Laserfiche WebLink
revised page 138 of Section 2.05 with any new structures within the current permit area and <br />within the proposed transferred portion of the permit area. <br />4. Approved page 113c of Section 2.05 mentions exploration wells P-1-03-03 and 2010-2. <br />However, revised page I I3C of Section 2.05 does not contain any reference to these two wells. <br />Please explain. <br />5. On revised page 113c of Section 2.05, please remove the reference to Map 4-1 for exploration <br />hole P-BRL-1-03-01 since that well designation does not appear on the revised map. <br />6. On revised page 113c of Section 2.05, please change the rule citation near the top of the page <br />from (3)(b)(iii) to (3)(b)(ii). <br />7. in the first paragraph on revised permit text page 116 of Section 2.05, not all of the original <br />hydrologic monitoring sites are mentioned. In order to avoid any confusion, please either <br />include all of the original monitoring sites in this section of the text or mention that the list is <br />not complete and reference the monitoring site tables in Volume 4, along with the already <br />referenced Map 4-1, for a complete listing. <br />The revised text in Section 2.05.6(3) discusses the transfer to Bowie No. 2 of the stream <br />monitoring sites and the ground water monitoring wells but only some of the monitored springs <br />and ponds. Please expand the discussion to include all of the monitored springs and ponds, <br />either directly or by reference to the monitoring site tables in Volume 4. <br />9. The last sentence on revised page 115 of Section 2.05 states that the piezometer at the West <br />Mine is installed in the fill but currently is not being monitored. If this is the fill that provided <br />the bench for the mine facilities and which has been destroyed, please provide an explanation in <br />the text concerning the destruction of the piezometer. <br />10. On revised page 124 of Section 2.05, BRL is proposing to eliminate the requirement to install <br />nine new piezometers in the reclaimed backfill at the East Mine. The Division asks that BRL <br />remove this request from PR-4 so that the adequacy review of PR-4 is not complicated by an <br />important side issue. BRL can submit a separate technical revision to deal with this issue. <br />However, BRL should know that the Division considers the installation and monitoring of the <br />piezometers to be important due to the steep reclamation slopes. <br />11. On the extreme western edge of the proposed new permit area, as shown on Map 4-1, there is a <br />portion of the Bowie No. 1 mine workings in section 15 that lies immediately east of the <br />proposed new permit boundary. In addition, it is stated in the first paragraph on revised page 2 <br />of Section 2.05 that secondary recovery of pillars and barrier pillars took place. Please <br />demonstrate that the effects of subsidence from these mine workings do not lie outside of the <br />proposed new permit area. <br />12. The Division has not finished its review of the ground water aspects of PR-4. <br />2