Laserfiche WebLink
III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />999 <br />The Corley Company <br />Phone 632-5050 P.O BOw t82i <br />COLORADO SPRINGS. COLO RA00 80901 <br />RECEIVED <br />Mar. 5, 1993 <br />*Ss. Catherine W. <br />Div. of Minerals <br />1313 Sherman St. <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Begej <br />and Geology <br />Dear Ms. Begej: <br />MAR 81993 <br />p~~;g;on of Minerals & Veolo9Y <br />We do not believe your statement that "all changes to pages in DMG <br />permit application must be treated as some form of revision...". We do <br />not believe that changing the liability insurance page each six months <br />for a new certificated, for instance, requires a revision. <br />[de do not believe that our response to question 8 is a revision by any <br />definition. Our response does not change the drainage design. Our <br />response to question 10 is simply the proposed contours of the reclaimed <br />ponds, which post reclamation contours were intended in the original <br />permit and which contours have been obvious to all observers except <br />yourself. As you will remember, we have indicated many times to you at <br />the site how the pond number 2 will be handled. Specifically, there is <br />no design change intended by any of our responses. <br />We are surprised that you agree that <br />have concluded that we shall expect <br />rules, i.e. Section 2.08.3. <br />Sincerely, <br />(.t/ <br />W.D. Corley, <br />President <br />the Mid-term review is late. We <br />the Division to adhere to its own <br />