S. Total | 0.192 | 0.195 | 0.206 |
POPULATION (000) | |||
Study Area Total | 42,500 | 52,000 | 57,300 |
U.S. Total | 227,000 | 249,000 | 265,000 |
Study Area as Percent of U.S. Total | 0.187 | 0.208 | 0.216 |
Notes: All figures rounded to three significant
digits. Mining employment not available for metal and nonmetal subsectors.
Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis 1998. |
Table G-3. Employment Trends in Study Area, 1980-1996 | |||||||
State |
1980 |
Percent of 1980 Total |
1990 |
Percent of 1990 Total |
1996 | Percent of 1996 Total |
Percent Change 1980-1996 |
Alaska | |||||||
Total | 169,000 | 1.000 | 233,000 | 1.000 | 257,000 | 1.000 | 0.525 |
Total Private | 115,000 | 0.685 | 165,000 | 0.708 | 189,000 | 0.736 | 0.638 |
Mining | 6,680 | 0.040 | 11,400 | 0.049 | 9,620 | 0.037 | 0.439 |
Metal Mining | 320 | 0.002 | 1,060 | 0.005 | 1,040 | 0.004 | 2.259 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 0 | N/A | 0 | N/A | 0 | N/A | N/A |
Arizona | |||||||
Total | 1,020,000 | 1.000 | 1,500,000 | 1.000 | 1,890,000 | 1.000 | 0.861 |
Total Private | 825,000 | 0.810 | 1,240,000 | 0.828 | 1,600,000 | 0.847 | 0.944 |
Mining | 21,100 | 0.021 | 12,700 | 0.008 | 14,000 | 0.007 | -0.338 |
Metal Mining | 19,200 | 0.019 | 10,600 | 0.007 | 12,000 | 0.006 | -0.394 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 658 | 0.001 | 855 | 0.001 | 1,260 | 0.001 | 0.918 |
California | |||||||
Total | 10,100, 000 | 1.000 | 13,300, 000 | 1.000 | 13,100, 000 | 1.000 | 0.299 |
Total Private | 8,400,000 | 0.831 | 11,300, 000 | 0.848 | 11,100, 000 | 0.843 | 0.318 |
Mining | 43,300 | 0.004 | 40,100 | 0.003 | 28,800 | 0.002 | -0.335 |
Metal Mining | 0 | N/A | 2,390 | 0.000 | 2,560 | 0.000 | N/A |
Nonmetallic minerals | 7,960 | 0.001 | 6,730 | 0.001 | 5,510 | 0.000 | -0.307 |
Colorado | |||||||
Total | 1,230,000 | 1.000 | 1,500,000 | 1.000 | 1,870,000 | 1.000 | 0.521 |
Total Private | 996,000 | 0.809 | 1,240,000 | 0.823 | 1,580,000 | 0.843 | 0.586 |
Mining | 36,000 | 0.029 | 19,800 | 0.013 | 13,600 | 0.007 | -0.622 |
Metal Mining | 11,700 | 0.009 | 3,440 | 0.002 | 2,250 | 0.001 | -0.807 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 806 | 0.001 | 985 | 0.001 | 1,410 | 0.001 | 0.748 |
Idaho | |||||||
Total | 316,000 | 1.000 | 386,000 | 1.000 | 493,000 | 1.000 | 0.557 |
Total Private | 250,000 | 0.789 | 309,000 | 0.801 | 402,000 | 0.815 | 0.609 |
Mining | 4,670 | 0.015 | 3,870 | 0.010 | 3,070 | 0.006 | -0.343 |
Metal Mining | 3,100 | 0.010 | 2,760 | 0.007 | 1,850 | 0.004 | -0.403 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 1,400 | 0.004 | 1,110 | 0.003 | 1,200 | 0.002 | -0.142 |
Montana | |||||||
Table G-3. Employment Trends in Study Area, 1980-1996 | |||||||
State |
1980 |
Percent of 1980 Total |
1990 |
Percent of 1990 Total |
1996 | Percent of 1996 Total |
Percent Change 1980-1996 |
Total | 265,000 | 1.000 | 287,000 | 1.000 | 350,000 | 1.000 | 0.320 |
Total Private | 204,000 | 0.768 | 223,000 | 0.776 | 280,000 | 0.802 | 0.377 |
Mining | 8,850 | 0.033 | 6,280 | 0.022 | 5,420 | 0.015 | -0.388 |
Metal Mining | 1,920 | 0.007 | 2,640 | 0.009 | 2,090 | 0.006 | 0.088 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 841 | 0.003 | 826 | 0.003 | 808 | 0.002 | -0.039 |
Nevada | |||||||
Total | 398,000 | 1.000 | 620,000 | 1.000 | 841,000 | 1.000 | 1.115 |
Total Private | 341,000 | 0.857 | 544,000 | 0.877 | 742,000 | 0.882 | 1.176 |
Mining | 6,220 | 0.016 | 14,300 | 0.023 | 14,600 | 0.017 | 1.346 |
Metal Mining | 3,640 | 0.009 | 13,000 | 0.021 | 13,000 | 0.015 | 2.571 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 1,770 | 0.004 | 1,130 | 0.002 | 1,470 | 0.002 | -0.169 |
New Mexico | |||||||
Total | 444,000 | 1.000 | 561,000 | 1.000 | 672,000 | 1.000 | 0.514 |
Total Private | 335,000 | 0.754 | 430,000 | 0.767 | 525,000 | 0.782 | 0.569 |
Mining | 29,460 | 0.066 | 16,100 | 0.029 | 15,400 | 0.023 | -0.477 |
Metal Mining | 10,700 | 0.024 | 2,120 | 0.004 | 2,160 | 0.003 | -0.798 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 3,400 | 0.008 | 2,310 | 0.004 | 1,970 | 0.003 | -0.420 |
Oregon | |||||||
Total | 1,020,000 | 1.000 | 1,240,000 | 1.000 | 1,470,000 | 1.000 | 0.445 |
Total Private | 824,000 | 0.811 | 1,030,000 | 0.833 | 1,240,000 | 0.847 | 0.510 |
Mining | 2,280 | 0.002 | 1,530 | 0.001 | 1,800 | 0.001 | -0.213 |
Metal Mining | 271 | 0.000 | 106 | 0.000 | 52 | 0.000 | -0.808 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 1,620 | 0.002 | 1,300 | 0.001 | 1,710 | 0.001 | 0.057 |
Utah | |||||||
Total | 523,000 | 1.000 | 694,000 | 1.000 | 923,000 | 1.000 | 0.767 |
Total Private | 407,000 | 0.778 | 553,000 | 0.796 | 767,000 | 0.830 | 0.885 |
Mining | 18,500 | 0.035 | 0 | 0.000 | 7,930 | 0.009 | -0.571 |
Metal Mining | 8,430 | 0.016 | 3,090 | 0.004 | 2,840 | 0.003 | -0.664 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 999 | 0.002 | 0 | 0.000 | 924 | 0.001 | -0.075 |
Washington | |||||||
Total | 1,600,000 | 1.000 | 2,140,000 | 1.000 | 2,410,000 | 1.000 | 0.502 |
Total Private | 1,290,000 | 0.807 | 1,760,000 | 0.825 | 1,980,000 | 0.823 | 0.531 |
Mining | 3,160 | 0.002 | 0 | N/A | 3,320 | 0.001 | 0.051 |
Metal Mining | 869 | 0.001 | 963 | 0.000 | 495 | 0.000 | -0.430 |
Table G-3. Employment Trends in Study Area, 1980-1996 | |||||||
State |
1980 |
Percent of 1980 Total |
1990 |
Percent of 1990 Total |
1996 | Percent of 1996 Total |
Percent Change 1980-1996 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 1,580 | 0.001 | 1,650 | 0.001 | 2,190 | 0.001 | 0.388 |
Wyoming | |||||||
Total | 205,000 | 1.000 | 191,000 | 1.000 | 214,000 | 1.000 | 0.042 |
Total Private | 163,000 | 0.793 | 140,000 | 0.734 | 161,000 | 0.752 | -0.011 |
Mining | 36,000 | 0.176 | 18,300 | 0.096 | 15,900 | 0.074 | -0.559 |
Metal Mining | 6,430 | 0.031 | 760 | 0.004 | 596 | 0.003 | -0.907 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 5,690 | 0.028 | 3,920 | 0.021 | 3,140 | 0.015 | -0.449 |
Study Area Total | |||||||
Total | 0 | 1.000 | 22,300, 000 | 1.000 | 24,200, 000 | 1.000 | 0.419 |
Total Private | 0 | 0.819 | 18,700, 000 | 0.836 | 20,300, 000 | 0.838 | 0.453 |
Mining | 0 | 0.012 | 138,200 | 0.006 | 128,000 | 0.005 | -0.383 |
Metal Mining | 0 | 0.004 | 40,300 | 0.002 | 38,500 | 0.002 | -0.405 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 0 | 0.002 | 20,000 | 0.001 | 20,800 | 0.001 | -0.196 |
U.S. Total | |||||||
Total | 89,200, 000 | 1.000 | 109,000, 000 | 1.000 | 118,000, 000 | 1.000 | 0.323 |
Total Private | 73,400, 000 | 0.823 | 90,900, 000 | 0.837 | 99,300, 000 | 0.842 | 0.353 |
Mining | 10,400, 002 | 0.012 | 711,000 | 0.007 | 578,000 | 0.005 | -0.444 |
Metal Mining | 100,000 | 0.001 | 58,900 | 0.001 | 53,900 | 0.000 | -0.461 |
Nonmetallic minerals | 124,000 | 0.001 | 112,000 | 0.001 | 107,000 | 0.001 | -0.136 |
Study Area as Percent of U.S. |
|||||||
Total | 0.191 | 0.206 | 0.205 | ||||
Total Private | 0.190 | 0.205 | 0.204 | ||||
Mining | 0.199 | 0.194 | 0.221 | ||||
Metal Mining | 0.647 | 0.685 | 0.715 | ||||
Nonmetallic minerals | 0.208 | 0.178 | 0.194 | ||||
Notes: Figures rounded to three significant
digits. "0" shows data that were withheld to avoid disclosure of
proprietary information. N/A = not applicable. Source: Ball 1997. |
The IMPLAN model uses the U.S. Department of Commerce national I-O model to estimate the flows of commodities used and produced by industry. The social accounts of the region under consideration are also included in the IMPLAN data base. Social accounts represent the flow of commodities to industry from producers and consumers as well as consumption of the factors of production from outside the region. Social accounts are converted to the input/output accounts and multipliers for each industry. IMPLAN includes tables that account for the percentage of each category's expenditures that remain within the region and expenditures that would flow outside the region.
Assumptions used in the I-O based regional impact models can potentially limit the accuracy of some basic models. The inputs used by every firm and the outputs produced by every firm in an industry are assumed to be used or produced in the same proportions. The assumption of homogeneous production can be a problem if production techniques greatly vary within the same industry.
The level of output for any industry is also assumed to be the only factor that determines input purchase requirements. Changes in the relative prices of inputs that would affect the mix of inputs purchased are not accounted for. Changes in technology are not accounted for unless the production functions are modified over time and the models are rerun after each change. Constant returns to scale are assumed, where production functions are linear, the effects of increased demand are additive, and the distribution of purchases and sales is assumed to be static.
I-O models represent the current relationships among production, technology, market structures, and inter-regional trade. Because these relationships are assumed to be static, substitutions between inputs are not allowed to occur. One major reason that substitution would be expected consists of changes in input prices. If the relative prices for inputs change, input substitution would be expected to occur because a different mix of inputs may become more cost effective. Changes in output prices can also cause substitution effects that would reduce total regional impacts. But substitution is not allowed to occur within the I-O model. In addition, the supply of all inputs required for current and future production is not considered to be a constraint in an I-O model.
In the short run these limitations in the I-O methodology may not create significant problems because of the relatively limited adjustments that can be made in a short time. Input substitutions may not be possible immediately, so price changes may not have a short-run impact on the types of inputs used. In the long run, however, an I-O based analysis may not reliably estimate regional impacts. The longer period of time allows producers to respond to price changes, and technology can change substantially in the long run. These factors allow for greater substitution in the long run and a greater possibility of error in a static I-O based model.
The problems of I-O based analyses may also be minor if the impact region is not large enough to significantly affect the market and, therefore, significantly affect prices of inputs and outputs. A small-market impact results in minor price effects and, therefore, minor substitution effects. If a large region is included in an analysis, price effects are more likely, and the input-output analysis will miss some substitution effects.
Estimating the regional impacts from changes in mineral production using IMPLAN may result in significant errors due to the problems mentioned above. Mining techniques for the same mineral can vary a great deal in different regions, resulting in varied input requirements. Input and output prices in the mineral industry can also fluctuate significantly over a relatively short period of time. Despite these potential problems, an analysis of mineral extraction impacts using IMPLAN reveals the magnitude of mineral production impacts.
Total income multipliers translate the impact of changes in final demand spending into changes in total income. Total income is defined as the sum of changes in employee compensation, proprietary income, and other property income, resulting from a change in final demand. Total income is equal to property income plus employee compensation. Property income includes proprietary income and other property income. Proprietary income can be defined as all income from self-employment, such as income earned by noncorporate business owners, doctors, and lawyers. Other property income includes dividends, interest, royalties, rental income, corporate profits, and corporate transfer payments. Employee compensation, a subcategory of total income, represents worker income as measured by wages, salaries, benefits, and retirement payments.
Value added multipliers translate the impact of changes in final demand spending into changes in value added. Value added represents income generated by local factors of production and payments to government, including employee compensation, proprietary income, other types of property income, and indirect business taxes. Indirect business taxes are payments to government on production, sales, purchase, or use of goods and services. Indirect business taxes do not include taxes on profit or income.
Employment multipliers are based on the fact that a change in final demand will have direct, indirect, and induced effects that will lead to employment changes. Employment multipliers measue the total change in employment from the production of $1 of output for final demand. Employment is measured by both part- and full-time jobs. Therefore, the number of jobs are not full-time equivalents.
The extent of regional impacts can be measured in IMPLAN by two types of multipliers. Type I multipliers measure the sum of the direct plus indirect effects divided by the direct effects, or: Type I multiplier = (Direct + Indirect)/(Direct). Type III multipliers account for induced effects, where: Type III multiplier = (Direct + Indirect + Induced)/(Direct). The induced effects in Type III multipliers are derived from an open model where households are exogenous or "outside" the model. The open model allows the assumption that some household spending occurs outside the region of consideration.
A large multiplier generally means that an industry is closely linked to the
local economy. But if the industry is small relative to the size of the local
economy, then a big multiplier does not translate into a large stimulus. A small
increase in demand for a sector with a small multiplier, however, can have a
significant impact if that industry produces a large proportion of total output
of the regional economy. Also, if the direct effect is tiny compared to the
calculated indirect and induced effects, then dividing it into indirect or the
sum of indirect and induced effects will result in a large number. In these
cases the large multiplier is not meaningful and should be ignored.
Mineral production requires large amounts of investment, which supports industries providing production inputs. Tables G-4 and G-5 show the value of inputs and value added for mineral industries by state and as a national average from the 1992 Census of Mineral Industries. Although the data are not complete, they do show the relative costs of labor, supplies, and capital for different types of operations. This information is useful for modifying production relationships in the IMPLAN model.
Another study of regional impadcts of resttraints to mineral access in the East Mojave National Scenic Area estimated the potential impacts to industry output, earnings, and employment in San Bernardino County, California, from mine construction and production (Schantz and Adams 1990). The East Mojave study showed impacts of about $1.27 billion from cumulative gold mine revenues of $968 million at the county level. These amounts represent substantial impacts considering the small study area.
Another study, published by the National Mining Association (see Table G-7)
estimated the economic impact of the solid-minerals mining industry (Leaming
1997). This study, which included minerals such as coal and many nonlocatable
types, estimated that the western states generated $115 billion and 1.1 million
jobs in 1995. These figures amount to 37% of the $524
Table G-4. Employment, Payroll, Value Added, and Costs of
Production for Mining (million $) | ||||||
State/type of mining |
Establish ments | Total Employees |
Payroll |
Value added by mining | Cost of supplies |
Capital expenditures |
Alaska Lead and zinc ores Gold Arizona Copper ores Gold ores Silver ores Metal mining services California Gold ore Miscellaneous metal ores Colorado Lead and zinc ores Gold ores Silver ores Metal mining services Idaho Lead and zinc ores Gold ores Silver ores Miscellaneous metal ores Montana Copper ores Gold & silver ores Metal mining services Miscellaneous metal ores Nevada Gold and silver ores Metal mining services New Mexico Copper ores Utah Copper ores Gold and silver ores Metal mining services Miscellaneous metal ores Washington Gold and silver ores Metal mining services Wyoming Miscellaneous metal ores |
2 41 28 28 1 27 45 11 5 52 1 20 5 25 9 4 3 21 16 7 119 36 7 5 23 22 11 13 14 15 |
250-499 400 10,100 300 <199 500 2,100 250-499 - 1,200 - 200 100-249 250-499 250-499 250-499 500-999 1000 200 250-499 9,900 1,100 1000-2499 1000-2499 500 400 100-249 500 100 300 |
- $19.0 384.6 11.3 - 15.1 77.3 - - 88.7 - 7.0 - - - - - 36.8 6.3 - 455.1 40.6 - - 20.2 16.4 - 23.5 4.9 $15.3 |
- $129.4 1,429.9 48.1 - 42.2 267.7 - - 4.8 - 12.2 - - - - - 160.6 15.0 - 1,718.0 106.4 - - 79.3 14.2 - 67.2 8.8 $14.5 |
- - $888.9 - - 17.9 - - - - - 4.3 - - - - - 60.9 - - 1,096.2 - - - - - - - - |
- - $187.2 - - 5.0 - - - - - 1.2 - - - - - 31.6 - - 556.1 - - - - - - - - - |
Source: Bureau of the Census 1996a and 1996b. |
Table G-5. National Average Costs of Production for Various Minerals, 1992 (million $) | |||||
Item |
Copper |
Gold |
Metal Mining Services |
Miscellaneous Metal Ores |
Silver |
Supplemental labor costs Purchased fuels consumed Purchased electricity Contract work Minerals/ores for preparation Purchased machinery Parts and attachments Industrial chemicals Explosive materials Tires and inner tubes Lime Iron & steel castings and forgings Steel shapes and forms Other supplies Undistributed Communication services Value of shipments and receipts Change in inventories 1991-1992 New capital expend, buildings New capital expend, equipment Used capital expenditures Mineral exploration/development Rental payments Lease rents |
$136.7 61.4 316.7 113.7 208.3 370.5 146.9 104.1 37.4 39.9 21.8 79.5 43.5 175.5 2.5 1.7 3,374.9 21.6 - 385.8 8.6 - $18.4 - |
$181.2 108.9 143.9 - NA 362.1 147.1 128.3 61.6 39.0 26.3 37.1 34.9 196.1 21.2 3.3 4,340.0 18.4 538.2 103.8 16.4 335.3 23.6 $10.1 |
$29.9 16.2 2.2 - NA 13.1 8.7 NA - - - - - 23.8 23.0 0.8 350.4 3.2 0.4 16.5 - NA $6.9 NA |
$24.7 8.8 29.5 - 1.6 9.5 13.0 13.6 3.2 0.8 1.2 - 3.7 19.6 9.8 0.4 312.2 -14.7 5.0 14.4 - - $2.0 - |
$16.7 4.5 4.5 - NA - - - - - - - - - - 0.1 114.6 -10.9 - - 0.1 5.0 - $0.1 |
Source: Bureau of the Census 1996c and 1996d. |
A U.S. Forest Service analysis of energy and minerals industries in the
United States provided information on the economic contribution of U.S.
extractive industries at the state, regional, and national levels (USFS 1996).
This study estimated multipliers for metallic ores, including copper, gold,
silver, ferroalloy ores, uranium, radium, and other metal ores not classified
elsewhere. The study also estimated multipliers for metal mining services,
describing in detail mineral industry impacts. This study can be used to help
validate the regional economic impacts presented in this analysis. The Forest
Service analysis estimated multipliers for 1977, 1982, 1985, and 1990 for the
Nation, for each Resource Planning Act region in the United States, and for
individual states. State-level multipliers are presented for 1985 and 1990 in
Tables G-8 and G-9.
Table G-6. Impacts of U.S. Gold and Silver Production, 1995 ($000) | ||||
State |
Total value |
Employment (jobs) |
Output |
Earnings |
Alaska Arizona California Idaho Montana Nevada Utah |
$54,474 63,209 302,828 64,091 180,676 2,708,263 $303,070 |
757 2,010 5,602 1,416 4,553 51,457 12,093 |
$96,500 154,977 621,039 116,421 365,272 4,832,354 $661,330 |
$27,798 51,389 170,977 34,000 105,587 1,485,211 $239,001 |
Source: Dobra 1997. |
Table G-7. Economic Impact of Solid-Mineral Mining from NMA Study ($000) | |||
State |
Total Value of Solid Minerals Produced |
Total Economic Impact |
Total Employment |
Alaska Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming 12-State Total U.S. Total Western Region as Percent of U.S. |
$589,600 4,975,800 2,866,100 995,500 383,300 1,049,400 3,291,300 1,775,300 391,600 2,417,000 730,300 2,695,500 22,160,700 $60,055,000 37% |
$1,342,600 13,715,900 52,475,900 7,634,600 1,898,300 2,214,100 7,067,000 3,409,000 5,108,300 6,907,000 9,604,800 3,967,400 115,344,900 $523,604,100 22% |
12,000 137,300 469,200 77,300 23,600 24,900 63,000 44,000 53,500 66,200 92,300 41,400 1,104,700 4,954,000 22% |
Source: Leaming 1997. |
The production function coefficients can be modified in IMPLAN to account for regional production differences. These modifications require detailed input requirement data from which production relationships can be estimated. Detailed input requirement data are not available from a cross section of mining operations at a small regional level. But Bureau of the Census data, such as in Tables G-4 and G-5, can be used to estimate the percentage of total production costs attributable to labor and capital expenditures. These percentages, on a statewide basis, can be compared to the national average and used to modify the labor and capital percentages represented in the IMPLAN model.
The U.S. Department of Commerce mining cost data for employee payroll and
capital expenditures for each of the 12 states and the study area total were
compared to the national average. These percentages were then applied to the
national average employee compensation and capital equipment categories included
in the IMPLAN model. The new coefficients were
then applied to the
individual states. In most cases the differences were less than a 10% change in
the coefficient, but the change was important enough to merit the modification.
Although this method for modifying the production functions is not precise, it does attempt to account for regional differences in mineral production. Any evaluation of surface mining regulation alternatives will use a consistent methodology so the economic impacts of the alternatives can be compared on an equal basis. The multipliers for locatable minerals in the study area are presented by state and type of mineral in Table G-10.
The regional impacts from locatable mineral production are based on the estimated value of production adjusted for the local level of activity using IMPLAN local purchase coefficients (LPCs). These LPCs show the percentage of regional demand that can be met by local sources and represent the proportion of activity that occurs in the model region. Using the LPCs better represents the true impact of the mining on the region because the need for some imports is recognized. Assuming all regional demand can be met locally would overstate the regional economic impacts.
The mineral production values used to estimate the regional impacts are
presented in Table G-11. These figures represent the portion of mine production
of locatable minerals estimated to originate only from public lands in the study
area.
Table G-8. 1985 Multipliers Derived in the Forest Service Analysis | ||||
State or Region |
Output Type I Type III |
Total Income Type I Type III |
Value Added Type I Type III |
Employment Type I Type III |
Alaska Metallic ores Metal mining services Arizona Metallic ores Metal mining services Idaho Metallic ores Metal mining services Montana Metallic ores Metal mining services New Mexico Metallic ores Metal mining services Nevada Metallic ores Metal mining services Utah Metallic ores Metal mining services Wyoming Metallic ores Metal mining services Pacific Region (California, Oregon, and Washington) Metallic ores |
1.28 1.44 1.23 1.46 1.40 1.68 1.24 1.61 1.45 2.10 1.43 1.86 1.47 2.01 1.46 1.81 1.28 1.56
|
1.64 2.06 1.41 1.87 1.69 2.27 1.34 1.89 2.09 3.95 1.65 2.38 1.77 2.77 1.75 2.41 1.52 2.07
|
1.44 1.71 1.32 1.65 1.62 2.13 1.32 1.85 1.66 2.72 1.56 2.19 1.76 2.74 1.65 2.21 1.36 1.74
|
1.27 1.52 1.14 1.35 1.40 1.79 1.26 1.82 1.47 2.50 1.45 2.16 1.49 2.24 1.48 2.06 1.25 1.68
|
Source: USFS 1996. |
The estimated regional impacts from the production of locatable minerals on public lands in the study area are presented in Table G-12. The impacts presented here are based on average production relationships at the national level. Therefore, the estimates are representative of the magnitude of the impacts rather than precise estimates.
The study-area total listed in Table G-12 is not a summation of the impacts estimated for each state. The study area represents a separate IMPLAN impact area. The expenditure and income leakages from the aggregate 12-state area would not be the same as the sum of leakages for each state. Since the larger area would be expected to have relatively small leakages, the overall economic impact of mineral production from a 12-state perspective would be expected to be larger than shown by the individual states.
In comparison, Table G-13 shows the regional economic impacts of all
locatable-type mineral production in the study area regardless of land ownership
(i.e. including production originating from federal, state, and private lands).
Tables G-14 through G-16 show the regional economic impacts by
alternative for Alternatives 2, 3, and 4. See the Economics section in Chapter 3
for an explanation of these impacts.
Table G-9. 1990 Multipliers Derived in the Forest Service Analysis | ||||
State or Region |
Output Type I Type III |
Total Income Type I Type III |
Value Added Type I Type III |
Employment Type I Type III |
Alaska Metallic ores Metal mining services Arizona Metallic ores Metal mining services Idaho Metallic ores Metal mining services Montana Metallic ores Metal mining services New Mexico Metallic ores Metal mining services Nevada Metallic ores Metal mining services Utah Metallic ores Metal mining services Wyoming Metallic ores Metal mining services Pacific Region (California, Oregon, and Washington) Metallic ores |
1.16 1.22 1.14 1.25 1.54 1.76 1.33 1.56 1.40 1.67 1.56 1.79 1.37 1.62 1.55 1.77 1.19 1.37
|
1.22 1.31 1.18 1.35 2.43 3.24 1.47 1.80 1.61 2.08 2.35 3.06 1.49 1.82 2.18 2.78 1.19 1.40
|
1.19 1.26 1.14 1.27 2.48 3.36 1.46 1.78 1.55 1.96 2.29 2.99 1.50 1.85 2.15 2.74 1.18 1.36
|
1.39 1.70 1.15 1.40 2.50 3.85 1.92 3.00 2.00 3.31 2.56 4.07 1.82 2.69 2.52 3.84 1.25 1.72
|
Source: USFS 1996. |
Table G-10. Estimated 1994 Multipliers | ||||
State or Region |
Output Type I Type III |
Total Income Type I Type III |
Value Added Type I Type III |
Employment Type I Type III |
Alaska Gold Silver Other Arizona Gold Silver Copper Other California Gold Silver Copper Other Colorado Gold Silver Copper Other Idaho Gold Silver Copper Other Montana Gold Silver Copper Other Nevada Gold Silver Copper Other New Mexico Gold Silver Copper Other Oregon Gold Copper Other Utah Gold Silver Copper Other Washington Gold Silver Copper Other Wyoming Other 12 State Total Gold Silver Copper Other |
1.32 1.45 1.10 1.37 1.12 1.25 1.34 1.62 1.37 1.70 1.43 1.67 1.29 1.50 1.37 1.57 1.41 1.60 1.52 1.71 1.11 1.37 1.40 1.64 1.24 1.47 1.18 1.32 1.59 1.97 |
1.40 1.60 1.09 1.35 1.13 1.30 1.39 1.77 1.36 1.71 1.46 1.74 1.27 1.47 1.37 1.61 1.77 2.15 1.08 1.28 1.53 1.90 1.20 1.39 1.25 1.46 1.70 2.22 |
1.35 1.53 1.07 1.28 1.12 1.26 1.37 1.71 1.36 1.73 1.43 1.68 1.26 1.47 1.33 1.54 1.47 1.74 1.58 1.84 1.08 1.27 1.46 1.77 1.20 1.40 1.20 1.36 1.68 2.19 |
1.63 2.13 1.08 1.43 1.19 1.56 1.68 2.64 1.58 2.51 2.14 3.41 1.63 2.54 1.83 2.93 1.75 2.42 2.98 4.65 1.20 1.98 2.04 3.17 1.51 2.43 1.49 2.15 2.11 3.44 |
Table G-11. Value of Locatable Mineral Production Originating from Public Lands - 1996 ($000) | |||||
Portion of study-area production originating from public lands1 | 43.4% |
36.2% |
1.0% |
2.4% |
N/A |
State |
Gold |
Silver |
Copper |
Other Metals & Industrials | Total |
Alaska Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming Study-Area Total U.S. Total (all land types) Public Land Portion as Percent of U.S. Total |
$26,500 9,500 130,000 26,000 40,300 49,500 1,160,000 2,170 0 126,000 21,100 0 1,590,000 $3,980,000 40% |
$7,890 11,400 1,310 453 13,900 5,680 36,600 1,210 0 10,000 0 0 88,400 $263,000 34% |
$0 29,800 0 0 0 940 580 6,150 0 7,080 0 0 44,550 $4,610,000 1% |
$11,500 7,300 23,000 6,020 5,830 5,350 5,590 1,830 1,830 12,700 3,910 4,850 89,700 $8,800,000 1% |
$45,800 58,000 154,000 32,500 60,000 61,500 1,210,000 11,400 1,830 156,000 25,000 4,850 1,820,000 $17,700,000 10% |
1 Source: USDI 1993. N/A = not applicable. Figures rounded to three significant digits. Some totals may reflect rounding errors. |
Table G-12. Estimated Regional Impacts from Production of
Locatable Minerals on Public Lands 1996 ($000) | |||||
Personal Income | |||||
State |
Total industry Output |
Total | Employee Compensation |
Value added |
Employment (jobs) |
Alaska | $52,800 | $42,800 | $11,400 | $31,400 | 370 |
Arizona | $53,700 | $26,700 | $15,900 | $31,200 | 410 |
California | $233,900 | $124,500 | $75,700 | $136,200 | 1,650 |
Colorado | $47,000 | $23,200 | $13,200 | $27,500 | 280 |
Idaho | $79,800 | $41,100 | $24,500 | $47,300 | 675 |
Montana | $86,200 | $40,200 | $25,100 | $51,700 | 570 |
Nevada | $1,866,900 | $854,800 | $479,900 | $935,300 | 11,060 |
New Mexico | $13,200 | $4,900 | $2,300 | $6,600 | 100 |
Oregon | $1,100 | $800 | $500 | $900 | 10 |
Utah | $108,100 | $43,700 | $23,100 | $54,000 | 760 |
Washington | $27,900 | $16,500 | $10,700 | $18,600 | 170 |
Wyoming | $3,300 | $1,700 | $800 | $2,300 | 30 |
12-State Area | $3,339,300 | $1,495,300 | $819,200 | $1,706,300 | 22,860 |
Note: These estimates include only
production estimated to originate from federal lands Source: IMPLAN Input-Output Modeling System |
Table G-13. Estimated Regional Impacts from Production
of Locatable Minerals 1996 ‹ All Land Ownerships ($000) | |||||
Personal Income | |||||
State |
Total industry Output |
Total | Employee Compensation |
Value added |
Employment (jobs) |
Alaska | $420,800 | $251,900 | $118,400 | $316,400 | 4,100 |
Arizona | 0 | $2,331,800 | 0 | 0 | 35,200 |
California | 0 | $735,400 | 0 | 0 | 11,150 |
Colorado | 0 | $164,400 | 0 | 0 | 2,100 |
Idaho | 0 | $195,500 | 0 | 0 | 3,800 |
Montana | 0 | $248,000 | 0 | 0 | 3,650 |
Nevada | 0 | $2,105,400 | 0 | 0 | 27,150 |
New Mexico | 0 | $31,200 | 0 | 0 | 6,450 |
Oregon | 0 | $35,000 | 0 | 0 | 350 |
Utah | 0 | $765,600 | 0 | 0 | 13,350 |
Washington | 0 | $99,200 | 0 | 0 | 1,350 |
Wyoming | 0 | $69,800 | 0 | 0 | 1,250 |
Study Area | $18,301,200 | $8,857,600 | $4,928,800 | $10,249,10 0 | 135,650 |
Table G-14. Alternative 2 (State Management) Estimated Total Regional Economic Impacts from Production of Locatable Minerals on Federal Lands ($000) | ||||||
|
Value of Production |
Total Industry Output |
Personal Income |
Value Added |
| |
Total |
Employee Compensation | |||||
Alaska Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming Study-Area Total |
$48,100 60,900 162,000 34,100 63,000 64,500 1,270,000 11,900 1,920 163,000 26,300 5,090 $1,910,000 |
$55,400 56,400 246,000 49,400 83,800 90,500 1,960,000 13,900 1,160 114,000 29,300 3,470 $3,510,00 0 |
$26,000 28,000 131,000 24,400 43,200 42,200 898,000 5,150 840 45,900 17,300 1,790 $1,570,00 0 |
$12,000 16,700 79,500 13,900 25,700 26,400 504,000 2,420 525 24,300 11,200 840 $860,000 |
$33,000 33,000 143,000 28,900 49,700 54,300 982,000 6,930 945 56,700 19,500 2,420 $1,790,00 0 |
400 450 1,750 300 700 600 11,600 100 <25 800 200 50 24,000 |
Estimated Change in Regional Economic Activity from Current Conditions ($000) | ||||||
|
Value of Production |
Total Industry Output |
Personal Income | Value Added |
Jobs | |
Total |
Employee Compensation | |||||
Alaska Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming Study Area Total |
$2,300 2,900 7,710 1,630 3,000 3,070 60,300 568 91 7,780 1,250 242 $90,800 |
$2,640 2,690 11,700 2,350 3,990 4,310 93,300 660 55 5,410 1,400 165 $166,000 |
$1,240 1,340 6,230 1,160 2,060 2,010 42,700 245 40 2,190 825 85 $74,800 |
$570 795 3,790 660 1,230 1,260 24,000 115 25 1,160 535 40 $41,000 |
$1,570 1,560 6,810 1,380 2,370 2,590 46,800 330 45 2,700 930 115 $85,300 |
<25 <25 100 <25 50 50 550 <25 <25 50 <25 <25 1,150 |
Notes: Figures rounded to three significant digits. Employment figures rounded to nearest 50, except figures under 25. |
Table G-15. Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Estimated Total Regional Economic Impacts from Production of Locatable Minerals on Federal Lands ($000) | ||||||
|
Value of Production |
Total Industry Output |
Personal Income |
Value Added |
| |
Total |
Employee Compensation | |||||
Alaska Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming Study Area Total |
$43,500 55,100 146,000 30,900 57,000 58,400 1,150,000 10,800 1,740 148,000 23,800 4,610 $1,730,00 0 |
50,200 51,000 222,000 44,700 75,800 81,900 1,770,000 12,500 1,050 103,000 26,500 3,140 $3,170,000 |
$23,600 25,400 118,000 22,000 39,000 38,200 812,000 4,660 760 41,500 15,700 1,620 $1,420,00 0 |
$10,800 15,100 71,900 12,500 23,300 23,800 456,000 2,190 475 21,900 10,200 760 $778,000 |
$29,800 29,600 129,000 26,100 44,900 49,100 889,000 6,270 855 51,300 17,700 2,190 $1,620,00 0 |
350 400 1,550 250 650 550 10,500 100 <25 700 150 50 21,700 |
Estimated Change in Regional Economic Activity from Current Conditions ($000) | ||||||
|
Value of Production |
Total Industry Output |
Personal Income | Value Added |
Jobs | |
Total |
Employee Compensation | |||||
Alaska Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming Study Area Total |
($2,290) (2,900) (7,710) (1,630) (3,000) (3,070) (60,300) (568) (91) (7,780) (1,250) (242) ($90,800) |
($2,640) (2,690) (11,700) (2,350) (3,990) (4,310) (93,300) (660) (55) (5,410) (1,400) (165) ($167,000) |
($1,240) (1,340) (6,230) (1,160) (2,060) (2,010) (42,700) (245) (40) (2,190) (825) (85) ($74,800) |
($570) (795) (3,790) (660) (1,230) (1,260) (24,000) (115) (25) (1,160) (535) (40) ($41,000) |
($1,570) (1,560) (6,810) (1,380) (2,370) (2,590) (46,800) (330) (45) (2,700) (930) (115) ($85,300) |
(<25) (<25) (100) (<25) (50) (50) (550) (<25) (<25) (50) (<25) (<25) (1,150) |
Notes: Figures rounded to three significant digits. Employment figures rounded to nearest 50, except figures under 25. |
Table G-16. Alternative 4 (Maximum Protection) Estimated Total Regional Economic Impacts from Production of Locatable Minerals on Public Lands ($000) | ||||||
|
Value of Production |
Total Industry Output |
Personal Income |
Value Added |
| |
Total |
Employee Compensation | |||||
Alaska Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming Study Area Total |
$39,000 40,600 116,000 22,800 48,000 43,000 844,000 7,950 1,740 109,000 20,000 4,610 $1,300,000 |
$44,900 37,600 175,000 32,900 63,800 60,300 1,310,000 9,240 1,050 75,700 22,300 3,140 $2,340,000 |
$21,100 18,700 93,400 16,200 32,900 28,100 598,000 3,430 760 30,600 13,200 1,360 $1,050,00 0 |
$9,690 11,100 56,800 9,240 19,600 17,600 336,000 1,610 475 16,200 8,560 640 $573,000 |
$26,700 21,800 102,000 19,300 37,800 36,200 655,000 4,620 855 37,800 14,900 1,840 $1,190,00 0 |
300 300 1,250 200 550 400 7,750 50 <25 550 150 <25 16,000 |
Estimated Change in Regional Economic Activity from Current Conditions ($000) | ||||||
|
Value of Production |
Total Industry Output |
Personal Income | Value Added |
Jobs | |
Total |
Employee Compensation | |||||
Alaska Arizona California Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming Study Area Total |
($6,880) (17,400) (38,500) (9,760) (12,000) (18,400) (362,000) (3,410) (91) (46,700) (5,000) (242) ($520,000) |
($7,920) (16,100) (58,500) (14,100) (16,000) (25,900) (560,000) (3,960) (55) (32,400) (5,580) (165) ($1,000,000 ) |
($3,720) (8,010) (31,100) (6,960) (8,220) (12,100) (256,000) (1,470) (40) (13,100) (3,300) (340) ($449,000 ) |
($1,710) (4,770) (18,900) (3,960) (4,900) (7,530) (144,000) (690) (25) (6,930) (2,140) (160) ($246,000) |
($4,710) (9,360) (34,100) (8,250) (9,460) (15,500) (281,000) (1,980) (45) (16,200) (3,720) (460) ($512,000 ) |
(50) (100) (400) (100) (150) (150) (3,300) (50) (<25) (250) (50) (<25) (6,850) |
Notes: Figures rounded to three significant digits. Employment figures rounded to nearest 50, except figures under 25. |
|