Laserfiche WebLink
the Board's order. They, therefore, should be required to <br /> perform reclamation as discussed above. In any event, the <br /> defendants' argument fails. The defendants have not met their <br /> burden of meeting the requirements for the granting of a summary <br /> judgment; issues of fact still remain to be resolved. <br /> In the present matter, although the liquidation plan has <br /> provided some funding for reclamation, there is no assurance that <br /> further funding will occur. The funding is contingent on sales <br /> of property. Indeed, to date, the only property that has been <br /> sold and the proceeds distributed for reclamation purposes has <br /> been the very property that Resources submitted to the Division <br /> to ensure complete reclamation of the site. These proceeds from <br /> the sale of the rockdust plant do not come close to the funds <br /> that are necessary to maintain and fully reclaim the site. <br /> In order for the Division to perform the tasks of <br /> maintenance and reclaration, the money must be in the bank; the <br /> Division cannot bid out the w0r}: without having the money in <br /> hand . The Di v i s i rr: tit limited' funds from the <br /> liquidation plan with r: :;:;,.ran t!-β€žit more funds are on the way <br /> or the timing of the a'.' jl lat : : it} 0' such funds. The funds now <br /> in the Division' s account tre ine:uf ! icient to perform maintenance <br /> and complete rec1amat i l . ( F xh : ,- : t -) . Yet maintenance and <br /> reclamation are necessary at the site. Accordingly, contrary to <br /> the defendants' argument , the Division has established injury. <br /> The Division' s request for monetary relief only asks that <br /> this Court provide the Division with sufficient funds to maintain <br /> -10- <br />