|
STORKE COMPLEX RECLAMATION COST ESTIMATES NOT INCLUDING REVEGETATION
<br />DMG task # and
<br />description
<br />DMG 1998
<br />estimate
<br />Climax
<br />1999
<br />estimate
<br />2000 estimate, grade
<br />Ark. R. cut mat'l
<br />in -place
<br />2000 estimate, backfill
<br />Ark. R. cut @ 7 -shaft &
<br />Storke portal areas
<br />7. Excavate Ark. R.
<br />channel
<br />$80,560
<br />$81,517
<br />$77,481
<br />$256,945
<br />7a. Riprap
<br />$14,664
<br />$14,664
<br />$14,664
<br />$14,664
<br />7b. Riprap bedding
<br />$2,482
<br />$2,482
<br />$2,482
<br />$2,482
<br />7c. Backfill & grade
<br />Ark. R. cut material
<br />Included
<br />in #7 &10
<br />Included
<br />in #7 &10
<br />$54,063
<br />Included in #7
<br />8. Finish grade
<br />reconstructed channel
<br />$2,404
<br />$2,349
<br />$2,280
<br />$2,280
<br />10. Backfill & rough
<br />grade Storke Complex
<br />$106,131
<br />$104,452
<br />$6,779
<br />Included in #7
<br />11. Finish grade
<br />Storke Yard
<br />$12,015
<br />$12,107
<br />$2,090
<br />$2,090
<br />12. Topsoil from Ark.
<br />R. stockpile
<br />$9,529
<br />$8,317
<br />$7,266
<br />$7,266
<br />13. Topsoil from
<br />Fremont stockpile
<br />$11,566
<br />$6,348
<br />$8,438
<br />$8,438
<br />14. Topsoil from
<br />McNulty stockpile
<br />$61,871
<br />$60,604
<br />Not needed, 46 acres
<br />already seeded
<br />Not needed, 46 acres
<br />already seeded
<br />TOTALS
<br />1 $301,322
<br />$292,930
<br />$175,543
<br />$294,165
<br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID #: M -1977 -493
<br />INSPECTION DATE: 9 -26 -00
<br />PAGE: 5
<br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: ACS
<br />compares the costs for channel reconstruction, regrading, and topsoiling in the Storke
<br />Yard as estimated by the DMG in 1998, by Climax in 1999, and as estimated by the DMG
<br />relative to the current site conditions under two scenarios that are discussed in
<br />detail below the table.
<br />The two new reclamation cost scenarios for the Storke Yard are summarized in the
<br />columns on the right half of the table. The first scenario assumes that the
<br />approximately 128,000 cubic yards of cut generated in the Arkansas River
<br />reconstruction project can be graded and blended into the reclaimed topography
<br />immediately adjacent to the reconstructed channel. The second scenario assumes that
<br />the Arkansas River cut material will be hauled to the opposite side of the Storke Yard
<br />and backfilled into the Storke Portal area and the slope below 7- shaft. The estimated
<br />cost differential of these scenarios is $118,622.00 due to the haul distance involved.
<br />Based on qualitative observations by the DMG in the Storke Yard, it is not likely that
<br />the Arkansas River cut material can be graded in -place without adversely impacting
<br />the quality of reclamation in the vicinity of the reconstructed channel. However,
<br />there appears to be ample room in the 7 -shaft area to waste the 128,000 cubic yards
<br />of cut, and the backfilling of this material below 7 -shaft may in fact enhance the
<br />reclamation potential in this area. Unless Climax can demonstrate that the first
<br />scenario is feasible, DMG will assume that the second scenario will be employed as
<br />the basis for cost estimating and the determination of the final bond amount to be
<br />established under revision SR -03. The appurtenant worksheets and cost calculations
<br />for the new estimates are enclosed with this inspection report.
<br />The E -dump complex facing Highway 91 was inspected. The approved reclamation plan
<br />for this area calls for grading of the uppermost bank slopes of the dump to 2.5:1 to
<br />3:1 "where practical and feasible" (1989 amendment AM -02). The approved plan
<br />
|