Laserfiche WebLink
Walker to File C-84-065 TR 17 Adequacy Review <br />August 11, 1998 <br />Page 4 of 12 <br />Midterm Review Item See Rule(s) Ade uac of Res onse <br /> <br /> this calendar year of <br />ve elation surve s. <br />Item 22 2.05.3(2)(b) The text of the response was <br />ade uate. <br />Rule 1.04(136) "Technical revision" means a minor change, including incidental permit <br />boundnry revisions, to the terms or requirements of a permit issued under these Rules, which <br />change shall not cause a significant alteration in the operator's reclamatiot: plan. The term <br />includes, but is not limited to, increases in coal production, reduction or termination of approved <br />environmental monitoring programs, or design changes for regulated structures or facilities. <br />The proposed action is considered as a technical revision as it will not cause a significant <br />alteration in the operator's reclamation plan. <br />Rule 2.03.3(1) See the Rules for the text of this rule. <br />Items 7a. 7b, 7c, 7d, 9, 10 and 20 of the midterm review was associated with this rule. Revised <br />pages i through x correct outdated information in the PAP. Item 9 had been corcec[ed previously <br />by Technical Revision 10 by pages 4-64 through 4-73. The response provided copies of these <br />pages. <br />Rule 2.03.4(7) Each application shall contain the names and addresses of the owners of record <br />of al[ surface and subsurface arens contiguous to nny part of the proposed pennit area. <br />The application was complete with the exception of the address of the Colorado & Utah Land <br />Company. By letter of July 3, 2000, the applicant was asked to supply the required information. <br />By response of July 31, 2000, the applicant advised that the land was no longer owned by the <br />Colorado & Utah Land Company, and provided an amended page and a revised Surface <br />Ownership Map (Figure 2.1-1). <br />Rule 2.03.4(9) See the Rules for the text of this rule. <br />Item 1 of the midterm review was associated with this rule. There were a number of inconsistent <br />items, and duplicate and redundant pages in the application adequately addresses the issue (the <br />whole section was rewritten), and is in compliance with this rule. <br />Rule 2.03.4(10) See the Rules for the text of this rule. <br />Item 2 of the midterm review was associated with this rule. The application adequately addresses <br />the issue (see paragraph 2.8 on page 2-9), and is in compliance with this rule. <br />