- 15 -
thickness of the property. Each man then reduced the gross
volume he had calculated to reflect a number of factors. What
was left were two competing final recoverable volumes.
We find that all the different methods used by Geotest,
Ebanks, and Moritz are reasonable for making volume estimates on
this property. But neither Ebanks’s nor Moritz’s method is
transparent. Ebanks’s final volume number reflects assumptions
about the required setbacks and set asides for a workplant area
with which, as discussed below, we disagree. Moritz’s final
volume number reflects a set of different assumptions, but we
disagree with some of them, too. This creates a problem, because
neither expert’s volume computations are adjustable using
information from the record. Geotest’s number has the signal
advantage of being both reasonable and adjustable, so it’s the
number we begin with. We therefore find that there were
3,899,696 tons of valuable deposits beneath the Hamblen Road
property.6
The parties do agree that no reasonable mining plan could
lead to the recovery of every last one of those tons. But their
agreement stops there, and so we must review each of the factors
affecting the total recoverable volume that they dispute.
6 We do not adopt Terrene’s suggestion to add another 12%
to this number as an adjustment for an increase in volume of the
sand and gravel when they are mined, because Geotest’s reported
numbers already take this adjustment into account.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007