Laserfiche WebLink
area could be classified as "previously mined areas". <br />If we agree that some of the surface disturbances could be classified as "previously mined <br />areas", we will then decide what the revegetation standards should be. <br />The fan shaft site was reportedly reclaimed in 1986. If we decide that the fan shaft site <br />could not be considered a "previously mined azea'", then we will decide what Phase IUIII <br />sampling methodology should be utilized for that site. <br />The haul road outslope and conveyor corridor were reportedly also reclaimed in 1986. If we <br />decide that these reclaimed disturbances could not be considered "previously mined azeas", <br />then we will decide what Phase IUIII sampling methodology should be utilized for the <br />reclaimed portion of the load-out. <br />10. We will decide what the "clock" is for the North Thompson Creek Mine No. 1 portal (It was <br />reportedly reclaimed in 1986, granted a Phase I bond release in 1988, re-disturbed and re- <br />bonded later in 1988 due to installation of water treatment facilities, then backfilled in 1998, <br />then backfilled slightly again in 1999). <br />11. We will decide if we could release the water treatment facilities by agreeing that a post <br />mining land use of "Industrial" had been achieved for the surface disturbances associated <br />with the facilities. <br />12. We will inform Jim Stover of our decisions in writing as soon as possible (given existing <br />workloads), so as to allow Steve Viert time to sample in July and/or August. <br />