RECORD OF DECISION 

AND 

PLAN OF OPERATIONS APPROVAL - FOR 

Atlas Perlite, Inc. 


Tucker Hill Perlite Project 


Mining Plan of Operation and 


Final Environmental Impact Statement 


(BLM/OR/WA_PL-96/003·1792) 


PROJECT FILE NUMBER:3809 


CASEFILE NUMBER:OR 51500 


PREPARING OFFICE: 

U.S. Department of Interior 


Bureau of Land Management 


Lakeview District 


P.O. Box 151 


Lakeview, Oregon 97630 


INTRODUCTION 

This Record of Decision (ROD) has been prepared in response to a 

review of a mining plan of operation submitted by Atlas Perlite, 

Inc., to mine perlite from existing mining ·claims located 

approximately 35 miles northwest of Lakeview, Oregon. Both a Draft 

and Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) were prepared 

analyzing the impacts of the proposed mining operation. 

DECISION 

On the basis of the analysis contained in the Draft EIS, the 

abbreviated Final EIS, · a:nd consultation with interested tribal 

governments, the mining plan of operation (POO) submitted by Atlas 

Perlite, Inc., as modified and described as the agency .preferred 

alternative C, pages 3-13 in the Final EIS, is approved. Briefly, 

this action will consist of developing a 20-acre perlite quarry on 

Tucker Hill, constructing a temporary growth medium (soil material) 

stockpile, upgrading 3.3 miles of an existing road to use for 

hauling ore, and reclamation of the road and quarry at the end of 

the 10-year operating period in accordance with a reclamation plan 

to be approved jointly by the Bureau and the Oregon Department of 

Geology and Mineral Industries. In addition, an associated 

processing facility will be constructed on company owned land in 

the town of Lakeview, Oregon, which is not subject to Bureau 

approval authority. 

1 

The approval of the POO is contingent upon the submission and 

acceptance of a reclamation plan, the posting and acceptance of an 

appropriate reclamation bond, implementation of the monitoring and 

mitigation measures identified in the Final EIS and this ROD, 

compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 

Act (as outlined in the Memorandum of Agreement between the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Bureau of Land 

Management, and Oregon State Historic Preservation Office for this 

project), and all required Federal, State, and local government 

permits being in place prior to commencing operations. 

ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION 

Alternative A - Company Proposed Alternative 

This alternative consists of the mining proposal as contained in 

the company's mining plan of operation. It calls for developing a 

20-acre perlite quarry on Tucker Hill, constructing a permanent, 6­

acre waste rock dump, constructing a 0. 5 -acre temporary growth 

medium stockpile, upgrading 3.3 miles of an existing road to use 

for hauling ore, constucting a processing facility on company owned 

land in the town of Lakeview, Oregon, and reclamation of the road 

and quarry at the end of the 10-year operating period in accordance 

with a reclamation plan approved jointly by the Burea1,1 and the 

Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. 

Mine operations would include the use of a variety of heavy 

equipment as described in the Final EIS. The majority of the 

quarry operations would occur during two campaigns per year, each 

approximately 45 days long (in early summer and late fall to avoid 

potential conflicts with nesting raptors), as outlined in the 

blasting schedule contained in Appendix IV of the Draft EIS and 

page 12 of the Final EIS. 

The ore would be stockpiled on-site then hauled via the upgraded 

access road to Highway 31, then south to Highway 395 into Lakeview 

where the processing plant would be located. Hauling would occur 

year round. The processed perlite would be shipped to markets by 

truck or rail. 

All available growth medium occurring on top of the quarry, waste 

rock dump, and access road would be stripped off, temporarily 

stockpiled, contoured to a slope angle of 2.5 horizontal to 1.0 

vertical, seeded, and monitored for weeds, as described in the 

Final EIS. Overburden would be placed in a permanent waste rock 

dump and contoured to an final overall slope angle of 2.5 

horizontal to 1.0 vertical, as shown on Figure 4 of the Draft EIS. 

Access would be provided using an existing road which would be 

resurfaced and maintained as described in the Final EIS. The 

2 

company would be required to obtain an easement for access across 

private lands. 

During the project life, the company would construct and maintain 

ditches, water bars, and culverts, where needed for control of 

drainage and sedimentation. 

Reclamation would occur as outlined in the Final EIS and in 

accordance with the reclamation plan to be approved jointly by the 

Bureau and the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. 

Alternative B · Alternative Waste Rock Location 

This alternative is the same as alternative A, except the waste 

rock dump site would be slightly smaller (5.0 acres) and located as 

shown in Figure 5 of the Draft EIS. This alternative was 

considered as a means of lessening the total disturbance of the 

project along with associated visual and cultural impacts. 

Alternative C County Gravel Pit Waste Rock Location (Agency 

Preferred Alternative) 

This alternative is the same as alternative A, except the waste 

rock would be hauled to the base of Tucker Hill and temporarily 

stockpiled at an existing, disturbed gravel pit operated by the 

Lake County Road Department. The material would then be used 

either as road fill or for reclamation of the gravel pit when 

operations cease at the pit. No permanent waste rock dump would be 

required. This alternative was designed to lessen the total 

disturbance 

cultural im

alternative. 

of 

pacts. 

the project along with 

This alternative is 

associated 

the Bureau's 

visual and 

preferred 

Alternative D No Action/Continue Existing Management 

(Environmentally Preferred Alternative) 

This alternative is included as a baseline for comparison of 

environmental impacts of the other alternatives. This alternative 

would consist of continuing existing management activities in the 

Tucker Hill area with no perlite mining occurring. Mineral 

exploration activities would be allowed to continue. Existing 

exploration sites would be reclaimed. 

The Bureau considers this alternative to be the "environmentally 

preferred" alternative, as impacts to visual quality and cultural 

uses/values would not occur. The "environmentally preferred" 

alternative is described by the Council on Environmental Quality as 

the "alternative that would best promote national environmental 

policy as expressed in section 101 of the National Environmental 

Policy Act". This means it is the alternative that causes the 

least damage to the biological and physical environment and/or best 

3 

protects, preserves, and enhances historic and cultural resources. 

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS AND RATIONALE FOR DECISION 

Under the 1872 Mining Law, a person has a statutory right to go 

upon the open (unappropriated and unreserved) Federal lands for the 

purpose of mineral exploration, development, and extraction. Under 

applicable surface management regulations (43 Code of Federal 

Regulations Part 3809), an approved plan of operations is required 

where mechanized earth·moving equipment or explosives result in a 

cumulative disturbance of more than five acres in any calendar 

year. During review· the Bureau can require that the plan be 

modified to prevent "unneccessary or undue degradation" by 

identifying mitigating measures that the operator must agree to 

comply with before surface disturbance can begin. The approved 

plan must also comply with all other applicable laws and 

regulations. 

The Bureau has limited discretion in approving a properly submitted 

mining plan, but may require reasonable modifications to prevent 

unnecessary or undue degradation. The operator must assure that 

operations include adequate and responsible measures to prevent 

"unnecessary or undue degradation" of the Federal lands and to 

provide for reasonable reclamation. Unnecessary or undue 

degradation, as defined under 43 CFR Part 3809, means surface 

disturbance greater than 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. 

It is also recognized, however, that existing treaties with Native 

American Tribes, cultural resource protection laws (National 

Historic Preservation Act and Archeological Resources Protection 

Act), tribal trust responsiblities, and recent laws (American 

Indian Religious Freedom Act and Native American Graves 

Repatriation Act) protecting Native American religious practices 

must also be considered in the decision-making process. The Tucker 

Hill area is of direct interest and concern to four Northern Paiute 

groups. The Bureau has consulted with recognized Native American 

tribes on a government-to-government basis. Consultation with at 

least two tribal governments has indicated the area has religious 

significance. Unlike impacts to other resource values, impacts to 

religious values cannot be mitigated. Both the Klamath Tribes 

(representing the Yahooskin Band of Northern Paiutes) and the Burns 

Paiute Tribe are opposed to the project due to the impacts to 

cultural uses and religious/spiritual values. The project would be 

in conflict with Klamath Tribes policy of allowing no surface 

disturbance activities within their ceded lands and recent 

proclamations issued by these tribes. 

4 


I 
Several individuals and environmental groups also oppose the 

project due to environmental reasons, particularly impacts related 

to visual and cultural values. 

In making the decision outlined above, the Bureau has attempted to 

balance the statutory rights of the applicant with other 

conflicting legal mandates as well as recognized tribal interests, 

uses, and concerns. Throughout the decision-making process, the 

Bureau has worked with all interested and concerned parties to 

mitigate, to the extent that is reasonably possible, the impacts of 

the proposed project to known cultural, visual, and biological 

values. To that end, the original proposal has been modified to 

reduce the total amount of surface disturbance from 38 to 32 acres 

(this includes 8 acres of existing disturbance from previous 

exploration activities in the area). This, in turn, would reduce 

the potential impact to one additional cultural site, reduce the 

overall level of visual impacts, and reduce the overall level of 

disturbance to soil and vegetation that would require reclamation. 

In making this decision, it is also recognized that it is not 

possible to mitigate the impacts to religious or spiritual values 

that may be associated with the formation. 

CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAND USE PLANS 

The minerals section of the current, approved Bureau land use plan 

governing management of the area (High Desert Management-Framework 

Plan) calls for keeping the Tucker Hill area "open for mineral 

development". This decision is consistent with this component of 

t&e existing plan, as well as other sections of the plan related 

to dispersed recreation use, wildlife habitat, and range 

management. 

The decision may be in conflict with the State of Oregon's 

statewide planning goal 5 which provides protection to scenic and 

historic areas, while it is consistent with goal 9 which seeks to 

provide for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, 

welfare, and prosperity of Oregon citizens. Various agencies with 

the State of Oregon, including the Governor's office, were given 

opportunity to review the project and provide the Bureau with a 

determination of conformance with the State's planning goals. 

Comments were received from the Oregon Department of Environmental 

Quality and Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. 

The decision also appears to be both compatible and in conflict 

with a number of components of applicable regional and county 

plans, as described in the Draft EIS. The Lake county 

Commissioners, Lake County Chamber of Commerce, the Town of 

Lakeview, and numerous businesses and individuals within Lake 

County are supportive of the project. 

5 

MITIGATION AND MONITORING 

Those project design features, requirements, and mitigation 

measures specified on pages 12-13 of the Final EIS would be 

implemented. This includes implementation of a Historic 

Preservation Treatment Plan (HPTP) to be developed in consultation 

with the State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation as outlined in the Memorandum of 

Agreement between the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 

Bureau, and Oregon State Historic Preservation Office. 

Implementation of the HPTP would fully mitigate the archaeological 

sites that cannot be avoided and would be directly impacted by the 

project. Mitigation would occur prior to project implementation. 

However, it is realized that impacts to some religious/cultural 

sites can not be mitigated. 

A formal reclamation plan consistent with the reclamation 

discussion on pages 6-11 of the Final EIS (description of 

alternative C) and approved jointly by the Bureau and the Oregon 

Department of Geology and Mineral Industries would be implemented. 

Environmental monitoring will occur during project operation and 

after final reclamation is complete, until the Bureau releases the 

reclamation bond, as described on pages 10-12 of the FEIS. 

Operational monitoring would consist of regular field visits by 

representatives of the Bureau and/or Oregon Department of Geology 

and Mineral,s to ensure compliance with operational and surface 

management requirements. Annual reclamation progress reports would 

be submit ted to both the Bureau and the Oregon Department of 

Geology and Mineral Industries. Reclamation would be considered 

successful when all disturbed sites are stabilized, revegetated, 

and post-mining land use objectives are met. 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT/TRIBAL CONSULATION 

Numerous opportunities were provided for public involvement and 

tribal consultation during project planning. The project proposal 

was announced in the September 1994 Fremont Frequent Flyer and the 

May 1995 Lakeview District Planning Update. A scoping letter was 

mailed to 80 indivictuals, agencies, and tribal governments on 

January 30, 1995. A Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS was 

published in the Federal Register on February 3, 1995, which also 

announced the beginning of the scoping period. The scoping period 

closed on March 3, 1995. A total of five scoping comment letters 

were received. 

Atlas Perlite, Inc. has made several presentations on the project 

to the Lake County Board of Commissioners, communities of Lakeview 

and Paisley, and the Klamath and Burns Paiute Tribes. 

Individual contacts and interviews were made with individuals of 

6 

the Klamath, Burns Paiute, Warm Springs Paiute, and Fort· Bidwell 

Paiute Tribes. Additional meetings occurred with 

individuals/groups of these same tribes and the Bureau staff. A 

government-to-government meeting was held with the Burns Paiute 

Tribal Council on June 30, 1995, and with the Klamath Tribal 

Executive Committee on July 11, 1995. An open tribal meeting and 

field trip was held on Tucker Hill on August 11, 1995. Both the 

Warm Springs Paiute and Fort Bidwell Paiute Tribes stated Tucker 

Hill was outside of their tribal area and wished only to be kept 

informed of decisions made. Two individuals (one from each tribe) 

expressed an interest in the area and were consulted individually. 

The Draft EIS was made available for a 60-day public review. A 

Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS was published by the U.S. 

EPA appeared in the Federal Register on October 6, 1995, initiating 

the public review period. The Bureau published its Notice of 

Availability in the Federal Register on the same date. In 

addition, Notices of Availability were published in several local 

newspapers on October 5 and 6, 1995. The availability of the draft 

was also announced in the September and November 1995 editions of 

the Bureau's publically distribured newsletter covering Oregon and 

Washington, the Bureau News. Over 100 copies of the Draft EIS were 

mailed out to Congressional offices, Federal agencies, state 

agencies, tribal governments, local governments, and interested 

groups and individuals. Over 20 additional copies were requested 

and mailed during the review period to interested individuals. 

These individuals were added to the list of recipients for this ROD 

and Final EIS. 

During the review period, a second government-to-government meeting 

was held with the Burns Paiute Tribal Council on November 8, 1995 

to discuss the DEIS. A government-to-government meeting was also 

scheduled with the Klamath Tribal Executive Committee on November 

14, 1995. However, this meeting was cancelled due to the Federal 

government shutdown. A follow-up meeting was held on January 17, 

1996, prior to completion of this ROD. The Lake County 

Commissioners also held a special public meeting to hear public 

comments and concerns about the project on November 27, 19 9 5. 

Representatives from the Bureau and Atlas Perlite were at this 

meeting. The review period on the DEIS ended on December 5, 1995. 

Approximately 20 oral comments or comment letters were received. 

Gomment letters were included in Chapter 4 of the Final EIS, along 

with individual responses to each letter. A 30-day public review 

period was provided on the Final EIS. Only one oral comment was 

received on the FEIS from a representative of the Klamath Tribes 

requesting correction for the record of a statement made in 

response to a comment letter #5 in the FEIS where the Bureau stated 

the Native Americans with direct lineal descent in the Tucker Hill 

area are the Burns Paiute. The respondent felt that the Native 

Americans with direct lineal descent are the Klamath Tribes. In 

fact, there is disagreement over this issue and the response more 

accurately should have stated that the Native Americans with direct 

7 

' ' 

lineal descent in this area are individuals of both the Burns 

Paiute and Klamath Tribes. A letter was received from the 

Association of Oregon Archaeologists requesting to be kept informed 

of the Section 106 activities and offering assistance, but provided 

no comments specific to the FEIS. 

Finally, 

Details 

section. 

a 

of 

30-day appeal 

this appeals 

period 

process 

is 

are 

being prov

included 

ided 

in 

on 

the 

this 

follo

ROD. 

wing 

APPEAL PROCEDURES 

Any party adversely affected by this decision may appeal in 

accordance with with 43 CFR Part 3809.4 which provides separate 

appeal procedures for the proposed operator (mining applicant) and 

all other parties. These two separate procedures are described 

below. 

It is suggested that any party submitting a notice of appeal, send 

it by certified mail, return receipt requested. 

Operator 

Any operator adversely affected by the decision may appeal to the 

State Director. Such an appeal must be filed, in writing, with the 

officer authorizing the decision (Lakeview District Manager) within 

30 days of receipt of the decision. The decision shall be in 

effect during the pendency of any appeal. However, a request for 

stay of the decision may accompany such an appeal. 

The appeal to the State Director must contain: 

a) the name and address of the appellant. 


b) the name of the mining claim (s) and serial number (s) 


assigned to the mining claim(s) recorded pursuant to 43 CFR 


Subpart 3833 which are subject to the appeal. 


c) a statement of reasons for the appeal and any arguments 


which would justify reversal or modification of the decision. 


The State Director shall promptly render a decision on the appeal, 

in writing, by certified mail. If the State Director's decision is 

adverse to the appellant. it may be appealed to the Board of Land 

Appeals, Office of Hearings and Appeals, in accordances with 43 CFR 

Part 4.4. This decision shall be effective while waiting for the 

outcome of any such appeal. 

All Other Parties 

Any other party, other than the operator, adversely affected by 

this decision may appeal by submitting a written notice of appeal 

within 30 days of receipt of this decision in accordance with 43 

8 

i 

' . 

CFR Part 4.4 to the District Manager, Lakeview District, Bureau of 

Land Management, P .O. Box 151, Lakeview, OR 97630 . The notice of 

appeal must include a statement of reasons or file a separate 

statement of reasons wi thi n 30 days of f i ling the notice of appeal. 

The filing o f any such appeal shal l not stop this decision from 

being effecti ve. The notice of appeal must state if a stay of the 

deci sion is bei ng reque sted. A copy of the notice of appeal, 

statement of reasons, and other documents should be sent to the 

Regional Solici tor, Pacifi c Northwest Region, U.S. Department of 

the I nter ior, Lloyd 500 Building, Suite 607 , 500 N.E. Multnomah 

St.r eet, Portland, OR 97232. If the stat ement of r easons is filed 

separately it must be sent to the Board of Land Appeals, Office of 

Hearings and Appeals, 4015 Wilson Boulevard, Arl ington , VA 22203 . 

Appr oved: 

9 

AMENDED 


PL<\N OF OPERATIONS AND 


RECLAMATION PLAN 


FOR THE 


TUCKER HILL PERLITE PROJECT 


Prepared for: 


USDI BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 


LAKEVIEW DISTRICT 


LAKEVIEW, OREGON 97639 


Prepared by: 


ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 


Denver, Colorado 


With the Assistance of: 


JBR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. 


5365 Mae Anne Avenue, Suite B-2 


Reno,Nevada 89523 


Aprill996 


Revised June 1996 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN 


FOR THE TUCKER HILL PERLITE PROJECT 


TABLE OF CONTENTS 


1 -INTRODUCTION .......................................................... I 


l.A 	 GENERAL BACKGROUND ............................................. I 


l.B 	 APPLICANT INFORMATION ........................................... 2 


l.C 	 NAME OF INDIVIDUAL COMPLETING APPLICATION ......................... 3 


l .D 	 BUSINESS ADDRESS ................................................ 3 


l.E 	 BUSINESS TELEPHONE ............................... .'............... 3 


l.F 	 CORPORATE INFORMATION ........................................... 3 


2- OPERATING PLAN ..•..................................................... 4 


2.A 	 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .................................. 4 


2.A.a Project Boundaries ............................................ 4 


2.B 	 CULTURAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................... 4 


2.C 	 SURFACE OWNERSHIP ............................................... 5 


2.D 	 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ASSOCIATED DISTURBANCE .................... 5 


2.D.a 	 Overview .................................................. 5 


2.D.b 	 Quarry .................................................... 5 


2.D.c 	 Waste Rock Dwnps .......................................... 6 


2.D.d 	 Operations ................................................. 6 


2.D.e 	 Operating Components ....................................... 7 


2.D.f 	 Growth Mediwn Management .................................. 8 


2.E 	 PROJECT ACCESS .................................................. 8 


2.E.a~ Haul Road ................................................. 8 


2.E.b 	 Access Control .............................................. 8 


2.F 	 SURFACE WATERS ................................................. 9 


3 -RECLAMATION PLAN .................................................... 10 
 .• 

3.A 	 PREVENTIONOFUNNECESSARYORUNDUEDEGRADATION ................. 10 


3.B 	 PROJECT SCHEDULE ............................................... 10 


3.C 	 POST OPERATIONAL LAND USE ...................................... 10 


3.D 	 POST OPERATION TOPOGRAPHY ...................................... 10 


3.E 	 RECLAMATIONOFWASTEROCKDUMP ................................ 10 


3.F 	 ROAD RECLAMATION .............................................. 10 


3.G 	 DRAINAGE AND SEDIMENT CONTROL .................................. 11 


3.H 	 REVEGETATION ................................................... 12 


3.1 	 RECLAMATION OF QUARRY ......................................... 13 


3.J 	 MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE OF RECLAIMED AREAS .................. 14 


3 .K 	 EFFECT OF RECLAMATION ON FUTURE MINING .......................... 15 


AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

A 1LAS PERLITE, INC. 
3.L DRILL HOLE PLUGGING ............................................ 15 


3.M CONCURRENT RECLAMATION ........................................ 15 


3.N SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE ...................................... 16 


4- ACCEPTANCE OF RECLAMATION RESPONSIBILITY ......................... 17 


5- RECLAMATION COST ESTIMATE .......................................... 18 


LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE l.B-1 PROJECTUNPATENTEDLODECLAIMS .................................. 2 


TABLE2.A-1 LEGALDESCRIPTIONOFTHEAFFECTEDLANDS ........................... 4 


TABLE2.D-2 PRODUCTION SCHEDULE ............................................. 7 


TABLE 2.0-3 SURFACE DISTURBANCE (EXISTING AND MAXIMUM PROPOSED) .............. 7 


TABLE3.G-1 TYPICALCHEMICALANALYSES(PERCENT) ............................. 12 


TABLE3.H-1 REVEGETATION SEED MIXTURE ...................................... 13 


TABLE3.J-1 MONITORING PROGRAM ............................................ 15 


LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1 Location Map 

Figure 2 Project Area Map 

Figure 3 Proposed Disturbance 

Figure 4 Cross Section ofQuarry 

Figure 5 Existing Disturbance 

Figure 6 Post Reclamation Topography 

LIST OF APPENDICES 

Appendix I Blasting Schedule 

Appendix II NMBMMR Chemical Analysis 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR TilE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

ii 
1 -INTRODUCTION 


l.A GENERAL BACKGROUND 

In 1987, Atlas Corporation acquired the Tucker Hill perlite property located in south-central Oregon 

about 50 miles north of the California state line (Figure 1). The property position includes 

approximately 886 acres ofland. The project area is located on public land administered by the 

Bureau ofLand Management (BLM), Lakeview District. 

A small portion ofthe Tucker Hill perlite deposit was originally discovered and staked by a group 

oflocal prospectors in 1949 Shortly after location, a bulk perlite sample was collected and crudely 

expanded in a fire assay furnace by the U.S. Bureau ofMines in Tucson, Arizona. The property then 

underwent a brief period of surface mining. Unfortunately, this mining was conducted on a portion 

ofthe property that contains a high percentage ofmarekanite nodules (obsidian), and large adjacent 

areas of high-grade perlite went unrecognized. Mining operations ceased in 1954. In June 1981, 

Tenneco Oil Company located approximately 80 mining claims and later sold its property to 

Houston Oil and Minerals Exploration Company (HOMEX) who conducted some mapping and bulk 

sampling in 1982. HOMEX in 1983, 1984, and 1985 constructed 3-4 miles ofroad, drilled in excess 

of 100 exploratory holes, and mined, sampled and tested approximately 50 tons ofperlite. In 1986, 

prior to acquisition ofthe property by Atlas from HOMEX, Western States Minerals Corporation 

conducted drilling and bulk sampling. 

Upon acquiring the Tucker Hill property in July of 1987, Atlas remapped and reinterpreted the 

geology ofthe deposit. Between 1987 and 1990, Atlas completed 18 core and reverse circulation 

drill holes and submitted a number of samples for expansion testing. A resource estimate 

incorporating the new data was developed in 1991. 

Compiled expansion test data, drill core information, reverse circulation drill information and 

geologic mapping indicate a reserve potential of between 50 and 100 million tons of commercial 

grade perlite. Bulk samples ofTucker Hill perlite have been shown to perform in test evaluations 

as well as or better than other perlite products currently being produced. Bulk sample tests indicate 

that Tucker Hill perlite is of the universal variety suitable for a wide variety of expanded perlite 

products. 

While the size of the Tucker Hill deposit, together with its high quality, make it a world-class 

deposit, the market for perlite products is not large, nor is it rapidly increasing. Consequently, 

development ofa new source ofperlite ore is constrained by such factors as supply, demand and the 

economics of mining, processing and shipping. Therefore, Atlas' proposed plan of operations is 

designed to accommodate these factors. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TUCKER HiLL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 
This Amended Plan ofOperations and Reclamation Plan is being submitted in compliance with 43 

CFR 3809 BLM regulations for surface mining of public lands and the State of Oregon Revised 

Statutes (ORS) 517. The operations in this plan are those conducted on public lands and include the 

proposed haul road, quarry, waste rock dump, and the ore and growth medium stockpiles for the 

Tucker Hill Project. 

l.B APPLICANT INFORMATION 

The claim names, claim types, and BLM serial numbers for claims associated with the project are 

listed in Table l.B-1. 

TABLE l.B-1 PROJECT lTNPATENTED LODE CLAIMS 

Location County BLM 

Claims Date Book Page Serial Number 

EDR 10 04-17-94 32 10 147400 

EDR 10 (Amd.) 09-13-94 32 78 

ED II 10-16-81 23 393 47556 

EDI2 10-16-81 23 394 47557 

ED 13 10-16-81 23 395 47558 

ED 14 10-16-81 23 396 47559 

ED25 10-16-81 23 407 47570 

ED26 10-16-81 23 408 47571 

ED27 10-16-81 23 409 47572 

ED41 10-15-81 23 423 47586 

ED42 10-15-81 23 424 47587 

ED48 10-15-81 23 430 47593 

ED49 10-15-81 23 431 47594 

ED 50 10-15-81 23 432 47595 

ED 51 10-15-81 23 433 47596 

ED 52 10~15-81 23 434 47597 

ED 53 10-15-81 23 435 47598 

ED 54 10-15-81 23 436 47599 

ED 55 10-15-81 23 437 47600 

ED 56 10-15-81 23 438 47601 

ED64 10-17-94 23 444 47607 

ED65 10-17-94 23 445 47608 

ED66 10-17-94 23 446 47609 

ED67 10-17-94 23 447 47610 

ED68 10-17-94 23 448 47611 

-

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

2 
The Tucker Hill Project site and haul road is located in Lake County, Oregon within sections 23 

through 26, and 35 in Township 34 South, Range 19 East (Figure 2). 

l.C NAME OF INDIVIDUAL COMPLETING APPLICATION 

Larry J. Gorell, Sr. Environmental Coordinator 

l.D BUSINESS ADDRESS 

Atlas Perlite, Inc. 

370 Seventeenth St., Suite 3050 

Denver, CO 80202-5631 

l.E BUSINESS TELEPHONE 

(303) 629-2440 

l.F CORPORATE INFORMATION 

Corporate Name: 

Atlas Perlite, Inc. 

3 70 Seventeenth St., Suite 3050 

Denver, CO 80202-5631 

President Information: 

Mr. Gary Davis 

370 Seventeenth St., Suite 3050 

Denver, CO 80202-5631 

Treasurer Information: 

Mr. Jerome C. Cain 

370 Seventeenth St., Suite 3050 

Denver, CO 80202-5631 

Secretary Information: 

Mr. Jerome C. Cain 

370 Seventeenth St., Suite 3050 

Denver, CO 80202-5631 

Oregon Resident Agent Information 

C.T. Corporation System 

800 Pacific Building 

Portland, OR 97205 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE llJCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

3 
2- OPERATING PLAN 

2.A PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 

The Tucker Hill Project is located in south-central Oregon, approximately 35 miles northwest from 

the town ofLakeview. The project is accessed by traveling north ofLakeview on U.S. 395, west on 

Highway 31 to the Tucker Hill road and then south 3.3 miles on the Tucker Hill road to the Tucker 

Hill Quarry site (Figure 1 ). 

Tucker Hill is within the rain shadow ofthe Cascade Mountains. The area has a semi-arid climate. 

Mean daily maximum temperatures are in the mid 80 d~grees, with mean minimum t~mperatures 

in the low 20 degrees. Annual precipitation ranges from 7 to 15 inches, with a mean of 10.25 inches. 

Most precipitation comes as winter snow or spring rain. Summers are typically hot and dry. 

Vegetation is predominantly a sagebrush/bunch grass community typical of Nevada and eastern 

Oregon. 

2.A.a Project Boundaries 

Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the Tucker Hill Project location which is contained in the sections listed 

on Table 2.A-l. The entire operation is estimated to disturb approximately 32 acres over the next 

10 years. Prior to any surface disturbance, the claimant and the BLM will meet to flag or stake the 

boundary of the area within which surface disturbance is allowable under this plan. To prevent 

unnecessary and undue degradation, Atlas will then be responsible for ensuring that all mining 

activities or related surface disturbance occur within this boundary. 

TABLE 2.A-1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED LANDS 

Area Section Township Range 

Tucker Hill Project 23-26,35 34S 19E 

2.B CULTURAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

Atlas Perlite, Inc. is aware that certain cultural and archaeological values exist in the Tucker Hill 

area. Atlas will manage its operations to preclude or minimize impacts to these values. Atlas will 

work with the BLM and the Oregon State Historical Preservation office to assure the identification 

of cultural values, religious beliefs, or traditional practices ofNative American people which may 

be affected by this project. Also, Atlas will cooperate with the BLM in its Native American 

consultation process, as required by the 1992 amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act 

and other relevant rules. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TUCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

4 
2.C SURFACE OWNERSHIP 

Figure 2 shows land status in the project area. The project is located on public lands that are 

administered by the BLM. 

2.D PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ASSOCIATED DISTURBANCE 

2.D.a Overview 

Atlas proposes to develop a small quarry at the Tucker Hill perlite deposit. The 15- to 20-acre 

quarry is situated at an elevation of 4,980 feet on Tucker Hill. An existing 3.3-mile access road 

would be upgraded and utilized as a haul road. The haul road would connect the Tucker Hill Project 

with Highway 31. Quarrying ofthe deposit would produce high grade perlite ore. The ore produced 

from the Tucker Hill quarry would be hauled via tl:e existing access road to Highway 31 and then 

south to the town ofLakeview for processing. Processed perlite product would be shipped in bulk 

to manufacturers or end users by truck or rail. 

2.D.b Quarry 

The Tucker Hill deposit would be quarried using conventional methods consisting of drilling, 

blasting, loading and hauling. The rock would be drilled with diesel-powered blast hole drills using 

10- to 12-foot drill hole centers depending on material. The holes would be loaded with a blasting 

agent (ANFO), a mixture of anunonium nitrate and fuel oil) and blasted in accordance with 

regulations ofthe federal Mine Safety and Health Administration. 

The Lakeview Interagency Fire Center will be notified of the Tucker Hill blasting schedule a 

minimum oftwo (2) days prior to any blasting. 

Figure 3 shows the proposed disturbance including the mine configuration, haul road and growth 

medium stockpiles (JVer a ten year period. A cross-section ofthe quarry as it is exposed at one, five 

and ten year intervals, is shown in Figure 4. 

The blasted rock would be loaded with front-end loaders into haul trucks (22 to 25 ton capacity). 

Waste rock would be hauled to the waste rock dump site located at the Lake County gravel pit in 

Section 24 (Figure 3). Ore would be hauled over the existing access road to Highway 31 and then 

south to the process facility in Lakeview, where it will be screened, sized, and transloaded for rail 

or truck shipment. 

Based upon the current mine plan, the estimated quantity ofperlite ore that could be extracted over 

a ten year period by Atlas Perlite, Inc. is approximately 1.5 million short tons. The estimated waste 

tonnage associated with this ore production is 72,000 tons. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

T\!Ct::Eill.f0C)Jo..,l2, I­ 5 
2.D.c Waste Rock Dumps 

The waste rock dump would be located in the northwest comer ofthe existing Lake County gravel 

pit. The waste rock will be used by the county either as material for the county road maintenance 

program, or as fill for final reclamation ofthe gravel pit. 

2.D.d Operations 

After the initial start up period in 1996, the bulk ofthe proposed quarry operations would take place 

during two blasting campaigns per year, each approximately 45 days during early summer and late 

fall to avoid conflicts with wildlife. There may be a need for an additional short blasting period 

(approximately seven days, not necessarily consecutively) between December and January 31 and/or 

July 1 through 31. Blasting would be scheduled as described in Appendix I. Quarritd material 

would be stockpiled in place on the quarry floor. There would be two trucks averaging 10 trips per 

day per truck working a five day work week (normally Monday through Friday) from approximately 

6 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily. The hauling would be done year round and there would be an average oftwo 

people at the quarry while hauling. During the blasting campaigns, there would be three to four 

people on site during the work day. The equipment and facilities Atlas plans to use at the quarry 

include: 

• 2- 25 ton Dump Trucks 

• 1 - D9 or equivalent Dozer 

• 1 - 980 or equivalent Front End Loader 

• Drill Rig 

• 1 - 3,000 gallon Water Truck 

• Light Vehicles (pick-up trucks) 

• Office Trailer 

Initial construction ofthe Tucker Hill project is scheduled to begin in the summer of 1996. Given 

the mineable reserves and projected production rates the expected mine life is minimum of five 

years. For planning purposes, however, ten years is considered a realistic production period. It is 

conceivable that market conditions would allow an opportunity to extend the operations beyond what 

is currently anticipated. In the event an extension is warranted, permits would be amended 

accordingly. Table 2.D-2 shows the anticipated production schedule for the next 10 years. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

6 

i 
TABLE 2.D-2 PRODUCTION SCHEDULE 


Year Annual Ore Production* Annual Waste Production* 

1 50,000 25,100 

2 50,000 4,500 

3 75,000 2,500 

4 75,000 2,500 

5 100,000 2,500 

10 250,000 7,100 

*In nominal short tons (ST) 

2.D.e Operating Components 

The operational components that would be created by the Tucker Hill Project consist ofthe haul 

road, growth medium stockpiles, the quarry and associated ore stockpile(s) (Figure 3). Existing 

roads and pads created in part by Atlas and in part by others during the exploration ofthe project and 

located out ofthe ultimate pit perimeter, are also a component ofthe Tucker Hill project (Figure 5). 

Table 2.D-3 lists the approximate acreage of disturbance, both existing and proposed, for each 

component associated with the Tucker Hill project. Proposed disturbance shown is estimated for 

both the five and ten year periods. The existing disturbance associated with the 1994 drilling 

program access (0.4 acres) and the largest bulk sample site (0.8 acres) are contained with the 

proposed disturbance. 

TABLE 2.D-3 SURFACE DISTURBANCE (EXISTING AND MAXIMUM PROPOSED} 

Disturbance Component Existing Acres 

Proposed Acres Total 

5 Yr. lOYr. 5 Yr. 10 Yr. 

Main Haul Road 3.7 3.5 4 7.2 7.7 

Quarry Area 0 13.8 20 13.8 20.0 

Growth Medium Stockpile 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

1994 Drill Access 0.4 -0.4 -0.4 0 0 

Exploration Roads 2.2 0 0 2.2 2.2 

Bulk Sample Sites 2.1 -0.8 -0.8 1.3 1.3 

Total 8.4 16.6 23.3 25.0 31.7 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR Tiffi TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

7 
2.D.f Growth Medium Management 

Prior to construction ofthe quarry and upgrading ofthe haul road, the available growth medium (soil 

material) that can feasibly be obtained with standard equipment would be removed and stockpiled 

(Figure 3). Growth medium material would be removed from all disturbed areas, except the growth 

medium stockpile locations, by either bulldozing the existing growth medium material and 

vegetation into piles along the slopes and near the reconstructed haul road, or loading the material 

into trucks and hauling the material to designated stockpile locations. 

The growth medium stockpile would be constructed like a waste rock dump. The material wou!.:i 

be end-dumped to its angle ofrepose and then regraded to slopes of about 2.5h: 1 v. The completed 

stockpile would be stabilized during the operational phase by seeding with a seed mix to be 

determined through consultation with the BLM. The application ofseed would follow stockpile 

construction at a time conducive to seed germination. 

Monitoring of growth medium stockpiles, and disturbed and reclaimed areas, will include the 

detection and appropriate removal of any invader species. Specific invader species and their control 

will be determined by consultation with representatives ofthe Lakeview BLM. 

2.E PROJECT ACCESS 

2.E.a Haul Road 

The project site would be accessed using the existing 3.3 mile road. The existing road would be 

resurfaced with crushed stone or gravel, where necessary, to provide for an all weather travel surface. 

Tum-outs would be constructed where appropriate to provide for safety. During operations, the road 

would be graded and watered to maintain the surface and control fugitive dust. The existing road 

would be expanded to an approximate running width of 18 feet with total disturbance width not to 

exceed 32 feet with a maximum cutbank height of approximately six feet. An existing two-track 

road would be upgraded on the private lands directly south ofHighway 31 to the east ofthe existing 

corrals. 

2.E.b Access Control 

Public access to the quarry area would be restricted for the duration ofthe operation. This would 

be accomplished administratively and by the posting ofwarning signs located in strategic areas and 

marked with words of "warning" applicable to the danger associated with the operations. 

Access would be provided to individuals or groups requiring access to or through the quarry area for 

such purposes as education, research and/or cultural/religious practices. However, there is no public 

access on that portion ofthe haul road which crosses private land. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

n.oct.:.EIO.f00-12, 19116 8 
2.F SURFACE WATERS 

There are no surface water bodies located on the Tucker Hill Project area. The nearest surface water 

is Chewaucan Marsh, which is approximately one mile distant at the closest point. Control of 

potential erosion products resulting from surface water runoff is discussed in Section 3. G, Drainage 

and Sediment Control. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR TilE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

9 
3 -RECLAMATION PLAN 


3.A PREVENTION OF UNNECESSARY OR UNDUE DEGRADATION 

The Reclamation Plan has been developed in accordance with BLM Handbook 3042-1, "Solid 

Minerals Reclamation Handbook." Details of the Reclamation Plan will be monitored and 

administered by the DOGAMI as well as the BLM. Design and construction ofthe project facilities 

would be conducted in a manner which prevents unnecessary or undue degradation of the 

environment. -Reclamation shall conform to the standards set forth in Chapter I.D. of BLM 

Handbook 3042-1. 

3.B PROJECT SCHEDULE 

The project life through completion based on the current plan is I 0 years. The schedule could be 

affected ifconditions change sufficiently. As a result ofthe modest size and nature ofthe project, 

concurrent reclamation for the waste rock dumps and haul road is not practicable. Reclamation 

would be performed upon termination of operations. Reclamation of existing exploration-related 

disturbances outside ofthe proposed quarry area would be reclaimed during the life ofthe proposed 

quarry operations. 

Ifoperations sit idle for longer than two years, measures will be taken to prevent erosion and other 

damage to the environment in accordance with BLM Handbook H-3809-1 (Chapter 7, II C.). 

3.C POST OPERATIONAL LAND USE 


The objectives ofthe reclamation plan include preventing or minimizing safety hazards, stabilization 


ofdisturbed areas, and providing for a post operation surface condition that would be consistent with 


the long-term land uses as specified by the BLl'vL 


3.D POST OPERATION TOPOGRAPHY 


Figure 6 is a map ofthe expected post-operation topography at the Tucker Hill project area at the 


end often years. 


3.E RECLAMATION OF WASTE ROCK DUMP 


Because Lake County may use some ofthe waste rock material for their road maintenance operations 


or as an aid in reclamation ofthe county gravel pit, the county would reclaim the existing gravel pit 


in accordance with requirements of the BLM and DOGAMI upon closure of the pit. 


3.F ROAD RECLAMATION 


Long-term management ofthe haul road would be determined as part ofthe reclamation process. 


Possible options include: 


AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE 1UCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

TUCIU1'.1'00-J1.1­ 10 
• 	 Permanently close the road, bring the road bed back to the original contour as closely as 

possible, and revegetate the road corridor. Fill material, enhanced with available growth 

medium, would be pulled onto the roadbed to fill against new road cuts and restore the slope 

to its existing contour as needed. Compaction would be relieved during excavation by 

ripping and smoothing the surface with the excavator bucket. This process would help 

inhibit soil loss from runoff and provide a suitable seedbed. Revegetation ofthe regraded 

area would be consistent with methods described under Revegetation; 

• 	 Regrading and recontouring of the haul road could be done to return the road bed to 

approximately its existing configuration; 

• 	 Stabilize the road as needed for protection ofthe watershed and road bed. Maintain existing 

access for BLM administrative purposes; or 

• 	 Maintain the road for both public and administrative use. This option would require an 

easement or right-of-way for the portion ofthe road across private lands. 

For the purposes ofthe reclamation cost estimate, the most costly option (completely reclaiming the 

road) was used to determine a reclamation bond. 

3.G DRAINAGE AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 

The goal of the drainage and sediment control plan is to convey runoff from reclaimed areas and 

upgradient undisturbed areas through the project site in a manner which would protect the reclaimed 

areas and prevent degradation of down gradient water quality. The drainage and sediment control 

plan is designed to require no maintenance. 

The main method of drainage and sediment control at the project site would be revegetating all 

disturbed areas, with the exception of the quarry. Drainage on roads would be by ditching, 

installation ofwaterbars and, where appropriate, culverts. Road running surfaces would be rocked 

to reduce sediment runoff. Drainage facilities would be designed to accepted road engineering 

standards. Reclamation will be considered acceptable if there are no rills over 6-inches in depth 

and/or width after three years. 

During operation, the quarry would be a topographic depression and all precipitation falling onto the 

quarry surface area would be contained on-site. Construction by this method would help control 

potential erosion from site run-off. Because the quarry is located on the top of Tucker Hill, no 

watershed exists up-gradient ofthe quarry, and only the precipitation directly falling onto the quarry 

area could be impounded. However, the site is arid, annual evaporation exceeds precipitation, and 

the perlite is fractured. These factors would lead to rapid infiltration or evaporation ofprecipitation. 

Consequently, it is highly unlikely that any water would be impounded. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECf 

ATI.AS PERLITE, INC. 

II 
Based on available data (see New Mexico Bureau ofMines and Mineral Resources or BMMR data 

in Appendix II), there are not any sulfides present in the ore or waste rock to contribute to acid rock 

drainage in the event there was standing water for a brief period. Three analytical testing procedures 

performed on the Tucker Hill perlite by the New Mexico BMMR (total metals [acid soluble], 

leachable metals [TCLP], and acid/base accounting) indicate that the ore contains low levels of 

metals, and that the metals tested would not be mobilized in the environment. The test for acid-base 

potential indicates there is a substantial excess of neutralization potential of the material which 

suggests that the potential for the generation of acidic conditions, and potential mobilization of 

metals, would be very low. Table 3.0-1 provides a general lab analysis ofthe material sampled from 

Tucker Hill. 

TABLE 3.G-1 TYPICAL CHEMICAL ANALYSES (PERCENT) 

SiOz 74.2% CaO 1.3% 

Ah03 12.6% NazO 3.8% 

Total Fe 0.5% 1<20 4.5% 

FezOJ 0.52% LOI 3.3% 

TiOz 0.06% Moisture 0.2% 

MgO 0.10% 

3.H REVEGETATION 

The revegetation methods described at this time are generally based on common industry practices. 

Further refinement is anticipated as site specific results are derived from future test plot and seed 

bank programs. A seed bank would be obtained from an off-site test plot seeded from native plants 

growing on the Tucker Hill formation. Two off-site test plots will be developed in locations 

acceptable to the BLM. The test plots would be designed, monitored and analyzed by the mining 

company in conjunction with the BLM and DOGAMI. 

The seed mix included in this proposal is based on known soil and climatic conditions and was 

selected to establish a plant community which would support post-mining land uses as prescribed 

by the BLM. The present seed mix is designed to provide species that can become established in 

the environment of south-central Oregon, are proven species for revegetation, and/or are native 

species found in the plant communities prior to disturbance. 

Ofthe seeds listed in Table 3.H-1, a minimum of seven species, including grasses, forbs, and shrubs, 

would be seeded based on seed availability at the time of planting and the success of species 

concluded from the test plots and concurrent reclamation .. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR TilE TUCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

12 
TABLE 3.H-1 REVEGETATION SEED MIXTURE 

Species Common Name Pounds Per Acre* 

Agropyron spicatum Bluebunch Wheatgrass 5.0 

Danthonia unispicata Single Spike Oat Grass 3.0 

Leymus cinereus 

(Elymus cinereus) 

Basin Wildrye 2.0 

Atriplex confertifolia Shadscale 3.0 

Poa sandbergii Sandberg Bluegrass 1.0 

Elymus elymoides 

(Sitanion hystrix) 

Bottlebrush Squirreltail 1.0 

Astragalus sp. Astragalus 1.0 

Trifolium spp. Clover 1.0 

Artemisia tridentata Great Basin Sagebrush 2.0 

Purshia tridentata Antelope Bitterbrush 1.0 

*Seeding rate is for hand broadcasting of pure live seed (PLS). The seeding rate for each species would be adjusted to 

result in a total of20.0 PLS pounds per acre. 

The specific seeding rates, mulch type and application rates, fertilizer requirements, and revegetation 

techniques would all be established through the test plot program. 

Seeding activities would be timed to take advantage of optimal climatic windows and would be 

coordinated with other reclamation activities. In general, earthwork would be completed in the 

summer or early fall. Seed bed preparation and seeding would be done in the fall, or when 

appropriate. 

Squirreltail grass would be used for temporary stabilization of soil and to prevent weeds from 

invading disturbed soil areas. 

Revegetation planning would be coordinated by Atlas and the BLM. 

3.1 RECLAMATION OF QUARRY 

The quarry walls would be left with overall slopes of approximately 22 degrees with benches 

approximately 10-12 feet vertical by approximately 25 feet horizontal. This would provide a very 

stable final slope. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TUCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

13 
There would be no surface discharge from the quarry. The relatively small amount ofrunoff from 

the surrounding land surfaces and precipitation directly into the quarry would either evaporate or 

percolate into the exposed bedrock in the quarry bottom. 

The proposed operation involves the quarrying of a uniformly high-grade perlite deposit. The 

geologic setting of the deposit allows for the extraction of ore from a single open pit quarrying 

operation. As multiple adjacent quarries would not be developed, sequential back-filling is not 

possible. Further, placing the excavated waste from the waste rock dump into the quarry would not 

result in an improved backfill condition since the bulk (99 percent) ofthe excavated matter removed 

would be perlite ore. Backfill would create an economic obstacle should the quarry be re-opened. 

Prior to final reclamation, public safety concerns would be evaluated with the BLM and the 

DOGAMI. If determined to be necessary by the agencies, the company would construct a barbed 

wire fence approximately four feet high along the margin of the pit about 25 feet back from the 

highwall edge. The fence would be posted with warning signs located in front of the fence and 

spaced every 200 feet. The permanent fence and weather resistant metal signs would provide for 

public safety for many years following mining. 

If visual impacts due to quarry walls are later determined to be adverse, the company will work 

cooperatively with BLM to develop acceptable mitigation, which may include vegetation or rock 

staining. 

3.J MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE OF RECLAIMED AREAS 

Environmental monitoring ofthe project area would consist ofboth operational and post-reclamation 

monitoring. Operational monitoring would extend for the duration of operations and would cease 

when operations are terminated. Post-reclamation monitoring would commence on any reclaimed 

area following completion ofthe reclamation work for the area and would occur along with, and/or 

following, operational monitoring until the project's reclamation bond is released to Atlas. Annual 

reports on the progress ofthe reclamation would be submitted to BLM and DOGAMI. 

The BLM and Atlas will monitor revegetation of all surface disturbed areas (outside of the main 

excavation pit) using random transect line intercept methods ofsurvey. Four sample areas, with two 

50-foot transects per area, will be chosen to represent the different areas of Tucker Hill. Percent 

composition, density, cover, and frequency oftype of vegetation data will be monitored along each 

transect. This information will be used to determine ifthe Reclaimed Desired Plant Community 

(RDPC) is being established. A RDPC is defined as: 

A perennial plant community established on a disturbed site which provides stability through 

management and land treatment, and which produces the type and amount of vegetation 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

14 
necessary to meet or exceed both the land use and activity plan objective established for the 

site. 

The RDPC will achieve as close to I 00 percent of the perennial plant cover of adjacent vegetation 

communities as possible. 

Monitoring will start the first year after reseeding of a reclaimed site and will continue every 

growing season for a maximum offive years, or until40 percent cover ofRDPC is achieved, or until 

the Authorized Officer determines that the plant community has met the revegetation goals. At the 

end ofthree years, those areas not meeting 40 percent cover ofRDPC will be evaluated by Atlas and 

the PLM to determine the best course of action to achieve reclamation goals. This may include 

reseeding and/or removal of unwanted plant species. Monitoring will then continue for two years 

following corrective action. 

Reclamation would be considered successful when the disturbed sites are stabilized, secondary plant 

succession is established, and the conditions are set to realize the land use objectives. The type and 

frequency ofmonitoring applicable to the Tucker Hill project is found in Table 3.J-1. 

TABLE 3.J-1 MONITORING PROGRAM 

Type ofMonitoring Operational Frequency Post-Operational Frequency 

Condition ofdrainages and 

sediment control 

Monthly Annually for three years 

Condition of reclaimed areas Annually Annually for five years 

3.K EFFECT OF RECLAMATION ON FUTURE MINING 

Reclamation of the site could affect future Inining of the area in so far as market conditions also 

allow continued operations. Future deposits may be identified, and could be developed as separate 

mining sites, or as an extension to the existing quarry. 

3.L DRILL HOLE PLUGGING 

All exploration drill holes at the project site have been plugged according to the State of Oregon 

requirements. Although no additional drilling is currently planned, any additional holes resulting 

from future development drilling within or adjacent to the quarry would also be plugged according 

to these requirements. 

3.M CONCURRENT RECLAMATION 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

lUCKE!ll.F00.-11, 1­ 15 
Revegetation of exploration roads and pads not located within the mining component boundary 

would take place during the mining ofthe Tucker Hill project. Reclamation would be considered 

successful when the disturbed sites are stabilized, secondary plant succession is established, and the 

conditions are met to realize the land use objectives. 

3.N SOLID AND HAzARDOUS WASTE 

Atlas Perlite, Inc. and its contractors will comply with all applicable federal and state laws dealing 

with the storage and disposal of chemicals, petroleum products, and RCRA Subtitle C hazardous 

waste, and RCRA Subtitle D solid waste. 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

16 
4- ACCEPTANCE OF RECLAMATION RESPONSIBILITY 


Atlas Perlite, Inc. agrees to accept the reclamation responsibility for operations at the Tucker Hill 

Project Area. Atlas will post a surety as required by the State ofOregon regulation ORS 517 and 

the BLM Surface management regulations as contained in 43 CFR 3809. 

&."i 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR TilE TUCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

17 
5.1 

5- RECLAMATION COST ESTIMATE 


METIIODOLOGY 

Earthwork production rates and hourly operating costs for equipment were calculated using Means Heavy Construction 

Cost Data (1995). Hourly labor costs are based on the U.S. Department of Labor General Wage Decision No. NV95-5 

(Davis-Bacon rates). In order to ensure that the cost estimate for the reclamation bond is high enough for either the state 

or BLM to perform the reclamation, this cost estimate was prepared under the assumption that Atlas personnel would 

not be available at the time of reclamation. Table 5.1-1 provides a summary of the mining components that would 

require reclamation under this plan and the costs associated with each. 

TABLE 5.1-1 RECLAMATION COST ESTIMATE BY COMPONENT 

Component/ Activity Labor($) Equipment ($) Materials ($) Total($) 

Haul Road Reclamation 

- Steep Portion 

Regrading 1,368 5,244 6,612 

- Flat Portion 

Regrading 252 637 889 

Ripping 396 1,001 1,397 

- Entire Road 

Seedbed Preparation 144 364 508 

Seeding 462 1,078 1,540 

Culvert Removal 36 338 374 

-Growth Medium Stockpile 

Recontouring 54 137 191 

Scarifying 36 91 127 

Seeding - 30 70 100_ 

-Additional Seeding (Two) 

Haul Road & Growth Medium Stockpiles 984 2,296 3,280 

-Pit Perimeter Fence 700 955 1,655 

-Pit Highwall Staining 10,625 10,625 

Mob and Demob Equipment 1,200 1,200 

Post-Reclamation Monitoring 7,020 1,070 8,090 

Sub-Total All Reclamation 11,482 10,082 15,024 36,588 

Add-On Items 

Insurance (1.5% oftotal labor) 172 

Contract Administration ( 18% oftotal) 6,586 

Bond Performance (1.5% oftotal) 549 

Bond Payment (1.5% oftotal) 549 

Profit ( 10% oftotal) 3,659 

GRAND TOTAL $48 103 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR TilE TUCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

18 
5.2 HOURLY COSTS FOR EQUIPMENT AND LABOR 

• Hourly equipment operating rates are from Means Heavy Construction Cost Data, 1995 . 

• Hourly labor rates are from U.S. Department of Labor, General Wage Determinations (Davis-Bacon) (1995) . 

Cat D9N Bulldozer 	 = $91/hr 

Cat 235C Hydraulic Excavator 	 = $138/hr 

Chisel Tooth Harrow & Seed Drill = $72/hr 


(pulled by Terex 82-30B tractor) 


Laborer (Group No. 1, Zone 5) 


Base Salary = $19.34 


Fringe = 6.65 
 • 

sus (10.52%) 2.03 


FICA (7.65%) = 1.48 


Unemp. (3%) = 0.58 


= $30.08/hr (rounded to $30) 

Equipment Operator (Group No. 2, Zone 3) 


Base Salary = $25.01 


Fringe = 6.55 


sus (10.52%) = 2.32 


FICA (7.65%) = 1.68 


Unemp. (3%) = 0.66 


= $36.22/hr (rounded to $36) 

BLM Reclamation Technician (GS 7, Step 1) 


Base Salary = $18.00 


Benefits (32%) = 6.00 


Leave Surcharge (18%) = ....l..llQ 


= $27.00/hr 

Seed Cost 


Per Pound = 7.00 


Per Acre (20.0 1bs/acre) = 140.00 


5.3 RECLAMATION COSTS- HAUL ROAD 

Total Road Length 17,424 ft (3.3 miles) 


Flat Terrain - 12,714 ft- knock down side berms, rip, scarify, mulch and reseed 


Steep Terrain - 4,710 ft- regrade, scarify, mulch and reseed 


5.3.1 Regrading Cost 

Reclamation Treatment: 	 Knock down berm on flat portion of haul road. 


Pnsh growth medium along haul road length. 


AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR Tiffi TUCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

TUCKEIU.I'OO- 12, 191'6 19 
Assumptions: 	 3 '-high berm on both sides of road 

100' dozing distance 

12,714 ft x 9 ft2 = 4,238 CY 

Decrease avg. operator correction factor from 0.75 to 0.5 to account for 

placing growth medium while regrading road. 

Equipment: Cat D9N @ $91/hr 


Labor: Operator @ $36/hr 


Average Production: 1200 LCY/hr (100' dozing distance Cat Book) 


Correction Factors: 


- Average operator = 0.5 


- Loose material = 1.2 


- Maneuverability = 1.00 


- Job efficiency = 0.83 


- Grade (average) = 1.00 


Average Production (corrected): 	 1200 LCY lhr x 0.5 x 0.83 x 1.2 = 600 LCY lhr 

Hours & Cost: 	 4,238 CY/600 LCY per hour = 7 hrs 


7 hrs x $91/hr = $637 


7 hrs x $36/hr = $252 


Regrading flat portion of haul road. 	 Total$~ 

5.3.2 Ripping Cost - Flat Portion of Haul Road 

Reclamation Treatment: 	 Rip exposed flat road bottom surface to relieve compaction. 

Assumptions: 	 Flat terrain, 18' width requiring ripping 


Ripping depth of 18 inches 


12,714 CY of material 


Equipment: Cat D9N@ $91/hr 


Labor: Operator @ $36/hr 


Average Production: 1500 LCY/hr (Cat Book Seismic Velocity Charts) 


Correction Factors: -Job efficiency = 0.83 


Average Production (corrected): 1,500 LCY/hr x 0.83 = 1245 LCY/hr 


Hours: 	 12,714 CY/1245 LCY per hour = 11 hrs 

Cost: 	 11 hrs x $91/hr = $1,001 


11 hrs x $36/hr = $396 


Ripping costs for flat portion of haul road. 	 Total $1.397 

5.3.3 Seedbed Preparation Cost - Entire Haul Road Length 

Reclamation Treatment: Scarify loose material to 6 inch depth. 


Assumptions: 5, 808 LCY of material 


Equipment: Cat D9N @ $91/hr 


Labor: Operator @ $36/hr 


Average Production: 2050 CY lhr (Cat Book) 


Correction Factors: -Job efficiency = 0.83 


Average Production (corrected): 2050 CY/hr x 0.83 = 1702 CY/hr 


AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TUCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

20 
Hours & Cost: 	 5,808 CY/1702 LCY per hour = 4 hrs 


4 hrs x $91/hr = $364 


4 hrs x $36/hr = $144 


Seedbed preparation costs for flat portion of haul road. 	 Total $508 

5.3.4 	 Regrading Cost - Steep Portion of Haul Road 

Reclamation Treatment: 


Assumptions: 


Equipment: 


Labor: 


Fill Factor: 


Heaped Capacity: 


Average Production: 
 ,--.. Correction Factors: 


Average Production (corrected): 


Hours & 	Cost: 

Pulling up fill material onto roadbed surface. 


4' x 18' average fill area, 1.5 CYper linear foot of road. 


4,710 x 1.5 = 7,065 CYofmaterial 


Cat 235C @ $138/hr (Meaus) 


Operator @ $36/hr 


57.5% 


2.75 CY x 57.5% = 1.58 LCY 

225 LCY lhr (Cat Book) 

-Job efficiency = 0.83 

225 LCY/hr x 0.83 = 187 LCY/hr 

7,065 CY/187 LCY per hour = 38 hrs 

38 hrs x $138/hr = $5,244 

38 hrs x $36/hr = $1,368 

Excavation costs of steep portion of haul road. 	 Total $6.612 

5.3.5 	 Seed and Seed Application Cost 

Reclamation Treatment: 

Assumptions: 

Material Cost: 

Average Production: 

Labor Cost: 

Cost: 

Material 

Labor 

Distribution of seed mix by hand broadcasting. 

7.7 acres of road disturbance. 


Broadcast application of seed by hand. 


Seed mix@ $140/acre (hand broadcasting) 


Assume I man labor crew 


Seed mix 0.5 acre/hr/laborer 


$60/acre ($30/hr/man) 


7.7 acres x $140/acre = $1,078 


7.7 acres x $60/acre = $462 


Seed application costs for the haul road. 	 Total $1.540 

5.3.6 	 Culvert Removal Cost 

Reclamation Treatment: 

Number of Culverts: 

Assumptions: 

Equipment: 

Remove culverts to re-establish natural drainage. 

2 - (21" x 20') shallow fill culverts 

18 ft road segment width (avg) 


3 ft road fill height (avg) 


20 ft road top surface length (avg) 


40 CY of material/culvert 


2x40CY=80CY 


Cat 235C @ $138/hr (Meaus) 


AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

21 
5.4 

5.4.1 

5.4.2 

Labor: 


Fill Factor: 


Heaped Capacity: 


Average Production: 


Correction Factors: 


Average Production (corrected): 


Hours: 


Cost: 


Haul to Lakeview dumps: 


Regrade culverts. 


RECLAMATION Cosr- TOPSOIL STOCKPILE LoCATIONS 

Assumptions: 

Recontouring Costs 

Reclamation Treatment: 


Assumptions: 


Equipment: 


Labor: 


Average Production: 


Correction Factors: 


Average Production (corrected): 


Hours: 


Cost: 


Operator @ $36/hr 

57.5% 

2.75 CY x 57.5% = 1.58 LCY 

225 LCY lhr (Cat Book) 

-Job efficiency = 0.83 

225 LCY/hr x 0.83 = 187 LCY/hr 

80 CY/187 LCY per hour = 1 hr 

1 hr X $138/hr = $138 

1 hr X $36/hr = $36 

$200 

Total $374 

Rip and regrade surface area. 

Rip/regrade costs for the topsoil stockpile areas. Total $191 

Estimated 0.5 acre of disturbance. 

Application of seed by band. 

Rip stockpile area. 

0.5 acre of disturbance. 

Ripping depth of 18 inches. 

Cat D9N @ $91/hr 

Operator @ $36/hr 

1085 CY/hr (Cat Book Seismic Velocity Charts) 

-Job efficiency = 0.83 

1085 CY/hr x 0.83 = 901 CY/hr 

1,210 CY/901 CY per hour = 1.5 hrs 

1.5 hours x $91/hr =$137 

1.5 hours x $36/hr = $54 

Scarify and Seed Cost 

Reclamation Treatment: 

Assumptions: 


Equipment: 


Labor: 


Average Production: 


Scarify loose material to 6 inch depth. 

Hand broadcast seed. 

0.5 acre of surface disturbance. 

Cat D9N@ $91/hr 

Operator @ $36/hr 

2050 CY lhr (Cat Book) 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

22 
Correction Factors: - Job efficiency = 0.83 


Average Production (corrected): 2050 CY/hr x 0.83 = 1702 CY!hr 


Hours & Cost: 	 404 CY 11702 LCY per hour = 1 hr 


1 hr X $91/hr = $91 


1 hr X $36/hr = $36 


Seedbed preparation costs for flat portion of haul road. 	 Total $127 

Material Cost: 	 Seed mix @ $ l 40/acre 

Average Production: 	 Assume I man labor crew 

Seed mix 0.5 acrelhr 


Labor Cost: $60/acre ($30/hr/man) 


Cost: 


Material 0.5 acre x $140/acre = $70 


Labor 0.5 acre x $60/acre = $30 


Seeding costs for the topsoil stockpiles. 	 Total $100 

5.5 RECLAMATION COSTS- TwO ADDITIONAL SEEDINGS 

Assumptions: 	 Assume haul road and growth medium stockpile areas will require two 

additional seedings to meet revegetation objectives. 


Labor Cost: $984 


Materials Cost: $2,296 


Two Additional Seedings. 	 Total $3,280 

5.6 RECLAMATION COSTS- PIT PERIMETER FENCE 

Assumptions: 	 Construction of a4~strand.birrbed wire fence around the pit perimeter, 

posted with warning signs. 

3400' pit perimeter. 

21' post spacing + cribs 

Materials: 	 180 posts @ $2.25/post 


10 rolls barbed wire @ $32/roll 


23 signs@ $10/sign 


Labor Cost: $700 


Materials Cost: $955 


Pit Perimeter Fence. 	 Total $1,655 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR TilE TuCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

23 
5.7 RECLAMATION COSTS- PIT HIGHWALL STAINING 

Total Perimeter 

Reclamation Treatment: 

Assumptions: 

Cost: 

3,400 ft 

Apply stain to portions of pit highwall visible from key observation 

points. 

One-half of pit perimeter will be visible, of which upper 25 feet of 

high wall will require staining 

I,700 ft x 25 ft =42,500 ft2 

Advanced Concrete Technologies of Santa Ana, California provided a 

verbal cost estimate on 4/8/96 which ranged from $0.15 to $0.35 per 

square foot, depending on steepness of slope. Estimated cost includes 

labor, materials and transportation. The average cost of $0.25 used for 

this estimate. 

42,500 ft2 X $0.25 =$10,625 

Total $10.625 

5.8 MOB AND DEMOB EQUIPMENT COSTS 

Assumptions: 	 2 hours mobilization time from Lakeview, 4 hours mob+demob 

$1 00/hr for each piece of equipment. 

Costs: 	 3 pieces of equipment@ $400/mob-demob =$1,200 

Mob-Demob Costs 	 Total $1.200 

5.9 POST-RECLAMATION MONITORING COSTS 

Assumptions: 

Equipment: 

Labor: 

Cost: 

-Equipment 

-Labor _--:; 

Semi-annual inspections for 5 years 

I 0-hour work days for frrst 3 years; 5-hour work days for last 2 years 

Approx. 80 mile round trip, Lakeview to Tucker Hill Quarry 

4-wheel drive pick-up truck@ $111day + $0.34/mile 

Reclamation Technician@ $27/hr 

28 days x ($111day + (80 miles x $0.34/mile)) =$1,070 

24 days x 10 hours/day x $27/hour =$6,480 

4 days x 5 hours/day x $24/hour = $540 

Post-Reclamation Monitoring cost estimate. 	 Total $8.090 

AMENDED PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE TUCKER HILL QUARRY PROJECT 

ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

24 

t 

N 

I 

FALLS· 

I.AKKVIEW TO VALI.KY fAI.l.S 1J MILES 

VALLEY FALLS 1'0 TUCKt;R IIILL CJUAIUlY 16 MILES 

'~---=s' . _,.u.. 

11/GI/WAY 

REVISIONS ATLAS PERLITE, INC. 

LOCATION MAP 

TUCKER HIU PERLITE PROJECT 

WYANT MACHINERY CO., INC. 

.

DATE: October I994 

FIGURE NO: l___ ·­

PREPARED BY: 

DRAFTED BY: I
R 19 E 

Existing 

Road 

I 

I 

s 

M 

[]. . 

D 

0 

~ 

[IJJ 

c=J 

EXPLANATION 

Surface Rights 

Mineral Rights 

BLM -Atlas Lode 

Claims 

Private Lands 

BLM (S & M) 

BLM (S) and State (M) 

State Mineral Leases 

BLM(S) 

Private Surfoce 

BLM minerals 

'----'""" 

SCAlE IN re:cr 

Alias Perlite Inc. 

TUCKER HILL PROJECT 

FIGURE 2 

LAND STATUS MAP 

-. 
23 22 

28 27 

R 19 E 

\ 

22 23 

"21 2b 

Existing 

Rood 

-=-""',,. ,.r 

"~.:.-

,V,' 

23 24 

26 25 

New Rood 18' 

/) 

(/) 

n"'" 

fI 

t 

• Growth Medium Stockpile Site 

0 1200 

SCALE IN FEET 

Atlas Perlite Inc. 

TUCKER HILL PROJECT 

FIGURE 3 

ALTERNATIVE C 

Proposed Disturbance At End Of 10 Years 
/ 

NOm VEit~ONANDl!OIUZO!ITM.S 

ATLAS PERLITE INC 

Cross Section of Querry .

'" Tucker H"ll '·"""· ._,~ Perlite 

""""""""' '"' "'" c"'"'r· o ...." 

1 

--

22 23 

27 26 

-====;~C"~==--"1200 SCAlE 1>1 FEET 

I. 

•OAIZO"'AI. 5C;.U IN FlH 
R. 19 E. 

T. 34 S. 

\1. '" 

·~ '"'o 23 

\. 

i 

I 

.- ... · 

~..?87~ 

I +·I 

Atlas Peril\«, Inc, 

TucKer Hill 

Existing Disturbance 

•••• Cooo,,o,.,,. 
!l 

t 

I 

FIGUR( 6 

ATl.AS PERLITE INC. 

Post Reclamation Topogroph~ 

Tucker Hill Perlite 

T.J<S•• OO.>OE. "" C"""''· "'''"" ,_........ 

BLASTING SCHEDULE 

1996 

JAN FEB MARC APRI MA JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC 

H L y 

Wintering bald eagle Wildlife clearance required to minimize ' Late fledging raptor No blasting coordination required Winter bald eagle clearance 

clearance required eliminate impacts to nesting raptors, later clearance required required LRA Biologist. 

LRA Biologist. wintering bald eagles, roosting bats, and· otber LRA Biologist. 

sensitive wildlife species. 

BLASTING SCHEDULE 

1997-2006 

JAN FEB JUNE JULY AUG NOV DEC 

Wintering bald eagle No blasting February 1 - June 30. Late fledging raptor No blasting coordination required Wintering bald eagle 

clearance required clearance required clearance required LRA 

LRA Biologist. LRA Biologist (usually Biologist. 

golden eagles due to 

Protection 

·I 


NEW MEXICO BUREAU OF MINES AND MINERAL RESOURCES (NMBMMR) 


SOCORRO, NEW MEXICO 87801 


REPORT OF ANALYSES' 

-­ Lab Sample Acid Soluble' , TCLP' Tons CaC0,/1000 tons 

No. Identification 

Cr Pb Cu Sc Ag As Hg Cd Cr Pb Se Ag As Hg NP APP NAPP Number Cd 

ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm 

Perlite Ore 

1345 5 yr. com <1.2 24 25 16 <0.06 0.10 2.3 O.o3 <1.0 <5.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <0.5 <0.2 24.5 0.9 -23.5 

1345 dup <1.2 20 27 15 <0.06 0.10 

1346 1yr. com <1.2 24 25 16 <0.06 0.21 2.1 0.03 <1.0 <5.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <0.5 <0.2 25 ND -25 

1346 dup <1.2 22 24 13 <0.06 25 -25 

1347 3 yr. com <1.2 24 26 17 <0.06 0.21 1.5 O.DI <1.0 <5.0 <5.0 <1.0 <5.0 <0.5 <0.2 25 ND -25 

1347 dup_ <1.2 24 23 15 <0.06 

Expanded Perlite 

1348 1yr. com <1.2 28 28 10 <0.06 0.21 1.3 139 ND -139 

1349 3 yr. com <1.2 23 23 12 <0.06 0.06 1.5 192 ND -192 

1350 5 yr. com <1.2 21 28 II 0.09 0.10 2.0 220 ND -220 

'Corrected Analytical Report dated January 5, 1996. 

'Samples are composite (com) samples ofore to be mined during years I, 3 and 5 of anticipated mine life. Dup =duplicate sample for check analyses. 3

Acid Soluble Analyses • Analytical method uses aqua regia digestion to detect total quantity of metals in the sample. Results do not indicate leachable metals. 

'TCLP Toxic Characteristic Leachate Procedure. All sample results were less than the analytical detection levels. The samples all pass the TCLP test. 

NP Neutralization Potential as tons CaCO, per 1000 t0ns material. 

APP Acid Producing Potential as tons CaCO, per I 000 \ons material. 

NAPP = Net Acid Producing Potential; (APP-NP) negative,number indicates neutralizing potential. 

Source: NMBMMR Chemistry Laboratory analytical report, and personal communication, Lynn Brandvold, Senior Chemist, NMBMMR Chemistry Laboratory, January 5, 

1996.