hearing, page-18

OK, so the next step/hearing will detertimine if we do indeed have to do more work on these 4 contentions.
Eg, wider cumulative effect - we may have to write a little ditty peppered with technical data that somehow plays down the cumulative affect;
Eg the dust - If (and I don't think this will be the case) they find the dust to be a valid problem requiring a response, we then either write another "ditty" as above or we offer something new (an extreme example would be to seal the road (costs about USD100,000 per km to tarseal a gravel road in NZ). But it is a well-known strategy in these types of situations to NEVER offer something before you are sure it really will be necessary, otherwise you are adding $ commitments you didn't need to. (Oh, sure, you SAY you are going to comply with everything and bend over backwards to be conciliatory and collaberative.)