Memo

To: Mark Hall, PhD From: Carmen Bernedo, P.E., D.WRE.

Zachary Elliott, P.E.
Steve Morton, AICP
Bureau of Land Management Black Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Rock Field Office
Winnemucca District
5100 E. Winnemucca Blvd
Winnemucca, NV 89445
File: Hycroft Mine Tailing Storage Facility Date: August 21, 2018
(TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation
Area Assessment

Reference: Hycroft Mine Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area
Assessment

INTRODUCTION
PROJECT BACKGROUND

Hycroft Resources and Development, Inc. (HRDI) is requesting services to estimate the potentially impacted
area(s) due to a release of tailing material for the two proposed tailing storage facility (TSF) alternatives
locations defined by the Golder Associates (Golder) Scoping Level Design South Tailings Management Facility
Hycroft Mine, Nevada (Golder, 2016), Addendum 1 to Feasibility Design Report Tailings Management Facility
(TMF) Hycroft Mine, Nevada (Golder, 2017a), and Addendum 1 to STMF Scoping Level Report South Tailing
management Facility (STMF) Hycroft Mine, Nevada (Golder, 2017b).

The current proposed mine expansion includes an expansion of the current Authorized Plan Boundary to
accommodate a new TSF east of the current project area called the Northeast (NE) TSF. The Authorized Plan
Boundary expansion would encompass 13,082 acres of public land administered by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM). This expansion would bring the project area total to 27,835 acres, of which 1,753 acres
would be on private land controlled by HRDI and 26,082 acres would be on BLM administered public lands. An
alternative (Alternative A) to the Proposed Action is being analyzed to potentially reduce impacts to multiple
resources. Alternative A would expand the current Authorized Plan Boundary to accommodate a new TSF south
of the Authorized Plan Boundary and would be called the Southwest (SW) TSF. The Alternative A expansion
would encompass approximately 5,310 acres of public lands administered by the BLM. The Alternative A
expansion boundary and the Authorized Plan Boundary would include approximately 18,310 acres of public
land and 1,753 acres of private land for a combined total of 20,063 acres (BLM, 2018).

The proposed mine expansion activities, which would be located solely on public lands, are subject to BLM
review and approval. The BLM has determined that review and approval of the proposed Plan Amendment is
a major federal action and that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared to fulfill the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). The BLM’s purpose of
this federal action is to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with HRDI’s proposed Project and
alternatives that would allow HRDI to expand operations at the Hycroft Mine (BLM, 2018).

The purpose of this assessment is to estimate at a conceptual level the potentially impacted area(s) due to a
release of tailing material (inundation areas) for the two TSF alternatives. Figure 1 shows the locations of the
August 21, 2018
Page 2 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

two TSF alternatives (NE TSF and SW TSF) determined by Golder (2016) and Golder (2017a), the Hycroft
Mine area, and major road and railroad alignments within the vicinity of the Hycroft Mine area.

PROJECT SETTING

The Hycroft Mine and TSF alternatives are located in a remote area within the Black Rock Desert and the Quinn
River drainage basin in northwest Nevada. The Quinn River is the largest river in the region and is an intermittent
river that flows south and west approximately 10 miles to the northwest of the Hycroft Mine area as shown on
Figure 1. The Quinn River discharges and evaporates at a sink located in the Black Rock Desert (USGS, 1986)
approximately 20 miles west of the Hycroft Mine area. To the west and north of the mine property is the High
Rock Canyon National Conservation Area, which is managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Jungo
Road (State Highway 49) is located on the northwest and north side of the Hycroft Mine and TSF alternative
locations. The town of Gerlach, NV is the nearest location with a permanent population and infrastructure and
is located approximately 20 miles southwest of the sink at an elevation about 20 to 30 feet (ft) higher than the
lowest elevations of the Quinn River sink area. Approximately 11 miles northeast of Gerlach, NV and within the
Black Rock Desert area is the location of an annual event called Burning Man, where up to 70,000 people may
gather for one to two weeks in late August and early September at a location named “Black Rock City”. “Black
Rock City” is a temporary community that is occupied during the event consisting of tents, vehicles, streets, a
temporary airport, and other temporary structures. Volunteers for the event may be present in the area for
several weeks before and after the event.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this assessment is to estimate the area(s) that could potentially be impacted in the event of a
release of tailing material from the two alternative TSFs locations for comparison purposes based on the limited
topographic data that is available, as well as the accelerated schedule required for the analyses. A breach
analysis should be conducted when a final alternative is selected and during final design of the selected TSF.
 NE TSF
Alternative

198C. 1\1

G t1y(fdt•. MX0$1HECRA$1TSF_~_0Yel'View_201aos1s n'lxd -
SOVt'ets: USGS 10t'r'I- OEM
0 20
I I
Miles
SeNICe-t.oyerCredi1s:Contemmc1 nottefSectNotiono/GeOQfOPhiC's current mop poky. Sources: NotonofGeoQfOph/C, Esri, Gorrrin, HERE. UNEP·\VCMC, VSGS, NASA, ESA. MEJI, NttCAN. GE8CO, NOAA, h:;:remeMP Corp.

Tailings Storage Facility D Existing Plan Boundary Ac tive Mine Area Hycroft Mine Area and Tailings Storage Facility Alternatives
() Stantec Alternatives (by Golder) (BLM 2018) D Black Rock Desert / High Project Location Overview
o--==o=.8•7•5-===
1.•75______
3.5 Miles
D Embankment D Proposed Expansion Plan Rock Canyon NCA
N
D DRAFT
$ NAO 1933 Stale Plane Nevada weu FPS 2703 feet
Prepared: Augosl,. 2018
Tailings lmpoundment Boundary (BLM 20 18)
Alternative A Expansion
: =: Plan Boundary (BLM 20 18)
Note: Background USGS 100k Topo Quad
elevation contours in meters
Figure l
HYCROFT M IN E PHASE 2 EXPANSION 203703039-201.113
August 21, 2018
Page 4 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

APPROACH AND ANALYSIS

ASSUMPTIONS

To evaluate the potentially impacted area (impacted area is defined as the inundation area due to the release
of the impounded tailings) for the two alternative TSF locations, Stantec assumed that the tailings behave as
water during release and that 100 percent of the TSF’s impoundment volume would be released during a
breach. Stantec used a simplified approach to estimate the potentially impacted areas downstream of the TSFs
based on typical dam release flow characteristics, the available topography of the Quinn River drainage basin
(slopes and storage areas), and the maximum volume of tailings that would be stored behind the dams based
on the total tailings design capacity for each TSF by Golder (2016) and Golder (2017a).

The following assumptions were made for this analysis:

• Ultimate TSF configurations by Golder (2016) and Golder (2017a and 2017b) were used for the
analysis.

• Released tailings characteristics were assumed to behave as water and estimates used open channel
governing equations.

• The hypothetical release of tailings scenarios for the two TSFs occurs independently for each
alternative to support comparison of TSF alternatives.

• Full breach conditions (100 percent of contained tailings are released).

• Sunny day conditions (no antecedent flow conditions).

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

TSF Locations and Geometry

Stantec used the feasibility design and scoping level design reports and drawings for the NE TSF alternative
(Golder, 2017a) and SW TSF alternative (Golder, 2016), respectively, provided by HRDI to map the two TSF
locations and estimate parameters used for the potential area of impact assessment. Table 1 contains a
summary of the HRDI TSF alternatives parameters used for this analysis.

Table 1. Summary of parameters for the alternative HRDI TSF locations (Golder, 2016 and Golder,
2017a and 2017b)
Parameter NE TSF(1) SW TSF(2) Comments
Total tailings design capacity (Mt) 615 615 From Golder (2016) and Golder (2017)
NE TSF main embankment only (north
Embankment crest elev. (ft) 4,820.3 4,327
embankment elevation varies)
Height from embankment crest to
Maximum embankment height (ft) 265 270
downstream toe
Based on stated ultimate TSF capacities
Maximum reservoir volume (ac-ft) 306,920 307,225
and ultimate tailings densities
Maximum reservoir surface area (ac) 3,300 2,064 Assuming flat tailing surface
Notes:
(1)From feasibility design report and drawings (Golder, 2017a).
(2)From scoping level design report and drawings (Golder, 2016 and 2017b).
August 21, 2018
Page 5 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

Northeast TSF Description

The NE TSF alternative site is located in a valley northeast of the existing Hycroft Mine area. The TSF would
be developed by constructing a dam across the existing drainage to create a “Valley Fill” type impoundment as
shown on Figure 1. A well-defined ephemeral drainage runs through the proposed impoundment area (Golder,
2010). The ultimate TSF configuration would consist of a main embankment and a north embankment. The
main embankment crest elevation is approximately 4,820.3 ft above mean sea level (amsl and has a maximum
embankment height of approximately 265 ft (from the upstream toe). The north embankment crest elevation
varies from 4,823 to 4,853 ft amsl and has a maximum embankment height of approximately 115 ft. The ultimate
NE TSF capacity is approximately 615 Mt. Using a tailing density of 92 pcf for the ultimate configuration, the
ultimate volume of tailing material estimated by Golder is approximately 306,920 ac-ft (Golder, 2017a).

Southwest TSF Description

The SW TSF alternative site is located on a gently sloping alluvial fan southwest of the existing Crofoot Heap
Leach Pad. The TSF would utilize a “Ring Dam” type of construction, requiring embankment fill to be placed on
three sides of the TSF as shown on Figure 1. State Highway 49 (Jungo Road) cross through the middle of the
proposed site location. The ultimate embankment crest elevation of the SW TSF is approximately 4,327 ft amsl
with a maximum embankment height of approximately 270 ft from the downstream toe. The ultimate SW TSF
capacity is approximately 615 Mt. Using a tailing density of 90 pcf for the ultimate configuration, the ultimate
volume of tailing material estimated by Golder is approximately 307,225 ac-ft (Golder, 2016 and 2017b).

Topographic Data

Stantec utilized the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Elevation Dataset (NED) 1/3 arc-second
digital elevation model (DEM) data (USGS, 2017) downstream of the TSF alternatives locations. This is the
only available topographic data outside the project area. The USGS 1/3 arc-second DEM data is approximately
equivalent to 10-meter (~30-ft) elevation contours. The project area consists of four USGS DEM tiles, which
were merged, reprojected and x,y,z values were converted to feet. Additionally, there was a digital terrain model
(DTM) in AutoCAD format available for the mine area (extending approximately one mile to the northwest of
the Hycroft Mine area) from a 2012 survey, which was also used to create a surface from which a raster was
extracted. The elevation differences between the 2012 survey DTM and the USGS DEM vary up to about 10 ft
at the intersection of these two data sets. Stantec merged the two together to create combined surface with the
best available data and cross-section locations were selected through the flattest portions of the overlapping
area to minimize the influence of the elevation differences.

For the NE TSF alternative location, the topography downstream of the embankment creates a relatively
confined valley (channel) for approximately seven to eight miles. Downstream of the valley, the topography is
very flat and slopes gently from approximately 0.5 percent to 0 percent to the Quinn River to the west. For the
SW TSF alternative, the topography immediately downstream of the embankment (all three sides) is also flat
and slopes gently from approximately 0.5 percent to 0 percent to the north and west toward the Quinn River.
Further downstream, the Quinn River empties into a sink within the Black Rock Desert with a bottom elevation
of approximately 3,896 ft amsl.

Using the USGS DEM data downstream of the Hycroft Mine area, Stantec developed an elevation-capacity
relationship (curve) for the Quinn River sink area using ArcGIS software to compare the capacity of the sink
area to the ultimate capacity of each of the TSFs. Table 2 contains the elevation-area-capacity data for the
Quinn River sink area below the Hycroft Mine area, and Figure 2 shows the elevation-capacity and the
approximate elevation of the town of Gerlach, NV downstream of the TSF alternative locations. Infrastructure
within the Quinn River sink area at or below the elevation corresponding to the volume of tailings contained
within the alternative TSF impoundments (Elev. 3,910 to 3,911 ft above mean sea level) includes a small section
August 21, 2018
Page 6 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

of the railroad on the southeast side of the sink area and the Burning Man event area where people gather from
one to two weeks on an annual basis.

Table 2. Quinn River sink area elevation-capacity data below Hycroft Mine area

Elevation Area Capacity

(ft) (ac) (ac-ft x 1,000)
3,932 151,419 3,228.35
3,931 151,419 3,076.94
3,930 151,416 2,925.52
3,929 151,406 2,774.10
3,928 151,392 2,622.70
3,927 151,379 2,471.31
3,926 151,367 2,319.94
3,925 151,355 2,168.58
3,924 151,336 2,017.23
3,923 151,266 1,865.90
3,922 151,147 1,714.68
3,921 149,134 1,564.02
3,920 144,658 1,416.38
3,919 140,703 1,273.30
3,918 136,407 1,134.33
3,917 131,198 1,001.16
3,916 127,215 872.38
3,915 124,001 747.23
3,914 116,503 614.31
3,913 103,744 503.38
3,912 95,548 404.18
3,911 88,244 312.58
3,910 82,349 227.25
3,909 75,093 148.26
3,908 54,700 77.56
3,907 32,404 35.85
3,906 13,398 13.31
3,905 2,277 4.83
3,904 1,092 3.35
3,903 630 2.60
3,902 557 2.01
3,901 487 1.49
3,900 417 1.03
3,899 352 0.65
3,898 296 0.32
3,897 144 0.11
3,896 0 0.00
August 21, 2018
Page 7 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

3,935

3,930

3,925

3,920
Elevation (ft)

3,915

3,910

3,905 Quinn River Sink Area

NE TSF/SW TSF
3,900
Gerlach, NV

3,895
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500
Capacity (ac-ft x 1000)

Figure 2. Quinn River sink area elevation-capacity curve below Gerlach, NV

ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL AREA OF IMPACT (INUNDATION AREA)

To estimate the potential areas of impact (inundation areas) downstream of the TSF alternatives due to a
release of the tailings from the impoundments, Stantec used a combined approach of open-channel flow
hydraulics estimates within the main reaches immediately downstream of the TSFs that are relatively confined
and an evaluation of slopes and storage capacity of the downstream topographic features to estimate potential
flow paths and unconfined flood area limits during a potential total release of tailings of the two alternative TSFs
as illustrated by the schematic on Figure 3.
August 21, 2018
Page 8 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

Figure 3. Schematic of approach to estimate potential area(s) of impact downstream of TSF alternative
locations

In the areas immediately downstream of the TSF embankments, Stantec assumed unidimensional (1D) flow
characteristics, typical dam failure flow characteristics (e.g., potential dam breach widths, flow depths and
velocities, channel and floodplain roughness parameters, and angle of flow expansion on floodplains), and
estimated dam breach peak discharges to estimate the potential limits of inundation to the Quinn River and sink
area to the southwest. To define the potential areas of impact, the analyses were divided in two steps. First,
open channel flow equations along the main flow paths from the TSFs to the Quinn River were used to estimated
potential flow depths and extents where the topography creates a valley or channel to contain flows that could
result from a release of tailings from the TSFs. Then, once the flow reaches the flat area surrounding the Quinn
River and sink area, the Quinn River channel alignments and storage capacity of the Black Rock Desert valley
(surrounding the sink based on the USGS NED topographic data) were compared to the total volume of potential
tailings releases for the TSF alternatives.

Potential dam breach widths and peak discharges resulting from a release of tailings were estimated for the
purpose of this analysis using empirical equations published by Froehlich (2008). The Froehlich (2008) dam
breach parameter equations are some of the most widely used for water storage dam breach analyses and
area based on 74 embankment dam failure cases analyzed. They are recommended for small or large dams
with reservoir volumes greater than 100 ac-ft as they yield conservative but reasonable results. The equations
for average breach width and peak outflow are given below. Table 3 contains a summary of the estimated
average breach widths and peak outflows for the NE and SW TSFs.

𝐵̅ = 0.27𝑘𝑜 𝑉𝑤0.32 𝐻𝑏0.04

August 21, 2018
Page 9 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

Where:

𝐵̅ = average breach width (ft)

𝑘𝑜 = factor that accounts for the effect of failure mode (𝑘𝑜 = 1.0 assumed for failure mode other than
overtopping)

𝑉𝑤 = volume of water above the final breach bottom that will eventually flow out of the reservoir (ft3)

𝐻𝑏 = height of breach (ft)

3
𝐴
𝑄𝑝 = 3.1𝐵̅ 𝐻𝑏1.5 ( )
𝐴 + 𝑡𝑓 √𝐻𝑏

Where:

𝑄𝑝 = peak discharge (cfs)

𝐴 = 23.4(𝐴𝑠 /𝐵̅ ) (acres)

𝐴𝑠 = reservoir surface area (acres)

𝑉𝑤
𝑡𝑓 = breach formation time (hr) = 0.01756√
𝑔𝐻𝑏2

Table 3. Summary of preliminary dam breach parameters for HRDI TSF Alternatives(1)
Parameter NE TSF SW TSF
Average breach width (ft) 587 588
Peak discharge (cfs) 4,900,000 4,000,000
Notes:
(1)Values based on parameters summarized in Table 2 and sunny day failure (piping).

NE TSF Path

Potential inundation limits for the NE TSF alternative area were estimated using open channel flow equations
with the peak discharge for the NE TSF release shown in Table 3 for the relatively confined valley (channel)
area downstream of the TSF. Downstream of the valley area to the Quinn River to the west, the topography is
very flat, and it is assumed that large flows from the valley would behave like unconfined, two-dimensional (2D)
flows in this area. To estimate the potential area of inundation in this area, it was assumed that the flow would
spread to the north and the south at an angle of expansion (relative to the alignment of the cross-sections
exiting the valley to the east) of approximately 30 degrees (°) to the Quinn River. An angle of 30° (opposed to
a larger angle) was assumed based on the potential flow velocities from the steeper, confined valley area
downstream of the NE TSF. The southern boundary of the NE TSF potentially impacted area was assumed to
angle back toward the northwest toward the Quinn River downstream of the SW TSF alternative location based
on the slope of the topography.

The main potential area of impact for the NE TSF considered a release of tailings from the main embankment
where the maximum dam height (embankment crest to upstream toe) occurs. The NE TSF alternative also has
a separate, smaller embankment to the east called the north embankment and a release of tailings from this
August 21, 2018
Page 10 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

location was also considered for this analysis. The dam height and volume of tailings stored behind the dam for
the north embankment are less than the main embankment. However, due to the lack of detailed elevation-
storage information for the 615 Mt NE TSF alternative, the same dam breach parameters (breach width and
peak outflow) used for the main embankment were also used for the north embankment. The ultimate outfall of
the released tailings was assumed to be the valley (Quinn River sink) area to the west of the Hycroft Mine area
and upstream of the town of Gerlach, NV. The NE TSF alternative potential area of impact (inundation) due to
a release of tailings in shown on Figure 4. The two most likely potential flow paths for releases from the main
embankment and north embankment are both shown on Figure 4 as lines labeled P1 and P2.

SW TSF Path

For the SW TSF alternative location, the topography downstream of the embankment is immediately flat and
slopes gently to the north and west towards the Quinn River. The terrain immediately to the north and east of
the TSF (towards the Hycroft Mine area) is steeper and 1D cross-sections and open channel flow equations
were used to define the southeastern boundary of the SW TSF potentially impacted area based the peak
discharge for the SW TSF shown in Table 3. Similar to the flat, floodplain area assumptions for the NE TSF, an
angle of flow expansion was assumed for the SW TSF to the Quinn River/ Sink area. An estimated angle of
flow expansion of 45° was assumed for the SW TSF potential area of inundation beyond the open channel flow
path based on the potential velocities and shallower flow depths entering on the flatter, wider area downstream
area in this location.

The main potential area of impact for the SW TSF considered a release of tailings from the location where the
maximum dam height occurs on the north side of the embankment. Since the SW TSF is proposed to have the
embankment constructed on three sides of the impoundment, two alternate tailings release locations along the
embankment (west side and northeast side) were also considered for this analysis. The dam heights for the
two alternate locations and volume of tailings stored behind the dam at these locations are less than the north
side. However, due to the lack of detailed elevation-storage information for the SW TSF alternative, the same
dam breach parameters used for the north side of the embankment were also used for the two alternate
locations. The ultimate outfall of the released tailings was also assumed to be the valley (Quinn River sink) area
to the west of the Hycroft Mine area and upstream of the town of Gerlach, NV. The SW TSF alternative potential
area of impact (inundation) due to a release of tailings in shown on Figure 5. The three most likely potential
flow paths for releases from the NE TSF embankment are shown on Figure 5 as lines labeled P1, P2, and P3.
 SeNICe-t.oyerCredi1s:Contemmc1 nottefSectNotiono/GeOQfOPhiC's CUfrentmop poky. Sources: NotonofGeoQfOph/C, Esri, Gorrrin, HERE. UNEP·\VCMC, VSGS, NASA, ESA. MEJI, NttCAN. GE8CO, NOAA, h:;:remeMP Corp.

Hycroft Mine Area and Proposed Tailings Storage Facility Alternatives

() Stantec Tailings Storage Facility Potential Area of Impact D Existing Plan Boundary Ac tive Mine Area NE TSF Potential Area of Impact (Inundation Area}
N 0 1.5 3 6 Alternatives (by Golder) (Inundation Area) (BLM 2018)
Black Rock Desert I High DRAFT
$ --==-~==~----NAO 1933 Stale Plane Nevada weu FPS 2703 feet
Prepared: Augosl,. 2018
Miles D
D
Embankment
Tailings lmpoundment
- Potential Flow Path
D
Proposed Expansion Plan
Boundary (BLM 2018)
D Rock Canyon NCA
Note: Background USGS 100k Topo Quad
elevation contours in meters
Figure 4
HYCROFT M IN E PHA SE 2 EXPANSION 203703039-201 .113
 Tailings st
Alternativ~~a(ge Facility
,. Potentia l Are
(Inundation Aarea)
of Impact
D Existing Plan Boundary
(BLM 2018)
ive Mine A
Act' .
D by Golder)
LM 2018) D ~lack
__ Allemat;,e A cea
vodoW Miles
Embankment - Potential Flow Path C :Plan BoundaryEx(pBansion NCAI H.igh
Rock Desert
ock Canyon DRAFT
HYCROFT MIN E p l'<epa'::';=feel
D Tailings Impound ment Figure 5
HASE 2 EXPANSION i 2018
203703039-201.113
---
August 21, 2018
Page 13 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

• For this analysis, Stantec estimated the area(s) that could potentially be impacted (inundation areas)
in the event of a release of tailings from the two alternative TSFs proposed by HRDI as shown on
Figure 1.

• Based on the limited, coarse topographic data downstream of the Hycroft Mine area and the
accelerated schedule to complete this work, Stantec applied a simplified approach for the analysis to
develop the potentially impacted (inundated) area estimates.

• Stantec assumed that the released tailings behave as water and 100 percent of the TSF’s impoundment
volume is released for each alternative.

• Peak flow estimates were estimated from empirical dam breach equations (Froehlich, 2008).

• Released volume estimates were obtained from the total tailings design capacity for each TSF by
Golder (2016) and Golder (2017a and 2017b).

• Open channel flow equations were used to estimate the potential inundation limits in the areas
immediately downstream of the TSFs where cross-sections developed from the topographic data could
contain the peak flow estimates in relatively confined channel flow conditions.

• Between the areas where the flow is mainly confined and the Quinn River and sink area (valley),
Stantec assumed the flow could spread across the flat terrain at angles between 30° for the NE TSF
and 45° for the SW TSF.

• The USGS DEM elevation-capacity data (USGS, 2017) was used within the Quinn River sink (valley)
area further downstream to define the ultimate limits of inundation where the total TSF impoundment
volumes could be contained below a certain elevation contour.

• Figure 4 shows the potential area of impact (inundation areas) for the NE TSF alternative and Figure
5 shows the potential area of impact (inundation area) for the SW TSF alternative.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the conceptual analyses developed, the following conclusions are derived:

• The potential areas of inundation for both the NE TSF and SW TSF alternatives include portions of the
Black Rock Desert and High Rock Canyon National Conservation Area to the north and west of the
Hycroft Mine area as shown on Figure 4 and Figure 5. Sections of the major road (State Highway 49
– Jungo Road) used to access the mine site and railroad downstream of the Hycroft Mine area could
also be inundated by the release of tailings due to a dam failure from either TSF alternative. Based on
a review of available maps and aerial imagery, there are also various unnamed roads and trails (not
shown on figures) surrounding the Hycroft Mine area that may also be impacted by a potential release
of tailings due to a dam failure.

• There would be enough storage capacity within the Quinn River sink area below the town of Gerlach,
NV (see Figure 2) to contain the total release of the volume of tailings impounded behind either TSF
alternative.
August 21, 2018
Page 14 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

• A small section of the railroad on the southeast side of the Quinn River sink area and the Burning Man
event site are located within the final potential inundation area. The elevation of released tailings from
either TSF alternative deposited within the Quinn River sink area below Gerlach, NV is approximately
20 ft below the estimated lowest elevation of the town based on the available USGS DEM data (USGS,
2017). However, any additional impacts due to wave action, turbulence, or uneven deposition of tailing
material at a given location have not been considered.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The analyses were performed based on limited data available at the time of execution of this assessment. Once
the final alternative is selected, the dam is designed, and the tailings characteristics are evaluated, it is
recommended that a full dam breach analysis be performed as part of the final design phase and for Emergency
Action Plans. Due to the flat terrain in the area downstream of the Hycroft Mine area and TSF alternatives, it is
recommended that 2D dam break and flood inundation mapping analyses be performed for the selected
alternative to further define the potential dam failure inundation area(s). In order to perform a detailed 2D flood
routing and inundation analyses, it is also recommended that higher resolution topography be developed
downstream of the Hycroft Mine area to the Quinn River and sink area. Based on the actual rheology of the
tailings for the selected TSF alternative, HDRI should also consider modeling the properties of the released
tailings as a non-Newtonian fluid for the 2D dam break and flood inundation analyses during Final Design. The
inundation limits resulting from a full dam break analysis considering the rheology of the tailings and the
acquisition of more detailed topographic data within the potential areas of influence shown on Figure 4 and
Figure 5 could vary from the areas estimated from this analysis.

LIMITATIONS
This evaluation does not account for the structural integrity or stability condition of the proposed TFS Designs
by Golder, but rather is an evaluation of the potential flood effects of the postulated assumptions. The approach
and assumptions used to develop the evaluation are approximate and relied on site characteristics reported by
others and topographic data available. Stantec is relying on the accuracy of data provided without independent
verification and does not assume any liability or responsibility for the accuracy thereof. The inundation areas
reported should be used only as guidance for considering comparison of alternatives. Changes to the
assumptions, TSF configurations and information used in this evaluation could affect the conclusions presented
and may need to be further evaluated.

REFERENCES
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (2018). Hycroft Mine Phase II Expansion Project Draft Environmental
Impact Statement. DOI-BLM-NV-W030-2015-0007-EIS.

Froehlich, D.C. (2008). Embankment Dam Breach Parameters and Their Uncertainties. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, Vol. 134, No. 12.

Golder (2010). Scoping Study Tailings Management Facility (TMF) Hycroft Mine, Nevada. Final Scoping Study
Report. December 2010.

Golder Associates (2016). Scoping Level Design South Tailings Management Facility Hycroft Mine, Nevada.
Draft Scoping Level Design Report. September 2016.

Golder Associates (2017a). Addendum 1 to Feasibility Design Report Tailings Management Facility (TMF)
Hycroft Mine, Nevada. Feasibility Design Report. February 23, 2017.
August 21, 2018
Page 15 of 15
Reference: Hycroft Tailing Storage Facility (TSF) Alternatives Potential Inundation Area Assessment

Golder Associates (2017b). Addendum 1 to STMP Scoping Level Report South Tailings Management Facility
(STMF) Hycroft Mine, Nevada. Feasibility Design Report. February 21, 2017.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (1986). Reconnaissance Bathymetry of Basins Occupied by Pleistocene Lake
Lohontan, Nevada and California. Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4262, Denver, Colorado.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (2017). 3DEP products and services: The National Map, 3D Elevation Program
Web page, accessed August 2018 at https://nationalmap.gov/3DEP/3dep_prodserv.html.