Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />terminated after two sessions of no movement or whether <br />monitoring will be annual after two sessions of no <br />movement. Please clarify. <br />j. The mineral boundary for the Tieken Lease on Map 2, <br />Sections 31 and 32, T5N, R86W needs to be completed. <br />k. Page 2.10-5 - (1) should be (1) as in "Larry". <br />Response <br />./a. Page 2.05-Sa has been revised to incorporated TR-14 <br />approval language. <br />b. The Exhibit Table of Contents has been revised to include <br />exhibits 13 and 25a. <br />c. Attached are two dividers each for Exhibit 13(a) and <br />~° 23 (a) . <br />d. Page 2.04-32(1) has been revised to reflect the above <br />IMk changes. Copies of the revised pages are attached. <br />e. Page 2.04-69 has been revised to reflect the above change. <br />Copies of the revised page are attached. <br />f. The paragraph containing the above rule reference has been <br />modified and the reference no longer exits. Copies of the <br />revised page are attached. <br />g. Page 2.05-56 has been revised to reflect 1.8 inches vs. <br />1,8 inches. Copies of the revised pages are attached. <br />~~ ~ h. Page 2.05-118d has been revised to show that table <br />"Revised Predicted Inflows for the Foidel Creek Mine" has <br />,~,a~06~,,~ ' been renumbered, and it is now table 60A. <br />~pa+~ i. Page 2.05-128(a) has been revised to clearly show that <br />~~ when two consecutive monitoring episodes show no further <br />subsidence monitoring will be discontinued. Copies of the <br />revised page are attached. <br />j. Map 2 has been revised to show the Tieken lease extending <br />into sections 31 and 32, TSN, R86W. However, there was a <br />UY~ note in the legend indicating that this is the Tieken <br />Lease. The extension of the bold lease line will call <br />this out more clearly on the map. Three copies of the <br />revised map are attached. <br />k. Page 2.10 - 5 has been revised to include the above <br />change. Copies of the revised page are attached. <br />DOMG Concern No. 8. The Division incorrectly stated our concern <br />No. 2 in our original adequacy concerns dated July 31, 1992. The <br />question should have read "Pastureland is not indicated as a pre- <br />mining land use on page 2.04-11" yet Map 3 indicates many areas of <br />pastureland within the permit as a pre-mining land use. Please <br />clarify and revise as necessary. <br />Response. No response necessary. <br />