Laserfiche WebLink
-6- <br />require regrading to achieve the amended reclamation plan configuration, <br />within the landslide mass of the North Pit. Based upon this magnitude of <br />regrading effort, the figures shown by Homestake Mining Company represents <br />cosmetic surface touchup. The 526,460 shown by Homestake Mining Company may <br />be incorrect by several orders of magnitude. At this point in time, achieving <br />the depicted final topographic configuration would probably represent a <br />multi-million dollar earthwork effort. <br />In several instances above, I have discussed the necessity of a topographic <br />monitoring program to determine the stability of the landslide mass, as well <br />as the character and progress of consolidation settlement throughout the <br />numerous overburden dumps and backfilled areas of the Pitch Project. Should <br />Homestake Mining Company default imminently, the State would be required to <br />implement such a program. For this reason, I believe that the operator should <br />provide surety for its completion. Of course, appropriate cost evaluation of <br />such a program will only be possible after a program has been formulated by <br />the operator. <br />Finally, as I have mentioned above, the proposed drainage erosion control plan <br />depends extensively upon the excavation of the South Pit lake. Failing <br />excavation of that lake, significant redesign of the final reclamation <br />drainage and erosion control plan would be required. Unless the applicant <br />commits to imminent submission of a request for temporary cessation, I believe <br />that we should require appropriate surety to allow completion of the necessary <br />drainage and erosion control plan redesign. Admittedly, the formulation of <br />surety valuation for this item might be extremely conceptual at this point in <br />time. <br />cc: Joe Zalkind <br />Dave Shelton <br />Mark Loye <br />/cd <br />Doc. 0417E <br />