Laserfiche WebLink
AUG-04-2003 MON 03;27 PM BANKS AND GES50 LLC FAX N0, 303 274 8329 <br />6. Again, there is concern here as to the necessity of an Amendment andlor <br />Technical Revision for submittal of a mitigation plan agreement with third parties, <br />particularly if said agreement in no way affects the acreage of affected land <br />under the permit and does not cause a significant change to either the proposed <br />mine or reclamation plan. We are agreeable to submitting any agreement to the <br />Division and incorporating the parameters of said agreement into the permit and <br />having this requirement be made a stipulation of approval. However, we would <br />request that the Division withhold determination of whether an Amendment or <br />Technical Revision would he required until such time that the agreement is <br />reviewed. In the event that said agreement does cause significant change to the <br />mine or reclamation plan, the Operator will submit any necessary Amendment or <br />Technical Revision application. However, requiring either of these processes <br />solely for the purpose of submitting an agreement is unnecessary and <br />presumptuous on the Division's part. <br />9. a) Groundwater flows in a generally northwesterly direction in the vicinity of the <br />Heil property. As such, we feel that New Piezometer #1, as located on Figure 3 <br />of the second WWE report, will reflect any mounding that may occur on the <br />upgradient side of the slurry wall. <br />b) We propose that water levels will be read on atwice-monthly occurrence <br />during the fast year of operations at the site, <br />c) The Operator commits to submitting the pre-mining data once all 16 months of <br />data have been collected. At this time a trigger point will be determined. During <br />the first year of operations at the site, the Operator will submit the two monthly <br />readings within thirty days of the last day of the reported month. <br />Rule 6.4.6 Exhibit H - Wildlife Information <br />10. Attached is a letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stating that they have <br />reviewed the proposed mine plan and have requested a site assessment be <br />performed and that the site assessment will be submitted to them far review once <br />completed. This letter is being forwarded to the Division per your letter dated <br />July 29, 2003, <br />Rule fi.5 Geotechnical Stability Exhibit <br />11. We received Mr. Sorenson's review of the submitted Slope Stability Analysis on <br />Friday, August 1, 2003, As per Mr. Sorenson's findings, the Operator commits to <br />maintaining a 40-foot setback from all permanent man-made structures for which <br />no agreement has been reached. The mine and reclamation plan maps have <br />been amended to reflect this setback and have been attached for the Division's <br />records. <br /> <br />We hope that this correspondence satisfactorily addresses your additional concerns. In <br />the event that the Division still has further concerns, we would like to request the <br />decision deadline be moved 4 days, which would place the decision deadline on August <br />