Mining Operation Plan (MOP) - NMC | Nevada Mining Company

Transcription

MINE OPERATING PLAN (MOP)
Lease Number: 11-86475
Mineral Lease
Section 11, TI3N, R4W Yavapai County, Arizona
NMC, INC.
(Nevada Mining Company)
909 Sunset Ridge Drive
Franklin, TN 37069
(615) 400-1099
http://www.nmcinc.com
PREPARED BY:
NMC, INC.
FOR:
Minerals Section Natural Resource Division
Arizona State Land Department
DATED:
December 31, 2009
NMC
NEVADA MINING COMPANY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA)
1.0 ADMINISTRATIVE SUMMARY
1
2
1.01 INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 Purpose and Scope of Assessment
1.1.2 Location and Legal Description
1.1.3 Access
1.1.4 Operator Contact Information
2
2
3
3
3
1.02 LAND OWNERSHIP AND CURRENT/PROPOSED LAND USE
1.2.1 Project Site
1.2.2 Adjoining Lands
1.2.3 Existing/Past State Trust Leases
1.2.4 Background /Land Use History
1.2.5 Land Use Compatibility
3
3
3
4
4
4
1.03 SETTING
1.3.1 Site and Vicinity Characteristic
1.3.2 Climate
1.3.3 Geology and Soils
4
4
4
4
1.04 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
1.4.1 Water
1.4.2 Hazardous Materials and Waste
1.4.2.1 Chemical
1.4.4.2 Explosives
1.4.3 Solid Waste
1.4.4 Air Quality
1.4.5 Noise
1.4.6 Visual Impacts
1.4.7 Parks, Recreation Areas, Wildlife Refuges
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1.05 RECLAMATION
1.5.1 Description of Desired Results
1.5.2 References to Mine Operating Plan and Reclamation Details
5
5
5
1.06 PERMITS AND APPROVAL
1.6.1 Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit
1.6.2 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit
1.6.3 Air Quality Permit
1.6.4 Aquifer Protection Permit
1.6.5 Notice of Intent to Drill
1.6.6 Septic Tank
1.6.7 Flood Plain Use Permit
1.6.8 Use Exemption
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.07 UTILITIES
1.7.1 Water
1.7.2 Gas
1.7.3 Electric
1.7.4 Sewer
6
6
7
7
7
Page i
1.08 TRANSPORTATION
7
1.09 PLANNING AND ZONING
1.9.1 Current Planning and Zoning
7
7
1.10 SOCIO-ECONONMICS IMPACTS
1.10.1 Mine Operations economics
1.10.2 State Trust revenue Projections
1.10.3 County and Surrounding Community Impacts
7
7
7
7
1.11 SUMMARY
8
1.12 AGENCIES CONTACTED
8
SECTION II: MINE OPERATIONS PLAN (MOP)
9
2.01 INTRODUCTION
2.1.1 Purpose and Scope
2.1.2 Operations Summary
2.02 DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION
10
10
10
10
2.03 ORE/MATERIAL RESERVES
10
2.04 DEVELOPMENT/PRODUCTION SCHEDULE
10
2.05 OPERATIONS
2.5.1 Site Development
2.5.2 Construction
2.5.3 Mining
2.5.3.1 Mine Design
2.5.3.1.1 Mine design Parameters
2.5.3.2 Topsoil Removal and stockpiling
2.5.3.3 Slope/Bench Preparation
2.5.3.4.1 Drilling
2.5.3.5 Blasting
2.5.3.6 Loading/Hauling
2.5.3.7 Mining Equipment
2.5.4 Processing
2.5.4.1 Plant Operating Parameters
2.5.4.2 Product Mix
2.5.4.3 Ore/Material Handling
2.5.4.4 Crushing Conveying
2.5.4.5 Screening
2.5.4.6 Sorting/Classifying
2.5.4.7 Production Monitoring and Verification
2.5.4.8 Product Handling, Stockpiling, Storage
2.5.4.9 Product Hauling
2.5.4.10 Processing Equipment and Buildings
2.5.5 Labor Force
2.5.5.1 Company
2.5.5.2 Construction Contractors/Subcontractors
2.5.5.3 Mining Contractors/Subcontractors
2.5.6 Emissions and Pollution Controls
2.5.6.1 Particulates
2.5.6.1.1 Drilling and Blasting
10
10
10
11
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
Page ii
2.5.6.1.2 Crushing, Screening, Sorting
2.5.6.1.3 Loading, Hauling and Conveying
2.5.6.1.4 Stockpiles
2.5.6.2 Noise
2.5.6.2.1 Mining Equipment
2.5.6.2.2 Blasting
2.5.6.2.4 Power Generation
2.5.6.3 Solid Waste Handling and disposal
2.5.6.4 Hazardous Waste Water Pollutants/Spills
2.5.6.4.1 Surface water
2.5.6.4.2 Ground Water
2.5.6.5 Emergency Response
2.5.6.6 Monitoring and Reporting
2.5.7 Wildlife/Endangered Species Protection
2.5.8 Protected Plant Species Handling
2.5.10 Cultural Resources
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
15
15
15
15
2.6 FACILITIES
2.6.1 Ancillary Equipment and Facilities
2.6.1.1 Access and Haul Roads
2.6.1.2 Power Generation and Distribution
2.6.1.3 Water Supply and Storage
2.6.1.4 Explosives Storage
2.6.1.5 Fuel Storage
2.6.1.6 Maintenance Areas
2.6.1.7 Mine Office
2.6.1.8 Sanitary and Solid Waste Disposal
2.6.1.9 Site Security
2.6.1.10 Fire Protection
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
16
16
16
16
2.7 ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY
2.7.1 Economic Summary
2.7.2 Commodity/Products
2.7.3 Market Analysis Discussion
2.7.4 Cost
16
16
16
16
18
SECTION III: RECLAMATION AND CLOSURE PLAN (RCP)
3.01 INTRODUCTION
3.1.2 Reclamation Summary
3.02 RECLAMATION APPROACH
3.03 EQUIPMENT AND STRUCTURE
3.04 WASTE DUMPS
3.05 ROADS, POWERLINES, WATERLINES, FENCES
3.06 AREA PREPARATION
3.07 RE-VEGETATION/SEEDING
3.08 SLOPE STABILIZATION
3.09 EROSION AND DRAINAGE CONTROL
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
21
21
21
21
Page iii
APPENDIX A
1. Geosyntec Analysis
(Appendix: Skull Valley Seismic Survey, Hasbrouck Geophysics, Inc.)
APPENDIX B
1. Advanced Analytical Assay
2. Additional Assays
APPENDIX C
1. Skull Valley Pit Map
APPENDIX D
1. Arizona Mill Site Flow Sheet
APPENDIX E
1. Equipment List
Page iv
SECTION I : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA)
ADMINISTRATIVE SUMMARY
Proposed Operating Summary
NMC, Inc. was incorporated on April 3, 1984. On February 4, 1997, Peeples Mining Company
("PMC"), a Nevada corporation was formed as a wholly owned subsidiary. The assets of Peeples
Mining LLC and F&H Mining, Inc. were consolidated into PMC. In addition, the first stage
concentrated precious metals acquired from Zarzion, Ltd in 1995 were transferred to PMC. On
September 9, 2003, NMC, Inc. merged with PMC, with NMC, Inc., continuing as the surviving
corporation. In 2007, we created California Precious Metals, LLC, a California limited liability
company, in order to hold our California mineral claims. The Company currently has two subsidiaries,
Peeples, Inc., a Delaware corporation and California Precious Metals, LLC
Peeples Inc. (A Delaware Corporation qualified to do business in Arizona) submits the following
information in support of a proposed Plan of Operation (POO) in order to perform the rights granted under
Lease No. 11- 86475. The POO would end on the expiration date of the Lease: May 1, 2003, or upon the
expiration of any extended term of the lease.
Peeples Inc. proposes to reclaim and recover valuable precious metals from certain inventoried concentrates
placed in two pits by previous operators on the site. Peeples Inc. will reclaim the pit areas as they process
same. A $15,000 Reclamation Bond was placed with the State of Arizona in 1995 even though the lease
requires only a $5,000 bond.
Because this proposed POO is part of a previous Plan and does not involve disturbing any new land, a new
formal Environmental Assessment (EA) is not required. The Plan will address any environmental issues
pertinent to the current proposed operation.
The mineral lease was first entered into on May 2, 1983. The original Lessees acted as the operator until May
11, 1992. At this date, a "subcontract" was made between the Lessees and Peeples Inc. ( a Delaware Corp.).
Peeples Inc. submitted a POO on Nov. 3, 1992. In 1996, Peeples Inc. submitted an Amended POO. NMC Inc.
has received no formal written action on the 1992 or 1996 POOs.
Peeples Inc. has relied on statements and documents from the previous operators and the former Lessees as to
the belief and understanding that NMC Inc was in full compliance of all necessary permits, filings and POOs.
1.1.01 INTRODUCTION
1.1.1 Purpose and Scope of Assessment
A formal EA will not be a part of this Plan. An EA was performed by previous operators. No new disturbance
will be made and the proposed POO is in essence the same as the initial plan using State of the Art
mechanical separation and gravity concentrating techniques.
PAGE | 2 OF 21
1.1.2 Location and Legal Description
The site is located on Arizona State Land Mineral lease No. 11 - 86475, Yavapai County, Tl3N, R4W, Sec. 11,
Kirkland Quad. The site and adjacent arroyos have been mined since 1983.
1.1.3 Access
The site is approximately three miles east of Skull Valley via Copper Basin Road to a dirt road following a
ridge approximately 3/4 of a mile to site of operation. (see Appendix C, Skull Valley Pit Map).
1.1.4 Operator Contact Information
Operator:
NMC, Inc.
Michael Sheppard, CEO
Franklin, TN 37069
Phone: 615-400-1099
Project Manager Onsite:
Pete Rushbrook
Phone: 928-899-1251
1.02 LAND OWNERSHIP AND CURRENT / PROPOSED LAND USE
1.2.1 Project Site
The project site is owned by the State of Arizona as Trust Land. The site is currently used for cattle grazing.
The proposed use is to process stockpiled concentrates left in pits by previous operators and reclaim the
disturbed areas.
1.2.2 Adjoining Lands
The lands adjoining the site are undeveloped lands used for grazing and owned by the State of Arizona and
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
PAGE | 3 OF 21
1.2.3 Existing/Past State Trust Leases
There is an existing Lease on the subject site:
Mineral Lease No.
11-86475
Date entered:
May 2, 1983
Date ending:
May 1, 2003
Names in which issued: Eugene Bender and Arnold Spielman
1.2.4 Background/Land Use History
The site has been used for precious metal mining since 1983. An estimated 8,000 ounces of gold have been
recovered in the area over the years. The size of the gold found ranges from extremely small particles to
nuggets weighing several ounces. Past operators recovered only the coarse gold. The fine gold and other
precious metals were placed in pits for recovery at a latter date.
1.2.5 Land Use Compatibility
The proposed POO is compatible with the adjoining land use of cattle grazing. The past mining history also
demonstrates that compatibility.
1.03 SETTING
1.3.1 Site and Vicinity Characteristic
The site is located in an undeveloped high desert environment. The community of Skull
Valley lies 3 miles to the west. There is no other development in the area.
1.3.2 Climate
The climate is typical of high (4800') desert elevations. It is generally dry with moderate temperatures. The
area is subject to high daytime temperatures in the summer (100 degrees F) and freezing temperatures at night
in the winter. Rainfall averages approximately 20 - 25 inches per year.
1.3.3 Geology and Soils
The site is located on the western flanks of the Sierra Prieta. This small mountain range is the northern
extension of the Bradshaw Mountains. These mountains consist of older schists and granites, which have been
intruded by younger granites and volcanic rocks.
Precious metal bearing gravels derived from the higher eastern elevations occur on a granite pediment and in
the arroyos. Soils range from 0 to 25 ft. in thickness. Little or no soils are found on the pediment.
1.04 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
1.4.1 Water
Peeples Inc. has applied for a determination of jurisdiction with the Army Corps of Engineers and has
applied to state of Arizona Department of Environmental Quality for determination of Applicability.
PAGE | 4 OF 21
1.4.2 Hazardous Materials and Waste
1.4.2.1 Chemical
There will be no hazardous chemicals used for mining operations at the site. Common
petroleum products will be used to operate vehicles on the site. They will be stored in such a
way as to not contaminate the environment from a leak or spill
1.4.4.2 Explosives
There will be no explosives stored on site.
1.4.3 Solid Waste
Any solid waste generated by the Plan will be collected and placed in appropriate containers and
disposed of in an approved landfill.
1.4.4 Air Quality
Air quality standards will be met as set forth by Yavapai County Air Quality Control and Arizona Department
of Environmental Quality. There will be no hazardous air pollutant emissions as a result of this Plan. Dust
emissions will be controlled by wetting roads with water. The Plant is a wet process and will not generate any
dust.
1.4.5 Noise
Noise from loaders, crushing, screening and power generation will occur. The equipment will be maintained
according to manufacture's specifications.
The closest community is Skull Valley located 3 miles to the west of the site. The site is not visible from
Copper Basin Road.
1.4.7 Parks, Recreation Acres, Wildlife Refuges
There are no known Parks, Recreation Areas or Wildlife Refuges on the site or in the general area.
1.05 Reclamation
1.5.1 Description of Desired Results
The desired result of reclamation is to reestablish the site so the topography and vegetation of the disturbed
area blends into the undisturbed landscape. This will be accomplished by backfilling dug out areas and recontouring those areas to match the natural slopes. These graded areas will then be re-vegetated with plants to
match type and density.
1.5.2 References to Mine Operating Plan and Reclamation Details
The MOP incorporates final reclamation detail and part of the scope of the POO is to accomplish
reclamation.
PAGE | 5 OF 21
1.06 Permits and Approval
1.6.1 Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit
There are no known Section 404 jurisdictional waterways involved in this project. Peeples, Inc. has
applied for a determination of Jurisdiction with the Army Corps of Engineers.
1.6.2 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit
Not applicable as our water usage is a closed loop recirculation and does not have discharge.
1.6.3 Air Quality Permit
Not applicable. We use water for separation; therefore, dust will be minimal with no chemical use.
1.6.4 Aquifer Protection Permit
No Aquifer Protection Permit will be required at this site. The water recirculation pond is lined with an
impervious material. An application for Determination of Applicability of the state APP program has been filed
with ADEQ.
1.6.5 Notice of Intent to Drill
No drilling is involved with this Plan except when prospective buyers or JV
partners require ore samples deeper than 15 feet.
1.6.6 Septic Tank
Portable toilet systems will be used during this project.
1.6.7 Flood plain Use Permit
Does not apply
1.6.8 Use Exemption
Mining/Metallurgical Use Does not apply.
1.07 Utilities
1.7.1 Water
Water is supplied from four wells developed on the site by the former Lessees. Diesel operated well pumps are
in place along with necessary ancillary water lines and access roads. Water from the wells are metered with
State approved meters. Water for processing use will come from the recirculation pond at an estimated rate of
300 to 500 GPM. The well water will be used as make-up water only.
1.7.2 Gas
We will be using a propane dryer for drying concentrates.
PAGE | 6 OF 21
1.7.3 Electric
Portable power generators will be used for the project.
1.7.4 Sewer
Portable toilets will be used for the project.
1.08 Transportation
Transportation to and from the site will occur on existing roads
1.09 Planning and Zoning
1.9.1 Current Planning and Zoning (County/City General Plan)
Does not apply to mining or mineral processing operations.
1.10 Socio-Economies Impacts
1.10.1 Mine Operations Economics
Evaluation of the impounded material has been an ongoing process since 1994. Assays show the presence of
Gold. (see Appendix B Advanced Analytical Assays). Beginning in 1997, extraction methods were initiated and
have been improved to a current acceptable level. There are approximately 279,000 tons of material (see
Appendix A, Geosyntec Analysis) available in the storage pits. There are 2.22 ounces of Gold per ton averaged
over 7 sample assays. (see Appendix B). At an 80% recovery rate, that equals 1.78 ounces per ton, times
279,000 tons, times the current spot price of $1090 per ounce, equals $541,315,800.
1.10.2 State Trust Revenue Projections
The Mineral Lease requires a 5% royalty of the value to be made to the State of Arizona. Based on the
projections of 1.10.1, the total royalty represents approximately $27,065,790
1.10.3 County and Surrounding Community Impacts
The Project will employ 9-12 people when in full production. Local businesses will be impacted from the
purchase of diesel and maintenance supplies.
PAGE | 7 OF 21
1.11 Summary
The site has been active for 26 years and Peeples Inc. will process the table concentrates of the original
operation which took place during the 1980's and early 90’s. The proposed project will provide final
reclamation.
1.12 Agencies Contacted
1). US Army Corps of Engineers
2). Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
3). Air Quality Division of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
4). State Land Department
5). Bureau of Land Management
6). Arizona State Mine Inspector
PAGE | 8 OF 21
SECTION II: MINE OPERATIONS PLAN (MOP)
PAGE | 9 OF 21
2.01 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this Mining Operations Plan (MOP) is to provide updated information relative to the
extraction of storage pit concentrates, the processing of those concentrates and the final reclamation
measures necessary to close the site.
2.1.2 Operations Summary
Peeples Inc., and assigns, proposes to initially reclaim, process, and recover precious metals from stockpiled
inventory. After the stockpiled inventory is processed and the affected areas reclaimed, Peeples proposes to
process virgin material on the site for precious metal recovery as profitability is determined by proper assay
method. A map of proposed areas for exploration and mining will be provided prior to such work
commencing.
2.02 DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION
The "deposit" consists of an upper pit and a lower pit (see Appendix C, Skull Valley Pit Map). Each
pit has sections separated by earthen walls. The upper pit's sections are labeled Upper Pit East, Upper
Pit West, and Upper Pit South. The lower pit's sections are labeled Lower Pit East, Lower Pit Middle,
Lower Pit West-2 and Lower Pit West-1. The concentrates to be recovered from these pits represent
the "fines" (1/8" X 0) developed from previous processing for “free Gold” on the site. Depths of these
concentrates are documented in the Geosyntec analysis. (see Appendix A)
2.03 Ore/Material Reserves
Based on storage pit dimensions and material density the following reserves 279,000 tons of ore concentrate
(see Appendix A, Geosyntec analysis)
2.04 Development/Production Schedules
Development of the site is ready. Much of the ground preparation has been prepared from past operations.
Processing methods have been known from past production and new testing during the past few years.
Production can occur within 4-6 months of a target date. Production rates will be approximately 10 tons per
hour. The projected time to process the stockpiled inventory is 5 to 7 years.
2.05 Operations
2.5.1 Site Development
The site is already developed (Approximately 1500 x 700 ft). Access roads exist and the entire
infrastructure is in place left over from the past operations. Construction of the processing plant will be at
the same location as the previous processing plant. Water wells, water lines, haul roads already exist.
2.5.2 Construction
Construction will commence upon Permit approval. The equipment to be installed is portable or will be
placed on skids. Construction should take from 4-6 months. The equipment is shown in the attached flow
PAGE | 10 OF 21
chart.(see Appendix D ). Cargo containers placed on a gravel bed will be used for maintenance, Q.C. and
shop requirements.
2.5.3 Mining
2.5.3.1 Mine Design (Pit, Quarry, Underground)
All concentrates will be removed from the storage pits located on the south side of the site. Pit
construction is shown in (Appendix C, Skull Valley Pit Map)
2.5.3.1.1
Mining Design Parameters
The mining will follow three steps:
1. Identify the "concentrates" during excavation by location and visual examination. The concentrates are
a "fine" (1/8" X 0) and are of a greenish brown color, and are only found in the storage pits and wash
basin.
2. Scarify the top 1 to 1 ½ ft. of the pit surface by ripping with a D4 Dozer to aid in drying the material.
3. Push the dried scarified material to the side of the pit to load-out point for transport to the
processing plant stockpile feed area. Haul the stockpiled material with a front-end loader from the pit
to the plant stockpile feed area.
Steps 1 to 3 will be continuously repeated until the pits are emptied. The mining of the pits will occur
during the summer and fall months when the weather is dry and evaporation rates are the highest. The
retaining berms will be left in place so the pit can be reused as part of the final reclamation plan. There is
no topsoil or waste in this recovery process. All of the material contained in the storage pits will be hauled
to the plant stockpile area. The depth of excavating will stop when native ground is encountered in the
scarifying process.
Hours: 10hrs/day
Mining Days: 250 days/year
Haul Road Width: 12 ft. Wide, 1 ft. Safety Berm
Haul Road Grade: Less than 10%
2.5.3.2 Topsoil Removal and Stockpiling
No topsoil is involved in this mining project.
2.5.3.3 Slope/Bench Preparation
The development of benches is not planned for this project. Upon completion of the project, the ponds will
be filled with natural material left from past mining and contoured to match undisturbed areas.
PAGE | 11 OF 21
2.5.3.4.1 Drilling
Core drilling will be done only as required for custodial assays.
2.5.3.5 Blasting
No blasting is planned
2.5.3.6 Loading/Hauling
Loading/Hauling of mined material will be accomplished with a Cat 950 Front-end loader. Haul
trucks are not planned to be used.
2.5.3.7 Mining Equipment
A complete list of equipment is shown in attached flow chart.
(See Appendix D).
2.5.4 Processing
2.5.4.1 Plant Operating Parameters
It is anticipated that the plant will operate 10 hours a day, six days a week. Onsite generators will
provide electricity for the equipment. At least one generator may need to be run 24 hours per day
because some of the equipment should not be shut off, except on weekends.
2.5.4.2 Product Mix
The final product will consist of a black sand final concentrate or ore containing precious metals
with our primary focus on Gold.
2.5.4.3 Ore/Materials Handling
Front-end loaders and belt conveyors will be used to handle materials on the site.
2.5.4.4 Crushing Conveying
After primary screening, the +20 Mesh fraction will be conveyed to a vibrating ball mill for size
reduction. The crushed material will be returned to the primary screen.
2.5.4.5 Screening
Two stages of screening will be used. The first stage will size the material at ±20 Mesh prior to the
first stage gravity concentration step. The second stage screening will occur between the primary and
secondary gravity concentration steps. The secondary screening will separate the material into three
different sizes for improved liberation of precious metals during the second stage gravity
concentration step.
PAGE | 12 OF 21
2.5.4.6 Sorting/Classifying
The precious metal bearing material will be gravity classified in two stages The first stage consists of
a primary gravity concentrating step. The feed will be sized to minus 200 mesh. The second stage
gravity concentrating step will be made on closely sized feed in order to improve precious metal
liberation. (see Appendix D Arizona Mill Site Flow Sheet)
2.5.4.7 Production Monitoring and Verification
Independent assays will be performed for referee purposes
2.5.4.8 Product Handling, Stockpiling, Bagging, Storage
The final product will be stored in one ton capacity containers for shipment to the refinery. Shipments
will be in one to six ton lots
2.5.4.9 Product Hauling
Hauling the final product to the refinery will be made via contract haulers
2.5.4.10Processing Equipment and Buildings
See attached equipment list. ( Appendix E.)
2.5.5 Labor Force
2.5.5.1 Company
Operator:
NMC, Inc.
Michael Sheppard, CEO
Franklin, TN 37069
Phone: 615-400-1099
Project Manager Onsite:
Pete Rushbrook
Phone: 928-899-1251
2.5.5.2 Construction Contractors/Subcontractors
Plant construction will be made directly under the supervision of
Peeples Inc.
2.5.5.3 Mining Contractors/Subcontractors
Mining will be performed directly under the supervision of Peeples Inc.
2.5.6 Emissions and Pollution Controls
2.5.6.1 Particulates
2.5.6.1.1 Drilling and Blasting
No drilling or blasting will take place except for core drilled samples required for assays.
PAGE | 13 OF 21
Material passing through the crushing Screening and sorting steps will be in slurry form.
2.5.6.1.3 Loading, Hauling and Conveying
Dust on the site resulting from loading hauling and conveying will be controlled with
spraying from water trucks.
2.5.6.1.4 Stockpiles
Dust on the site resulting from stockpiles will be controlled with spraying from water trucks.
2.5.6.2 Noise
All equipment will be maintained to emit noise levels within manufacturer’s specifications.
2.5.6.2.1 Mining Equipment
See attached equipment list. (Appendix E)
2.5.6.2.2 Blasting
There will be no blasting on site
Noise from crushing, screening, and sorting will be minimal because of the small feed rates and because
the process is wet
2.5.6.2.4 Power Generation
Power for the processing plant will be generated using portable generators
2.5.6.3 Solid Waste Handling and disposal
Solid discard material will be stored in approved containers and disposed of in approved landfills.
2.5.6.4 Hazardous Waste/Water Pollutants/Spills
No hazardous waste will be generated on the site. No water will leave the property. Process water will
be recycled into a lined pond.
2.5.6.4.1 Surface Water
2.5.6.4.2 Ground Water
No ground water monitoring will occur
2.5.6.5 Emergency Response
An emergency response plan will be developed
2.5.6.6 Monitoring and Reporting
Monitoring and reporting will be included in the emergency response plan.
PAGE | 14 OF 21
2.5.7 Wildlife/Endangered Species Protection
It is not anticipated that any federally listed species will be impacted by the operations or reclamation
steps taken in this proposal.
2.5.8 Protected Plant Species Handling
There will be no new disturbance involved in processing the stockpiled inventory, therefore there will be
no impact on any plant species. After the stockpiled inventory is completely processed, an impact study of
proposed areas for exploration and mining will be provided prior to such work commencing.
The closest community is Skull Valley located 3 miles to the west of the site. The site is not visible
from Copper Basin Road
2.5.10 Cultural Resources
There will be no new disturbances involved in processing the stockpiled inventory, therefore there will be
no impact on any cultural sites. After the stockpiled inventory is completely processed, an impact study of
proposed areas for exploration and mining will be provided prior to such work commencing.
2.6 FACILITIES
2.6.1 Ancillary Equipment and Facilities
2.6.1.1 Access and Haul Roads
All access and haul roads already exist.
2.6.1.2 Power Generation and Distribution
Portable power generation will be used for the entire site. Generally, the main power will run only during
operating hours. One generator will operate 24 hours per day because of specific equipment requirements
2.6.1.3 Water Supply and Storage
Water will be supplied from four wells on the site. Process water will be stored in a lined pond. The plant
water is recycled through this pond. Make-up water will come from the wells. Water used for ancillary
purposes will come from a 2000 gallon tank on site.
2.6.1.4 Explosives Storage
There will be no explosives stored on site.
2.6.1.5 Fuel Storage
Diesel fuel will be stored on site in a double wall above ground 500 gallon tank.
PAGE | 15 OF 21
2.6.1.6 Maintenance Areas
An 8' x 40' cargo container located at the processing plant will function as a maintenance shop.
2.6.1.7 Mine Office
An 8' x 40' container located east of the processing plant.
2.6.1.8 Sanitary and Solid Waste Disposal
Portable toilets will be used at the site. All solid waste will be hauled to an approved landfill.
2.6.1.9 Site Security
A cable gate provides access security to the site. A 24-hour security guard may also be necessary to protect
against vandalism and watch over any equipment that may be operating, such as power generators.
2.6.1.10 Fire Protection
The site is located within the Central Yavapai Fire District, which provides fire protection to the area. In
addition, Peeples Inc. will provide fire extinguishers on site and in vehicles.
2.7 ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY
2.7.1 Economic Summary
NMC plans to produce about 619,380 oz of gold over a period of approximately 5 years. Assuming a
royalty rate of 5% and average price of $1090 for gold less 20% for selling and refining, the state's annual
revenue would be about $5,400,000 at the planned mining rate. Based on the most recent appraisal in
2006, the land is valued at $3600 per acre. The state's annual rental fee at $2.00 per acre for all 377 acres,
including the disturbed area of approximately 3.5 acres where the previously mined ore is stored, would be
$754. The state's cash flow is expected to be $5,400,000 + $754 = $5,400,754 per year for at least five
years. The state's NPV at a discount rate of 10% over the approximate 5 year stored ore processing period
would be $22,159,424.
NMC plans to lease or joint venture the equipment, so the capital cost will be very low. NMC’s
break-even cost is expected to be $340 per ounce of gold, plus state royalty and rental costs. NMC's
estimated cash flow is estimated at $74,325,600 per year for at least 5 years, less state royalty and rental
costs.
2.7.2 Commodity/Products.
NMC plans to produce placer gold in the form of nuggets and gold dust.
2.7.3 Market Analysis Discussion.
Gold is regarded as a store of value, meaning that its purchasing power is relatively constant over time.
Gold is sold on the international market. The usual benchmark for the price of gold is known as the
London Gold Fixing, a twice-daily (telephone) meeting of representatives from five bullion trading
firms. There is also active gold trading based on the intra-day spot price, derived from gold-trading
markets around the world.
Like other investments and commodities, the price of gold is driven by supply and demand,
including hoarding and disposal. Unlike most other commodities, hoarding and disposal play a much
PAGE | 16 OF 21
bigger role in affecting the price Most of the gold ever mined still exists and is potentially able to come
on to the market for the right price. Given the quantity of hoarded gold compared to the annual
production, the price of gold is more subject to changes in sentiment rather than changes in annual
production.
According to the World Gold Council, annual mine production of gold over the last few years has
been close to 2,500 metric tons. About 3,000 tons goes into jewelry or industrial/dental production, and
around 500 tons goes to retail investors and exchange traded gold funds. This translates to an annual
demand for gold to be 1000 tons in excess of mine production, which has come from central bank sales
and other sources.
Central banks and the International Monetary Fund play an important role in the gold price. At
the end of 2004, central banks and official organizations held 19 percent of all above-ground gold as
official gold reserves. The Washington Agreement on Gold, September 1999, limits gold sales by its
members (Europe, United States, Japan, Australia, Bank for International Settlements and the
International Monetary Fund) to less than 400 tonnes a year. European central banks, such as the Bank of
England and Swiss National Bank, have been key sellers of gold.
The Russian central bank and others have expressed interest in growing their gold reserves again.
In early 2006, China, which holds 1.3% of its reserves in gold, announced that it was looking for ways to
reposition more of its holdings into gold in line with other central banks.
In general, gold becomes more desirable in times of:
1) Bank and investment firm failures. When investors fear failure their bank or investment firm, many
move their savings or investments into durable commodities such as gold.
2) Low or negative real interest rates. If the return on bonds, equities and real estate does not adequately
compensate for risk and inflation, the demand for gold and other alternative investments increases. An
example of this is the period of "stagflation" that occurred during the 1970s and which led to an economic
"bubble" in the price of precious metals.
3) War and other crisis. In times of crisis, people in some countries fear that their assets may be seized
and that the currency may decline in value. Gold is viewed as a transportable, solid asset which will
always buy the necessities. In times of great uncertainty the demand for gold rises.
These factors, which are all active in different countries today, indicate that gold prices will
likely stay high for the foreseeable future.
From 1975 to the present, the price of Gold increased from $170 to $1200 per ounce recently.
While there have been peaks and valleys, the trend of gold price is up. We are using a gold price of $1090
per ounce for all calculations.
PAGE | 17 OF 21
2.7.4 COST
2.7.4.1 Pre-mine Development. Pre-mine development consists only of access roads and leveling of the
concentration plant site, both of which have been done during the exploration and milling phase. Roads
require minor improvement. Pre-mine development costs will be less than $5000 for about one week of
dozer rental, fuel and operator.
Weekly Operating Cost
Equipment
Rental
($/h r)
Op.
Cost
($/hr)
Cat 330 Excavator
25 Ton Dump truck
Alaskan 25 Plant
Cat 938 Loader
20 KW Generator
Conveyer
Water Truck
Total Weekly Cost
$66.00
$34.00
$47.00
$44.00
$10.00
$18.00
$86.00
$35.00
$31.00
$28.00
$21.00
$6.00
$6.00
$29
Operator
($/hr)
Rental
(hr/wk)
$20.00
$20.00
$20.00
$20.00
$0.00
$0.00
$20.00
40
40
40
40
40
40
8
Op
time
(hr/wk)
8
40
40
40
40
0
0
Total
($/wk)
Remarks
$4840
$3400
$3800
$3400
$640
$960
$1080
$18120
Monthly rental
Monthly rental
Monthly rental
Monthly rental
Monthly rental
Monthly rental
Daily rental
2.7.5 Break Even Price. NMC’s approximate break even price is $340 per ounce, plus state royalty and
rental.
PAGE | 18 OF 21
SECTION III : RECLAMATION AND CLOSURE PLAN (RCP
3.01 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this Reclamation and Closure Plan (RCP) is to present the details of rehabilitation. The "Mining
Operations" have ceased on this site. No new disturbance is planned. All of the Mining areas have been reclaimed.
The ±5 Ac. Processing site, consisting of storage pits, access and haul roads, and the Plant site itself remain to be
reclaimed. Upon completion of final reclamation, the site will appear as a gentle inclined sloping ridge. The end use
will be open space and wildlife habit suitable for grazing.
3.1.2 Reclamation Summary
Most of the reclamation required under the original Lease is complete. A $5,000 Reclamation Bond was posted when
the Lease began. The Bond amount was increased to $15,000 in 1996. The completion of the Reclamation for the site
will only take about 12 months since reclamation will continue to be concomitant with our mining processes.
Reclaiming the storage pits by processing the fines and recovering the Precious Metals contained will provide revenue
for Peeples Inc. and royalties for the State of Arizona. Finally, all improvements will be removed and the area treated in
accordance with the Lease and Commissioner requirements.
3.02 RECLAMATION APPROACH
The following four steps will be taken to accomplish the final reclamation of the site:
1.
2.
Process the Pit concentrates that contain the valuable Precious Metals. There are approximately
279,000 tons of concentrates impounded that contain values.
Process and concentrate the Precious Metals to a condition that they can be sold or removed to a smelter,
Back fill pits with stockpiled overburden and Plant tailings. Grade the area to match the natural contours as
mush possible. Remove access and haul roads.
Reseed the area in accordance with the Lease and Commissioner
3.03 EQUIPMENT AND STRUCTURE
All equipment located on the site will be removed upon completion of precious metals processing. It is estimated that
dismantling and removal would take approximately 120 days.
3.04 WASTE DUMPS
Any earth that may have been contaminated during operations, such as the maintenance shop, will be removed and
disposed of at an approved location.
3.05 ROADS POWERLINES, WATERLINES, FENCES
Any roads that were constructed as a part of the mining operations at this site will be removed and reseeded. Water
bars will be placed in predetermined areas to stabilize growth and prevent water erosion.
PAGE | 20 OF 21
There are no above ground power lines on the site. Any Underground lines will be removed when the portable
generators are removed. The water wells will be capped and the lines running to the plant will be removed.
There are no fences at the site, except the fence around fresh water re-circulating pond which will be removed
during reclamation.
3.06 AREA PREPARATION
The pond area will be backfilled and then graded to match the surrounding natural contours as much as possible.
Fine growth media will be placed on top of the graded fill to aid the re-vegetation, Rock lined drainage trenches will
be made on the hillside and along the bottom of the hill as a storm waterway. Water bars will be placed in
predetermined areas to stabilize growth and prevent water erosion.
3.07 RE-VEGETATION/SEEDING
The hillside, plant site and roads will be re-vegetated and seeded per the requirements of the Lease and the
Commissioner.
3.08 SLOPE STABILIZATION
Reclaimed slopes will be made to match the natural slopes as much as possible. Vegetation can provide sufficient
stabilization for this type of slope. Seeding the slopes with a seed mix that will germinate quickly will assist in
protection against soil erosion and aids in stabilization. Water bars will be placed in predetermined areas to stabilize
growth and prevent water erosion.
3.09 EROSION AND DRAINAGE CONTROL
Vegetation will provide most of the erosion control. Where needed, rock lined trenches will be placed for storm
water run-off. Water bars will be placed in predetermined areas to stabilize growth and prevent water erosion.
PAGE | 21 OF 21
Appendix A
Geosyntec Analysis
Evaluation of the Peeples Mine Arizona Concentrates Quantity,
Skull Valley, Arizona
September 10, 2007
200 East Del Mar Boulevard, Suite 250
Pasadena, CA 91105
PH 626.449.0664
FAX 626.449.0411
www.geosyntec.com
10 September 2007
Michael Sheppard
Chief Executive Officer
Nevada Mining Company, Inc.
4229 Warren Road
Franklin, Tennessee 37067
Subject:
Evaluation of the Peeples Mine Arizona Concentrates Quantity, Skull Valley,
Arizona
Dear Mr. Sheppard:
Pursuant to your request of 13 July 2007, Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. (Geosyntec), is pleased to
provide this report evaluating the quantity of Arizona Concentrates within pits located at the
Peeples Mine in Skull Valley, Arizona (Figure 1), owned by the Nevada Mining Company
(NMC). The Arizona Concentrates are mineral concentrates that contain various precious
metals. The concentrates are stockpiled within two pits at the Skull Valley lease, comprising an
Upper Pit and a Lower Pit that is divided into three smaller sub-pits. This work was performed
in accordance with our proposed scope of work, dated 10 August 2007, with the exceptions
noted below.
Field work was performed by Mr. Walt Grinyer, P.G. of Geosyntec and Mr. Jim Hasbrouck, G.P.
of Hasbrouck Geophysics, Inc. This report was prepared by Dr. Jim Finegan, P.G., C.Hg. and
has been reviewed by Mr. Sam Williams, P.G., C.Hg. of Geosyntec Consultants (Geosyntec), in
accordance with the review policies of the firm.
SCOPE OF WORK
Geosyntec’s scope of work included review of existing aerial photographs and site assay reports
and discussions with NMC personnel regarding the approximate locations and dimensions of the
pits. This was followed by two-dimensional (2D) surface seismic tomography surveys to aid in
identifying the bottom and sidewalls of the pits. These data were used to calculate estimated
volumes of Arizona Concentrates within each pit.
Based on this scope of work,
recommendations for further subsurface investigation are made below.
HA1086/SV07-001.VolRpt.doc
Mr. Michael Sheppard
10 September 2007
Page 2
BACKGROUND
The NMC Skull Valley site consists of two pits that have been backfilled with ore concentrates
composed of minerals containing precious metals. These ore concentrates, stockpiled on site
during previous mining activities, are referred to as Arizona Concentrates within documents
provided by NMC. The Arizona Concentrates comprise a major asset of NMC, and the volume
of these materials may affect the sale price. However, the dimensions of the pits at the Skull
Valley site were not clearly defined prior to the backfilling with the ore concentrate, although
several estimates of the volumes of the pits have been produced. It is our understanding that the
pits were excavated into the native material at the site and the sidewalls are generally near
vertical with berms between separate areas of the pits. In addition, portions of the pits may be
benched where excavations achieved greater depths.
EVALUATION OF ARIZONA CONCENTRATES
Site History Review
Pursuant to the scope of work defined above, Geosyntec reviewed available documents and
aerial photographs of the site in preparation for 2D surface seismic surveys of the Upper and
Lower Pits. In addition, site conditions were discussed with NMC management. Accompanying
Geosyntec and the geophysicist to the site for the seismic surveys were Mr. Michael Sheppard of
NMC, Mr. Bill Berridge (geologist), and Mr. Pete Rushbrook.
2D Seismic Tomography
As described in detail in the attached report by Hasbrouck Geophysics, Inc. (Appendix A), a
high resolution two-dimensional (2D) surface tomographic seismic survey across each of the pits
was performed on 17 to 18 August 2007, to allow resolution of the contact between the
processed ore concentrate and the native surrounding material. Figure 2 shows the locations of
the lines along which seismic data were acquired. Due to inaccessible terrain and relatively
narrow pit widths, lateral seismic lines could not be run, so the volume estimates provided below
are limited by the estimated pit widths and information provided by NMC management. In
addition, physical access limitation at the west end of the Upper Pit seismic line prevented
extension of the line in this direction and a pit just south of the Upper Pit could not be surveyed
due to lack of access. The seismic line along the Lower Pit was run relatively close to the
southern edge of the west and middle sub-pits because of the presence of large debris piles in the
center of the west sub-pit. However, the drilling program proposed below to confirm seismic
data will also provide additional data on pit dimensions, thus refining the pit volume estimates.
10 September 2007
Page 3
The primary principal of the seismic data collection is that the partially processed ore
concentrate will have a significantly different velocity from the surrounding native material.
This interface between the assumed lower velocity ore concentrate and the higher velocity native
material provides the contact for reflecting the seismic signal. The results of field work
performed at the site indicate a strong velocity contrast between bedrock and unconsolidated
materials.
Seismic data were acquired by detecting seismic waves generated by an artificial energy source,
in this case a 20-pound sledge hammer striking a square aluminum plate on the ground at
specific intervals (40 feet) along each seismic line. Seismic waves were detected by geophones
placed at regular intervals (20-foot spacing) along the test line and digitized data were recorded
on a seismograph (hard disc) and subsequently downloaded to a computer for processing and
interpretation. The first arrivals used in seismic tomography may be refractions, reflections, or
diffractions, which is important for this project because of the possible vertical pit walls. A 20foot spacing interval for geophones was used for both the Upper and Lower Pits. A 10-foot
interval was initially used along a portion of the Lower Pit seismic line to evaluate bedrock
resolution. The 10-foot interval did not indicate the high velocity layer expected at the base of
the pits and therefore the 20-foot geophone interval was used. The response observed in the
geophones from the sledge hammer using 20-foot spacing alleviated this concern.
As shown in the attached report (Appendix A), processed seismic data are displayed on depthversus-velocity cross sections. Elevation-velocity cross sections that show relative groundsurface elevations are also provided. The attached seismic data and the pit limits provided by
NMC personnel were used to calculate pit volumes. Volumes were calculated using AutoCAD
Land Development software, based on the pit boundaries shown on Figure 2 and estimated pit
depths derived from the seismic data. Seismic velocities ranging from 4,000 to 4,500 feet per
second (ft/sec) were used to delineate the base of ore concentrates on seismic cross-sections.
This value was selected as a conservative assumption, but it also generally corresponds to where
seismic velocity contours tended to condense together, particularly on the Upper Pit seismic
section. The compressing of velocity contours is assumed to generally represent the base of the
ore-filled pits. A delay-time analysis was also performed using a regression method, in which a
straight line is fit by least squares to the arrival times representing the velocity layer and average
velocities are computed by taking the reciprocals of the weighted average of the slopes of the
regression lines. The average regression value calculated was approximately 4,500 ft/sec,
further supporting the use of 4,500 ft/sec as the base of the ore concentrate.
10 September 2007
Page 4
Note that additional non-ore deposits may have washed or been pushed into the pits on top of the
ore concentrate. Seismic data suggest that this overburden may be several feet thick in places,
indicating that calculated volumes may be over-estimated if this material is not subtracted from
the calculations. However, it is not expected to represent a significant portion of the material
filling the pits. A reported distinctive dark coloring of the ore concentrate may allow for
evaluation of the overburden thickness during confirmatory drilling.
UPPER PIT
The boundaries of the Upper Pit shown on Figure 2 are irregular, with a possible berm, indicated
by seismic data, across the western half of the pit. Seismic data also suggest that the Upper Pit
extends further west than indicated by NMC management, as shown on Figure 2 where two
possible pit boundaries are shown. This extra area has been included in the volume calculations,
and should be confirmed by drilling. Based on the seismic data, an average depth of 40 feet is
assumed for the western portion the Upper Pit and a depth ranging from 40 feet to 20 feet is
assumed for the eastern portion where the base appears to slope upward. Rather than use a range
of values for the pit bottom where it appears to slope, an average depth of 30 feet was used.
Because of inaccessibility due to steep walls and abundant vegetation, another pit south of the
Upper Pit (Figure 2; Upper - south pit) could not be seismically surveyed. However, available
data suggest that this pit contains ore concentrate. Volume calculations for this pit are based on
a depth estimated during recent excavation (approximately 25 to 30 feet) and dimensions
determined by visual observation of the aerial photograph and historical documents provided by
NMC. The table below summarizes estimated pit depths, surface areas, and volumes/tonnage for
the eastern and western sub-pits, which are divided by the inferred berm, and the Upper southern
pit. The eastern sub-pit calculations are provided as a range of values, one set of values for the
NMC-indicated boundary and one set for the area east of the berm.
LOWER PIT
The Lower Pit has been divided into three separate sub-pits, the west, middle, and east (Figure
2). The boundaries of these pits were estimated using historical documents with modifications
as follows: the middle sub-pit was extended to occupy the depressed area indicated on the aerial
photograph, and the east sub-pit was extended at least 200 feet further to the east. The west subpit was reported in historical documents to be the deepest at up to 90 feet. However, use of the
4,500 ft/sec base limit would restrict the average depth of this pit to no more than 35 feet. There
is also a low-velocity anomaly at depth at this location, suggesting that there may be a deeper
section of the pit down to approximately 90 feet. The seismic data also suggest that there may be
10 September 2007
Page 5
buried benches within this pit that may have been used to excavate the pit to the reported depth
of 90 feet. Volume calculations for this pit have been performed assuming that about 75 feet of
its west end are 90 feet deep (1) and the remainder is 35 feet deep (2). This assumption is based
on the approximate width of the apparent seismic anomaly.
There is no clear separation in the seismic data between the west and middle pits, although a
berm between them may be indicated, as described in the seismic survey report between source
points 99.5 and 101.5 (Lower Pit – Elevation Section). Volume calculations were performed
separately for these pits (west and middle), because if a berm is located between them, it may
have similar velocity to the ore concentrate while still separating the two sources. Using the
4,500 ft/sec seismic contour provides an average depth of about 27.5 feet for the middle pit. On
the seismic cross sections, this pit approximately extends from source point 103 to 111.5 where
the 2,000 ft/sec contour is close to the ground surface.
Seismic data suggests an average depth of about 35 feet for the east pit, based on the 4,500 ft/sec
contour. The recommended drilling program should be used to verify actual pit depth. The table
below includes estimated depths, surface areas, volumes, and tonnage for the west, middle, and
east sub-pits of the Lower Pit.
PIT VOLUMES AND ARIZONA CONCENTRATES TONNAGE
Upper and Lower Pit Estimated Depths and Volumes
AVERAGE
DEPTH (feet)
SURFACE AREA
(square feet)
VOLUME
(cubic yards)
TONS*
UPPER PIT – WEST
40
10,239
15,169
21,236
UPPER PIT – EAST
30
22,872
25,414
35,580
UPPER PIT – SOUTH**
27.5
29,576
30,124
42,174
LOWER PIT – WEST 1
90
7,754
25,847
36,186
LOWER PIT – WEST 2
35
13,907
18,027
25,238
LOWER PIT – MIDDLE
27.5
35,396
36,051
50,471
35
37,525
48,643
68,100
LOWER PIT - EAST
* Tonnage was calculated assuming 1.4 tons per cubic yard, based on historical documents.
** This pit was not seismically surveyed; the indicated depth is based on recent excavation and the outline was
estimated by visual assessment of the aerial photograph; both should be field confirmed.
10 September 2007
Page 6
The total estimated volume of Arizona Concentrates is 199,275 cubic yards (278,985 tons),
based on both the seismic data and historical site data for surface areas and estimated pit depths
from seismic data as indicated above. These calculations also assume that the pits have vertical
sides and flat bottoms. The tonnage conversion value of 1.4 is derived from historical assay
documents and should be confirmed by testing. The recommended drilling program below will
help to verify the pit depths and confirm the seismic data as well as refine the indicated pit
boundaries, particularly the Upper Pit, which may be larger than is shown on Figure 2, and the
un-surveyed Upper south pit.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the seismic data acquired on 17 to 18 August 2007, and the physical limitations of data
acquisition, several boreholes should be drilled in both the Upper and Lower Pits to refine the
volume calculations presented herein. All drilling should proceed to refusal (e.g., bedrock) and
samples should be collected either continuously or at a regular interval (i.e., 5 feet) using a drivesampling method to confirm the lithology indicated by cuttings returned to ground surface
during drilling. These include four drilling locations in the Upper Pit to refine the depth
estimates and pit boundaries, which may extend further than previously believed both to the east
and west. Drilling should also be performed in the depression south of the Upper Pit. We
understand that access to this pit may be difficult, so excavation may be required to provide an
access ramp. Two drilling locations are recommended for the Lower west sub-pit: one to
evaluate ore-concentrate depth in the western portion of this sub-pit and one to help define the
northern pit boundary. One drilling location is recommended in the Lower middle sub-pit to
evaluate ore concentrate depth. Two locations are recommended for the Lower east sub-pit to
define both ore-concentrate depth at either end of this sub-pit and to verify its eastern extent.
Additional shallow boreholes may also be drilled at the expected edges of the pits to verify their
widths. Potholing using a backhoe may also be used for this purpose. Geosyntec can provide a
cost estimate upon request to perform the recommended drilling program.
LIMITATIONS
Subsurface investigations and geophysical surveys are inherently limited to data derived from
samples taken or tests performed at selected locations, and the number of locations, samples and
tests are commonly based on cost-benefit judgments and the client’s budgetary concerns. Due to
these inherent limitations, it must be recognized that actual conditions may vary from those
predicted on the basis of such limited data, despite the use of professional care.
10 September 2007
Page 7
CLOSURE
Geosyntec appreciates this opportunity to be of service to NMC.
questions, please contact Jim Finegan at (626) 449-0664 ext. 202.
Should you have any
Sincerely,
Jim Finegan, PhD, CHg
Senior Hydrogeologist
Walt Grinyer, PG
Senior Hydrogeologist
Attachments: Figure 1 – Site Location Map
Figure 2 – Site Plan
Appendix A – “Skull Valley Seismic Survey,” Hasbrouck
Geophysics, Inc., 23 August 2007
Hasbrouck Geophysics, Inc.,
Skull Valley Seismic Survey
August 23, 2007
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 1
DATA ACQUISITION................................................................................................................... 1
DATA PROCESSING .................................................................................................................... 2
RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Upper Pit ..................................................................................................................................... 3
Lower Pit..................................................................................................................................... 4
RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 5
LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION......................................................................................... 5
Figures
Upper Pit Station Locations Map
Lower Pit Station Locations Map
Caterpillar D8 Ripping Chart
Upper Pit Elevation Section
Upper Pit Depth Section
Lower Pit 20 Feet Geophone Interval Elevation Section
Lower Pit 20 Feet Geophone Interval Depth Section
Lower Pit 10 Feet Geophone Interval Elevation Section
Lower Pit 10 Feet Geophone Interval Depth Section
August 23, 2007
Page i
INTRODUCTION
Two-dimensional (2D) surface seismic tomography surveys were conducted on 17 and 18
August 2007 at Nevada Mining Company, Inc.’s Skull Valley mine near Skull Valley, Arizona.
The purpose of the seismic survey was to aid in the determination of the volume of ore
concentrate within waste pits from previous mining operations.
METHODOLOGY
Surface seismic tomography surveys essentially consist of recording seismic waves that have
been generated by artificial sources, observing the arrival times of these waves, and producing
cross-sections of variations in subsurface seismic wave velocities that can then be related to
geology. The source of seismic energy for relatively shallow surface surveys is generally either
a sledgehammer or weight-drop system, primarily dependent upon target depths and logistics. In
surface surveys the seismic waves are detected by geophones that consist of a coil suspended by
a spring with magnets build into the case. A seismic wave moves the case and the magnets while
the coil remains relatively stationary because of its inertia. The relative movement of the
magnetic field with respect to the coil generates a voltage across the coil with the voltage
proportional to the relative velocity of the coil to the magnets. The electrical voltages produced
by the geophones are transmitted back to a seismograph via cables.
DATA ACQUISITION
Surface seismic data were acquired along two lines (one each in the Upper and Lower Pits as
shown in the Station Locations Maps) in a manner suitable for 2D tomographic analyses using a
leased 24-channel Geometrics SmartSeis seismograph in 32-bit floating-point format, 1024
samples per channel, 0.25 ms sample interval and 256 ms record length. Within the Upper Pit
Geospace 14-Hz geophones were placed at intervals of twenty feet with distances measured by
the takeout (connection point for the geophones) interval along the geophone spread cable.
Within the Lower Pit the data were acquired along the entire line at geophone intervals of twenty
feet and also along a portion of the line at intervals of ten feet (with the ten feet intervals
measured using a tape). The seismic source was a twenty-pound sledgehammer struck vertically
upon an approximately two feet square aluminum plate. A PEG-40 (Propelled Energy
Generator) accelerated weight-drop system with an 88-pound ram weight that could be mounted
on the trailer receiver hitch of a pickup truck was available but was not used because the quality
of the sledgehammer data was considered excellent and access to portions of the lines was not
possible with a vehicle.
For proper 2D tomographic analyses, seismic data must be acquired with several source points
along each geophone spread and for longer profiles subsequent spreads must be overlapped by
50%. A total of 14 source points were used for each spread of 24 geophones with the Upper
Plate line consisting of one spread of geophones while the 20 feet geophone interval data along
the Lower Plate line consisted of two spreads overlapped by 12 geophones. The Lower Pit ten
feet geophone interval line consisted of one geophone spread. The seismic data were stacked
nominally three to four times (depending upon offset and noise) at each source point to increase
the signal-to-noise ratio. Stacking, or signal enhancement, involved repeated source impacts at
the same point into the same set of geophones. For each source point, the stacked data were
recorded into the same seismic data file and theoretically the seismic signal arrived at the same
August 23, 2007
Page 1
time from each impact and thus was enhanced, while noise was random and tended to be reduced
or canceled.
The data were recorded on the hard disk of the seismograph and downloaded to a personal
computer for subsequent data processing and interpretation. A total of 70 24-channel seismic
records (or 1680 traces) were acquired for this project. The overall quality of the seismic data
was excellent with clearly identifiable first breaks (first arrival of seismic energy) present along
all the spreads.
DATA PROCESSING
Seismic tomography is defined as a method for finding the seismic velocity distribution within
the subsurface from a multitude of observations using combinations of source and receiver
locations. The subsurface is divided into cells and the seismic data are expressed as line
integrals along raypaths through the cells. A velocity is assigned to each cell and traveltimes are
calculated by tracing rays through the model. The results are compared with observed times, the
model is modified, and then the process is repeated iteratively to minimize errors.
The seismic tomography data for this project were processed using the Rayfract (version 2.74)
computer software program developed by Intelligent Resources Inc. of Vancouver, BC, Canada.
The models produced by the Rayfract tomography program use multiple signal propagation
paths (e.g., refraction, reflection, transmission and diffusion) that comprise a first break.
The first arrival of seismic energy at each geophone is chosen as the first significant variation
from a somewhat straight line. The selection of first arrival times is a tedious procedure,
particularly since there are almost 1700 individual traces involved in this project, but it is very
important. These arrival or traveltimes are then modeled and iteratively compared with the
original times. The modeling for this project consists of delta-t-v and WET (wavepath eikonal
traveltime) methods. The delta-t-v turning ray inversion method delivers continuous depth
versus velocity profiles for all geophones, while the WET method automatically adjusts the
subsurface velocity model until the synthetic times optimally match the first arrival times. The
modeled traveltimes are used in the tomographic calculations to determine the subsurface
seismic velocity distribution and only the results from the WET method are presented.
Location, elevation or depth, and velocity values for each profile are converted into a format
compatible with the Golden Software Surfer (version 8.00) computer program and presented as
individual elevation and depth sections. All the figures within this report are not referenced by
number because each map or section is clearly identified.
RESULTS
With surface seismic tomography a full representation of the subsurface velocities is obtained
and different geological units can often be identified based upon their velocities even if those
velocities are relatively close together in value. Additionally, first breaks used in seismic
tomography can be from refractions, reflections, transmissions or diffusions and thus, to a certain
extent, velocity inversions can be mapped. Surface seismic tomography results are generally
August 23, 2007
Page 2
considered to present a more geologically representative view of the subsurface than other
shallow refraction seismic methods (e.g., delay-time).
Previous work to aid in the determination of the volume of ore concentrate within both the Upper
and Lower Pits consisted of the use of an excavator. According to the operator of the machine it
was possible to excavate to a depth of 35 feet from benches within portions of the pits or to a
depth where suspected bedrock was encountered (i.e., no further excavation could be made
because the material was too hard). Caterpillar Inc. has prepared charts that estimate the
rippability of material relative to geology and seismic velocities for their models D8 through
D11 tractors. As seen in the ripping chart figure, igneous rocks can be ripped up to a seismic
velocity of around 6000 feet per second using a D8. It is improbable that that the excavator used
in the pits could penetrate material as well as a D8 ripper so the excavator’s maximum depth
probably ended within material with velocities of no more than about 4000 to 5000 feet per
second.
From seismic investigations in similar geologic environments, it is assumed that velocities less
than about 1500 feet per second are primarily representative of unconsolidated and dry
overburden, weathered bedrock velocities range from around 6000 or 7000 to perhaps about
9000 or 10000 feet per second, and competent bedrock has velocities greater than about 9000 or
10000 feet per second. Without confirming data from drill holes it is only possible to assign
rough velocity values to the ore concentrate. A possible conservative range of seismic velocities
for the ore concentrate is from about 1500 to 4000 feet per second, while a less conservative
range may be from about 1500 to 5000 feet per second. However, it must be kept in mind that
sedimentary material may also have velocities similar to those preliminarily assigned to what
might be ore concentrate. It is considered unlikely that the ore concentrate will have seismic
velocities less than about 1500 feet per second because that is generally more applicable to
highly unconsolidated material. The 4000 to 5000 feet per second upper end velocity for ore
concentrate material is estimated by what an excavator could possibly penetrate and
interpretation of the seismic data. The elevation and depth sections shown in this report have
highlighted velocity contours of 1500, 4000 and 5000 feet per second to facilitate calculation of
the amount of possible ore concentrate. However, it must be stressed and stated again that it is
not possible to accurately assign velocity values to the ore concentrate material without drill hole
data.
Upper Pit
The results of the seismic modeling using Rayfract are originally output as elevation sections
that are then converted to depth sections. Consequently, there are sometimes minor variations
(or what appears as noise) within the depth sections because of the arithmetic conversion
operation. Within the Upper Pit some historical documents state that the depth of ore
concentrate is 90 feet deep which may be approached near the southwest end of the seismic line
using the 5000 feet per second upper end velocity limit although there appears to be some higher
velocity material from depths of about 40 to 60 feet that separate shallower and deeper lower
target velocities. To around 240 feet, or so, along the line the estimated upper end target
velocities of 4000 to 5000 feet per second are relatively constant at about 40 feet depth and the
target lower end velocity material of 1500 feet per second is generally shallow at depths less than
about ten feet.
August 23, 2007
Page 3
Beyond about 240 feet along the line in the Upper Pit (wherein the pit becomes progressively
more narrow) material with velocities less than 1500 feet per second becomes absent (at about
source point 219.5 or 370 feet along the line) and there is a definite upward dip in the subsurface
material. The source point at 225.5 is along the side of the hill within natural sediments thus the
material downdip from that point with velocities greater than about 2500 feet per second may
actually be natural sediments versus ore concentrates.
A knob of relatively higher velocity material from about 120 to 175 feet along the Upper Pit line
beginning at a depth of around 50 feet and extending beyond 100 feet depth in addition to
another shallower knob with the same horizontal range that is present from around 20 to 35 feet
depth may be indications of a possible berm between sub-pits.
Lower Pit
In historical documents the Lower Pit is identified as having a depth of 60 feet. Along portions
of the line (from approximately 0 to 240 and 380 to 540 feet) if the arbitrary upper end velocity
limit for the possible ore concentrate is increased to about 5500 feet per second then the depth of
60 feet is met or exceeded. In particular, from around 90 to 180 feet along the line there appears
to be material present with velocities up to around 5500 feet per second to depths approaching
120 feet. Along other portions of the line the arbitrary upper end velocity of 5000 feet per
second is shallower and generally around 35 feet depth.
Within the geophysical data the indication of the berm between about source points 99.5 and
101.5 is not present within the shallow section (i.e., to a depth of about 40 feet), but may be
manifested within the deeper data (if an increased upper end velocity of 5500 feet per second is
used) as benches with relatively vertical boundaries extending from around 40 to 70 feet and 70
to 120 feet depth from about 180 to 240 feet along the line. These possible benches may
indicate the northeastern side of what is termed the west lower sub-pit. The southwestern side of
the west lower sub-pit may be indicated at the velocity limit of 5000 feet per second as a
variation in depth (between approximately 26 and 37 feet) from about 80 to 100 feet along the
line and as moderate angle contour level variations of the increased upper limit value of 5500
feet per second to a maximum depth of about 120 feet at approximately 160 feet along the line.
The southwestern side of the central lower sub-pit (around source point 103.5) is not seen within
either the shallow or deeper geophysical data, however material with velocities equal to or less
than about 4500 feet per second shallow consistently to within 40 or 50 feet the berm at the
northeastern edge of this pit (approximately source point 111.5). Also, from about 400 to 450
feet along the line there is an anomalous increase in material with velocities approaching the
upper end velocity of 5000 feet per second. Note that the ten feet geophone interval line shows
similar results with maybe a slight indication of the berm to the southwest and a shallowing of
materials with velocities less than about 4500 feet per second to the northeast.
The southwestern edge of what is termed the east lower sub-pit is evident within the geophysical
data as an increase in thickness of material up to at least a velocity of around 5000 feet per
second just before source point 115.5 (approximately 520 feet along the line). The thickness of
this range of material remains relatively constant at about 35 or 40 feet to about source point
135.5 after which it shallow considerably. Therefore, from the geophysical data it appears that
August 23, 2007
Page 4
the east lower sub-pit may extend from about source point 115.5 to 135.5 (approximately 520 to
930 feet along the line).
RECOMMENDATIONS
As stated previously, it must be stressed that it is not possible to accurately assign seismic
velocity values to the ore concentrate material without drill hole data. Therefore, the only way to
determine the actual composition of the subsurface material within either the Upper or Lower
Pits is through drilling.
Within the Upper Pit the following drill locations are recommended:
1. Halfway between the flags at 221.5 and 223.5 to an approximate depth of 80 feet to
investigate whether material with velocities from about 2500 to 5000 feet per second are
natural sediments or ore concentrate.
2. At station 211.5 to an approximate depth of 45 feet to determine the actual limits of
suspected ore concentrates.
3. Halfway between the flags at 201.5 and 203.5 to an approximate depth of 90 feet to
determine the actual limits of suspected ore concentrates, to determine the composition of
material at depths from about 40 to 65 feet depth and to determine if ore concentrates are
present at depths approaching 90 feet.
The Lower Pit recommended drill locations are as follows:
1. Within the west sub-pit, halfway between the flags at 95.5 and 97.5, if access is possible,
to an approximate depth of at least 100 feet to investigate if material beyond a depth of
about 35 feet and with velocities up to about 5500 feet per second are natural sediments
or ore concentrate.
2. Within the central sub-pit, halfway between the flags at 109.5 and 111.5 to an
approximate depth of 50 feet to determine the actual limits of suspected ore concentrates
and if material with velocities between 4000 and 5000 feet per second are natural
sediments or ore concentrate.
3. Within the east sub-pit, halfway between the flags at 117.5 and 119.5 to an approximate
depth of 40 feet to determine the actual limits of suspected ore concentrates.
4. Within the east sub-pit at station 133.5 to an approximate depth of 35 feet to determine
the actual limits of suspected ore concentrates and the horizontal extent of the pit.
LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION
This survey was conducted with state-of-the-art instrumentation operated by an experienced and
licensed geophysicist, the data were processed with commercial software packages utilized on
projects with similar objectives, and the results were interpreted by an experienced and licensed
geophysicist. However, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the results and
professional advice included within this report.
The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions
of a property can and do occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes
or the work of people on this or adjacent properties. Accordingly, the findings of this report may
August 23, 2007
Page 5
be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside of our control. Therefore, this report is
subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified.
August 23, 2007
Page 6
Upper Pit -- Station Locations Map
2D Surface Seismic Tomography Survey
400
226
224
300
222
Relative Northing (feet)
220
218
200
216
214
212
100
210
208
206
204
0
202
200
-100
-100
0
100
200
Relative Easting (feet)
300
400
Station
Hasbrouck Geophysics, Inc.
Line2GeophoneLocations.grf
Relative Elevation (feet)
Upper Pit -- Elevation Section
20 Feet Geophone Interval
225.5
20
10 200 201.5
207.5
205.5
209.5
223.5
203.5
221.5
211.5
213.5
215.5
217.5
219.5
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
-100
-110
-120
-130
-140
-150
-40
0
40
80
120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520
Southwest
Northeast
Distance along line (feet)
Velocity
(ft/sec)
12000
11000
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
Vertical Exaggeration = 2
Source Point
Line2Elevation.srf
Upper Pit -- Depth Section
Velocity
(ft/sec)
12000
Depth (feet)
200
201.5
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
-100
-110
-120
-130
-140
-150
-40
0
Southwest
203.5
205.5
207.5
209.5
211.5
213.5
215.5
217.5
219.5
221.5
223.5
225.5
11000
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
40
80
120
160
200
240
280
320
360
400
440
480
520
Northeast
Source Point
Line2Depth.srf
Lower Pit -- Station Location Map
1000
900
800
Relative Northing (feet)
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
96 98
88 90 92 94
0
100
102
104
106
108
110
112
114
116
118
120
122
136
134
132
130
128
126
124
10 ft geophone interval
-100
-100
0
100
200
300 400 500 600
Relative Easting (feet)
700
800
900
1000
Station
(20 ft geophone interval)
Line1GeophoneLocations.grf
Lower Pit -- Elevation Section
10 ft geophone interval line
Velocity
(ft/sec)
20
115.5 117.5 119.5 121.5 123.5 125.5 127.5 129.5 131.5 133.5 135.5 137
97.5
99.5 101.5
91.5
95.5
10 88 89.5
93.5
103.5 105.5 107.5 109.5 111.5 113.5
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
-100
-110
-120
-130
-140
-150
-40 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 600 640 680 720 760 800 840 880 920 960
Southwest
Northeast
12000
11000
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
Source Point
Line1-20Elevation.srf
Lower Pit -- Depth Section
Velocity
(ft/sec)
10 ft geophone interval line
Depth (feet)
88
89.5
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
-100
-110
-120
-130
-140
-150
-40 0
Southwest
91.5
40
93.5
95.5
97.5
99.5
101.5
103.5
105.5
107.5
109.5
111.5
113.5
115.5
117.5
119.5
121.5
123.5
125.5
127.5
129.5
131.5
133.5
135.5 137
80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 600 640 680 720 760 800 840 880 920 960
Northeast
12000
11000
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
Source Point
Line1-20Depth.srf
Lower Pit -- Elevation Section
Velocity
(ft/sec)
12000
11000
100
101.5
10000
10
103.5
105.5
107.5
109.5
111.5
113.5
115.5
117.5
119.5
121.5
123.5
125
0
9000
8000
-10
7000
-20
6000
5000
-30
4000
-40
-20
0
Southwest
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
Northeast
3000
2000
1000
Source Point
Note: Source Point locations are not the
same as along 20 feet geophone interval line
and do not correlate to flags in the field
Line1-10Elevation.srf
Lower Pit -- Depth Section
Velocity
(ft/sec)
12000
11000
10000
Depth (feet)
0
100
101.5
103.5
105.5
107.5
109.5
111.5
113.5
115.5
117.5
119.5
121.5
123.5
125
9000
8000
-10
7000
-20
6000
5000
-30
4000
-40
-20
0
Southwest
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
Northeast
3000
2000
1000
Source Point
Note: Source Point locations are not the
same as along 20 feet geophone interval line
and do not correlate to flags in the field
Line1-10Depth.srf
Caterpillar D8 Ripping Chart
Station
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
X
-20
-0.07556
19.84889
39.77333
59.69778
79.62222
99.54667
119.4711
139.3956
159.32
178.1139
196.9079
215.7018
234.4957
253.2896
272.0836
290.8775
309.6714
328.4654
347.2593
366.0532
384.8471
403.6411
422.435
441.2289
460.0229
478.8168
497.6107
516.4046
535.1986
553.9925
572.7864
591.5804
610.3743
629.1682
647.9621
666.7561
685.55
703.6758
721.8017
739.9275
758.0533
776.1792
794.305
812.4308
830.5567
848.6825
866.8083
884.9342
903.06
Y
-20
-18.2567
-16.5133
-14.77
-13.0267
-11.2833
-9.54
-7.79667
-6.05333
-4.31
2.530357
9.370714
16.21107
23.05143
29.89179
36.73214
43.5725
50.41286
57.25321
64.09357
70.93393
77.77429
84.61464
91.455
98.29536
105.1357
111.9761
118.8164
125.6568
132.4971
139.3375
146.1779
153.0182
159.8586
166.6989
173.5393
180.3796
187.22
195.6725
204.125
212.5775
221.03
229.4825
237.935
246.3875
254.84
263.2925
271.745
280.1975
288.65
Elev
0
0
1
6
6
3
3
3
6
9
8
6
11
11
5
2
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
11
12
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11.08333
11.16667
11.25
11.33333
11.41667
11.5
11.58333
11.66667
11.75
11.83333
11.91667
12
StaEvery2
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
102
104
106
108
110
112
114
116
118
120
122
124
126
128
130
132
134
136
Sta
X
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
-20
-1.874
16.252
34.378
52.504
70.63
84.77143
98.91286
113.0543
127.1957
141.3371
155.4786
169.62
179.62
189.62
199.62
209.62
221.092
232.564
244.036
255.508
266.98
278.452
289.924
301.396
312.868
324.34
Y
-20
-11.548
-3.096
5.356
13.808
22.26
36.40143
50.54286
64.68429
78.82571
92.96714
107.1086
121.25
138.57
155.89
173.21
190.53
206.913
223.296
239.679
256.062
272.445
288.828
305.211
321.594
337.977
354.36
Elev
2
2
1.666667
1.333333
1
1.75
2.5
3.25
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.666667
1.333333
2
16
20
StaEvery2
200
202
204
206
208
210
212
214
216
218
220
222
224
226
Appendix B
Skull Valley
Advanced Analytical Assay
Assay No. 81117
Dated: October 3, 2008
Appendix B
Skull Valley
Additional Advanced Analytical Assays
Dated: December 3, 2007
Appendix C
Skull Valley
Site Features and Pit Map
N EVADA M INING C OMPANY (NMC, Inc.)
NORTH
SKULL VALLEY, ARIZONA
S ETTLING PONDS
SITE FEATURES MAP
(RECLAIMED)
www.nmcinc.com
L OWER P IT
E AST
L OWER P IT
M IDDLE
L OWER P IT
W EST 2 L OWER P IT
W EST 1
(RECLAIMED)
TAILINGS
PILE
U PPER P IT
W EST
U PPER P IT
S OUTH
R ETENTION P OND
P ROCESSING F ACILITIES
(DISASSEMBLED & SOLD)
PROCESSED ORE
STORAGE AREA
(FIRST STAGE)
NOTE: ALL IDENTIFIED AREAS
ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT
TO FIELD VERIFICATION.
Copyright 2009©NMC,Inc
0’
50’
100’
200’
SCALE: 1”-100’
‘300
U PPER P IT
E AST
TAILINGS PILE
A CCESS R OAD
(via Copper Basin Road)
WGS-84 (GPS) COORDINATES
N 34˚29’ 07”
W 112˚38’ 53”
ELEVATION = ± 4,750 MSL
Appendix D
Skull Valley
Arizona Mill Site Flow Sheet
P1 - Feed Hopper
The bagged ore is dumped into the feed hopper and is not handled again until the
final concentrate is collected and put into the dryer.
P2 - Conveyer
This conveyer feeds a constant ore into the trammel.
P3 - Trammel
The ore is vigorously washed to float off the clays after separating the heavy ore
from them.
P4 - Double Deck Power Screen
This classification step removes all particles larger than 1/8",sending it to PF to be
discarded. The +20 mesh to 1/8" is stockpiled to be pulverized and processed at a
later date. The ore that washes thru the 20 mesh screen is dumped into a sump
pump (P6) and pumped thru pipe (P7) to the sweco screen group (P8).
P5 - Conveyer
The conveyer carries ore larger than 1/8" to waste pile.
P6 - Sump Pump
Pumps slurred ore (with plain water) to the sweco screens.
P7 - Steel Pipe
Carries ore slurry to the sweco screens.
P8 - 4 Multi Deck, 48" Sweco Screens
Primary ore size classification. Beginning with -20 mesh ore, the sweco classifies
to 5 size groups of ore for transfer to the U. H. F. concentrated tables.
P9 - Diaphragm Pumps
These pumps transfer the classified ore groups to their designated U. H. F.
concentrated tables.
P10 - 7' X 12' U. H. F. Concentrating Table
P11 -7' x 12' U. H. F. Concentrating Table
P12 - Vibrating Ball Mill
Pulverizes table concentrates from P11 back to P8 for reclassification
P13 - Vibrating Ball Mill
Pulverizes table concentrates from P11 back to P8 for reclassification.
P14 - Sweco Dewatering Screen
Removes most of the water from the table tails and collects the -400 mesh ore
pumping it to the settling tanks, and sends the +400 mesh table tails thru the
dewatering screw (P21 to P22).
P15 - 4' x 8' U. H. F. Concentrating Table
Receives classified ore from the sweco's (P8), separating the concentrates from the
tails.
tails.
tails.
tails.
P19 - (2) 2' x 4' U-Tech Concentrating Table
tails.
P20 - Table Concentrate Dewatering System
This removes most of the water from all of the (final) table concentrates and
delivers them to the dryer.
P21 - Conveyer
P22 - 24" Dewatering Screw
Dewaters table tails and discards them.
P23 - Water Collection Tank
Collects all excess water and sends it thru to the fines settling tanks (P24, P25 and
P26) .
P24 - 4" Steel Pipe
Carries water to settling tanks (P25).
P25 - First Of Two Settling Tanks
The ultra fine ore (-400 mesh) settles out of the water and then flows to the other
settling tank (P26) where the settling process continues, before the water flows into
our vinyl lined third acre pond for recycling the water for reuse in our processing.
P26 - Second Settling Tank
P27 - Propane Fueled Dryer
Dries concentrates before the induction furnace.
P28 - Screw Feeder
Loads dried concentrates into 55 gallon barrels.
P29 - Water Cooling System
For The Induction Furnaces
P30 - Double Induction Furnaces
Used to make Dore bars from the table concentrates.
P31 - 100 KW Silent Run Diesel Generator Set
P32 - 1000 KW 16 Cylinder Diesel Generator Set
With House and 22 Hundred Gallon Fuel Tank
P33 - Screw Type Air Compressor 350 CFM
P34 -1400 Gallon Air Storage Tank
P1A - Full Laboratory Facility
The lab includes a direct current plasma machine (OCP) with all supportive
accessories, two fume hoods, acid resistant work tables, two water sinks,
scales, glass ware, safety equipment, first aid equipment, air conditioners
and all other necessary items.
P1 B - Lunch Room
Including clothing lockers, safety equipment, first aid equipment and a
restroom with a biodegradable toilet.
P1C - Parts and Maintenance Facility
P10 - Tool and Electrical Supply Facility
P1 E - Sample Preparation Facility
Rock crushing and pulverization of samples.
Appendix E
Equipment List
Quantity
Year
Model
Description
Identification / Serial No.
1
1973
CASE
580B Loader Backhoe
5230332
1
1981
CHEVY
Dually 1 Ton Pickup (white)
1GBHC34W1BV118109 516-HKF (NV)
1
1986
CHEVY
Dually 1 Ton Pickup (grey)
CA·77878
1
2000
CHILDERS
20 ft Flatbed Trailer
5DRCH2022YLOOOO2 K-44591
1
1999
TEXAS BRAG
20 ft Flatbed Trailer
17XFP182XX1999067 k-51492
1
1980
100 KW Generator
Trailer Mount
317-A-63
1
1991
CAT 205 KW Generator
Skid Mount
5JC01459 3306
1
1999
OLYMPIAN
100KW Generator
D2875A1001 D100P1\4100 SERIES
1
1987
CHEVY
3/4 Ton Pickup
(Brown)
1
1975
GALION
Road Grader T-500 A
GC 06026 T-500
1
N/A
WIGGINS
Lo-pro Forklift
HWIGGINSWLC851044
1
N/A
N/A
6' X 15' Steel Hopper
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
6' X 8' Steal Hopper
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
2'6" X 7'6" Steel Hopper
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
5' X 5' Aluminum Hopper
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
6' X 10' Steel Cone
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
6' X 10' Steel Platform
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
2'6" X 12' X 5' High Steel Catwalk
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
2'6" X 12' X 2'6" High Steel Catwalk
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
2'6" X 12' X 5'9" High Steel Catwalk
N/A
2
N/A
N/A
2'6" Wide Steel Catwalk Stairs
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
4' X 4’ Wide Stainless Steel Tank
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
400 Gallon Tank
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
550 Gallon Fuel Tank
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Propane Tank 500 Gallon
B19259
2
N/A
N/A
8' X40' Steel Containers
N/A
2
N/A
N/A
8' X 40' Aluminum Storage Containers
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
4' X 3' Marble Table
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
4'X8' Graphic Eng. Aluminum Top Vibrating Table
2471
1
N/A
N/A
4'X8' Graphic Eng. Plastic Top Vibrating Table
2523
1
N/A
N/A
2'X4' Graphic Eng. Aluminum Top Vibrating Table
2367
1
N/A
N/A
7' X 12' Graphic Eng. Aluminum Top Vibrating Table
2536
4
N/A
N/A
1'6" X 4' UTECHTIC Vibration Finish Tables
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
3' x 3' Stainless Steel Table
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
3' x 4' Stainless Steel Table
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
1' Belt X 9' Steel Conveyer
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
1'2" Belt X 13' Stainless Steel Conveyer
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
1'2" Belt X 40' Stainless Steel Conveyer
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
10" Belt X 13' Steel Conveyer Shelf Style Belt
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
1' Belt X 14' Alumium ELPCO Conveyer
C-O-U156K2·3020
1
N/A
N/A
1' Belt x 13' Steel Conveyer 87962
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
1'6" Belt X 2'6" Steel Conveyer
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
2' X 5' Rolling Screen Unit-Silver Spr. Equip
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
12" screw X 12' screw feeders
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
9" screw X 12' screw feeders open top
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
6" screw X 21' screw conveyer enclosed
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
6" screw X 5' dewatering screw unit open top
N/A
2
N/A
N/A
4" screw X4' screw feeders open top
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
BICO Pulverizer
802189F-1
1
N/A
N/A
DENVER Jaw Crusher 5" x 6"
002113-001-1 ,10317/P15
1
N/A
N/A
DENVER Jaw Crusher 4" x 8"
01-145194-001-1
1
N/A
N/A
BICO Puck and ring
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
1996 ROSKAMP roll crusher 6"
135447
1
N/A
N/A
15 HP DURCO pump
7731 PUMP/5542 MOTOR
1
N/A
N/A
Gen. American trans. Corp- Dryer
2672
1
N/A
N/A
18" SWECO Vibrating Stack Screen
LS18-579-88 LS18533
1
N/A
N/A
LS30-686-6 LS39C66
1
N/A
N/A
750393-A200 X548C888
1
N/A
N/A
750393-8200 X548C888
1
N/A
N/A
750393-C200 X548C888
1
N/A
N/A
C-865-3 948C88
1
N/A
N/A
Direct Current Plasma Machine
N/A
2
N/A
N/A
1'x1' Kilns
N/A
2
N/A
N/A
Stainless Steel Sinks
N/A
misc.
N/A
N/A
Steel Shelving
N/A
ORIGINAL INVENTORY LIST
Quantity
Year
Model
Description
1
N/A
N/A
CAT 950 Loader (rubber tire) 3 yd.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
CAT D4D Bulldozer 10 ton
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
CAT Generator Trailer mounted 50 KW
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
ISUZU diesel w/4" trash pump & 5 KW Gen.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Welding Truck w/400 Amp. Welder & Torches
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
3" Red Jacket Deep Well pumps/440 Volt Controls
N/A
2
N/A
N/A
Approx. 1300 ft. of 3" Steel Pipe and Misc. Fittings
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
3" Valves and Couplers, etc.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Approx. 12,000' of 2"-8" Aluminum & Plastic Pipe
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
8x6 Rubber Lined Pump 60 HP.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Electrical Control Trailer
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
DUETZ Generator Trailer Mounted 100 KW.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
6x5 Rubber Lined Pump w/I Tank 30 HP.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
4x3 Rubber Lined Pump w/ Tank 10 HP.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
4" High Pressure Pump 10 HP.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
4" Submersible Pump 10 HP.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
6" Volume Fresh Water Pump 30 HP.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
56"x 40' Trailer Mounted Trommel 5 to 40 Ton per hr.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
56"x40' Skid Mount Trommel 5 to 40 Ton per hr.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
48" Belt Feeder-Under 6'x10' Hopper 5 to 60 ton per hr.
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
30' Feed Belt
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
60' Discharge Conveyor
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
40' Discharge Conveyor
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Double Deck Vibrating Screen- Portable
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Riechart Spiral System Portable w/ Pumps & Sumps
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
36" Eagle Sand Dewatering Screw
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Knudson Concentrating Bowl
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
4'x8' Steel Drying Table
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
2,500 Gallon Water Storage Tank
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
7,500 Gallon Water Storage Tank
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Honda Three Wheeler w/ 2 Wheel Cart
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
40' Skid Mount Steel Storage Container
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Misc. Spare Parts, Supplies and Work Tools
N/A
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT SUBJECT TO CHANGE ONCE BUYER/JV PARTNER DETERMINED
Quantity
Year
Model
Description
1
N/A
N/A
Front End Loader
5/7 vds.
1
N/A
N/A
Crawler Backhoe
2/4 vds.
2
N/A
N/A
Concentrating Tables
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
CAT D8 Bulldozer
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Fuel Truck
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
Water Meter
N/A
Misc.
N/A
N/A
Additional Conveyors and Mechanical Grizzly
N/A

Mining Operation Plan (MOP) - NMC | Nevada Mining Company

Transcription

Similar documents

IsoMetrix Information Sheet

Garage Access Victory Lane access

experience fuzzy`s pit box lounge

A Perfect Spark

studio op - Datamine

Katy`s Korner Current Project

Green Stone PDF DIY Detailer Fire Pits Updated

See more details

[email protected] www.npfbassettspole.com

Marianist Retreat Center - Institute of Integral Qigong and Tai Chi