Laserfiche WebLink
49 <br /> 1 feel, net. So I didn't really want to get into 1 If there are no questions, I'll <br /> 2 those dates and times. ( 2 just -- I'll roll right into the Division's <br /> 3 So they committed in SL-08 to doing 3 presentation, which I believe is the second packet <br /> 4 these investigations and this work. Minor Revision ( 4 that -- that Scott gave you. Give me one Second to <br /> 5 82 basically put that in the permit. So it was just 5 pull that up here. <br /> 6 a text change to Snowcap's permit docment that 6 MR. BECKWITH: If I may inquire. <br /> 7 incorporated this information. 7 Will the packet that has been handed out -- Will <br /> 8 It added the hydrologic comumumication 8 that be identified as an exhibit? If so, what <br /> 9 repair plan cmmitmments to the permit, and that was 9 exhibit number? <br /> 10 approved without any caamnts or objections on 10 MR. STARK: I don't think we <br /> 11 December 21, 2015. So now that's a part of their 11 identified it as an exhibit. <br /> 12 permit document. 12 MR. BECKWITH: I would ask that it be <br /> 13 So as part of that, Snowcap was 13 identified as an exhibit. <br /> 14 required to submit this plan, and that's what became 14 MR. STARK: Okay. We can call it <br /> 15 Technical Revision 69. It was submitted on the 15 Exhibit 1. <br /> 16 29th -- I'm sorry -- the 28th of September 2016. We 16 MR. BECKWITH: That's fine. And then <br /> 17 deemed the application carplete on the 7th of 17 we have all exhibits in sequential order without <br /> 18 October 2016, and cmu ents were submitted by both 18 attributing to each particular party? <br /> 19 Mr. Fontanari and Mr. Carey on this -- on this 19 MR. ROBERTS: Yes. <br /> 20 revision. ( 20 MR. BBCVit TH: Make it a lot easier <br /> 21 We sent out an adequacy review letter 21 for everybody. <br /> 22 to Snowcap on November 24, 2016, and they responded 22 MR. STARK: Okay. So then my <br /> 23 on December 9 of 2016 to the Division's adequacy. 23 presentation then will be Exhibit 2. <br /> 24 The Division proposed a decision to 24 MR. BECKWITH: That is correct. <br /> 25 approve Snowcap's application for Technical Revision 25 MR. STARK: And then the next one you <br /> 49 51 <br /> 1 69, and that was signed on January 30 of 2017. The 1 have is Mike Boulay's. <br /> 2 proposed decision to approve Snowcap's application 2 MR. BECKWITH: That will be Number <br /> 3 for Technical Revision 69 was subsequently published 3 3. <br /> 4 in a pay — in the newspaper on the 6th of February 4 MR. STARK: And that would be Number <br /> 5 2017. 1 5 3. <br /> 6 And we did receive timely objections 6 MR. JUSTUS: I apologize. On the <br /> 7 to the proposed decision to approve Technical 7 ordering of exhibits, since you discussed this map, <br /> 8 Revision 69. One of was received from Mr. Fontanari 8 we would like to have it marked. <br /> 9 on February 15 of 2017. The other was received from 9 MR. STARK: We'll call that 4. <br /> 10 Mr. Carey on February 17 of 2017. 10 Mt. BOCKCM: Sure. <br /> 11 So based on our prehearing conference 11 MR. STARK: Since we already <br /> 12 that was ordered by the Board in March, the two 12 identified the others as 1, 2, and 3. Excellent. <br /> 13 jurisdictional and -- jurisdictional and relevant 13 MR. BECKWITH: Thank you. <br /> 14 objections are the adequacy of the testing 14 MS. UTPERBACK-NORMANN: I have a <br /> 15 procedures to determine hydrologic coammication or 15 question before you begin. <br /> 16 connection between surface water and the mine 16 MR. STARK: Yes, ma'am. <br /> 17 workings and the adequacy of the proposed plan to 17 MS. UTTERBACK-NORMANN: Viy did you <br /> 18 repair the hydrologic coamuiication or connection 18 deem it necessary to do this? Is this to meet <br /> 19 between surface water and the mine workings. So 19 reclamation requirements that you had said that you <br /> 20 those are the two issues that we have -- that we had 20 would do when you obtained the permits? Why did you <br /> 21 to address here. 21 deem it necessary to do --propose to do these <br /> 22 And with that, that's my brief 22 actions now? Or now why did you propose to do these <br /> 23 introduction, and I will take any questions that you 23 actions? <br /> 24 might have on kind of the basics of the revision or 24 MR. STARK: Mr. Boulay will talk <br /> 25 history of the revision or the site. 25 about that in a minute, if that's a good answer. <br /> 50 52 <br />