My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1992-06-09_REVISION - M1988112
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1988112
>
1992-06-09_REVISION - M1988112
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2021 6:00:51 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 1:01:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1988112
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/9/1992
Doc Name
FAX COVER
From
MLRD
To
PAES CONSULTANT ADA TECHNOLOGIES INC
Type & Sequence
TR8
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
~ STA~F COLORADO <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION o4 ~o~ <br />Department of Natural Resources ~~~ <br />N % ~g <br />1313 Sherman St.. Room 215 . ~'~I (ate Li . <br />Denver. CO 60203 •'~' <br />303 866-3567 'ra76' <br />Fox: 303 832-6106 <br />Roy Romer, <br />June 26, 1992 Governor <br />M,chael B. Long, <br />Division DIfeC(or <br />Mr. Andre J. Douchane <br />Battle Mountain Gold Co. <br />5670 Greenwood Plaza Blvd., Suite 106 <br />Englewood, CO 80111 <br />RE: San Luis (Permit M-88-112) BMR Response to Division Adequacy Review <br />Proposed Technical Revision 8. <br />The Division is in receipt of Battle Mountain Resources' response referenced <br />above. In regard to the response to Comment 1, the Division, as well as <br />Battle Mountain Resources, will have to be satisfied that the well network is <br />adequate in order to forego additional well locations and additional testing. <br />The operator should commit to receiving Division concurrence in regard to <br />the adequacy of the monitoring network before terminating the program. <br />In regard to the response to Comment 2, the Division agrees that it may be <br />premature, to some extent, to criticize the proposed locations. The <br />suggestion was made in the hope that better initial location of wells M-12 and <br />M-13 might improve the operator's chance of not having to drill any additional <br />wells. Since Battle Mountain Resources prefers its proposed locations and to <br />accept the greater risks that M-12 and M-13 may not prove to be in gptimum <br />locations for contaminant leak monitoring, the Division will accept the <br />proposed locations. <br />In regard to Comment 3, the Division finds the response acceptable. <br />If you have any questions, please call. <br />Sincerely, <br />c~~y,y, G~-,.vir,~ <br />James C. Stevens <br />Senior Reclamation Specialist <br />JCS/scg <br />cc: Costiila County Conservancy Dist. Scott Mefford <br />Helen Sigmund Gary Dodson <br />People's Alternative Energy Services Walter Wise <br />Nora Jacquez Dean Massey <br />David Hyatt James Pendleton <br />Roger Flynn Larry Oehler <br />Jane I. Kircher <br />3820E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.