Laserfiche WebLink
3. Did DMG properly reduce the amount of the required Financial Warranty <br /> to reflect the reclamation tasks for which Climax was released from Financial Warranty liability? <br /> 4. Did DMG properly recalculate the amount of Financial Warranty required <br /> for the remaining reclamation tasks for which Climax was not released from Financial Warranty <br /> liability? <br /> 5. Do the limitations and requirements set forth in DMG's February 22, 2001 <br /> letter constitute technical revisions or modifications to the reclamation requirements under <br /> Permit No. M-77-493? If so, did DMG have a valid legal basis and follow required procedures <br /> to modify the reclamation requirements? <br /> 6. There are additional factual and legal issues related to DMG's proposed <br /> change to the required amount of the Financial Warranty under Rule 4.2.1(2)that are not <br /> relevant to the appeal under Rule 4.18, but which Climax may raise at the requested hearing. <br /> The Rules do not require Climax to include these issues in a Statement of Factual and Legal <br /> Issues. <br /> 7. Climax reserves the right to amend this Statement of Factual and Legal <br /> Issues prior to the hearing to reflect additional factual and legal issues that may arise through <br /> further evaluation of this matter. <br />