To: J. Nelson who wrote (2101 ) 10/19/1999 5:23:00 PM From: Tim Hall Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 2392
J. I never said nor did I mean to imply that there was anything wrong with this permit process. In fact, I said several months ago that they would have to do this and Ga Bard said that they wouldn't because there permit was already up to date. They might be able to do some limited testing but production will have to wait until the permit is approved and that probably won't be this year. Here is the actual text of the message I received from the state. Hi Tim- Thanks for the web site. The old Groundwater Quality Protection Permit is still active but they are still required to obtain an Aquifer Protection Permit (like every other mine that is operating under a GWQPP). They asked for a 120-day extension to their deadline of Sept 10, 1999 to submit an application. On Sept 13, 1999, we denied the 120-day but gave them a 90-day extension under the condition that they submitted 30-day status reports until Dec 10, 1999, which is when the application is due. Their first 30-day staus report was very vague, but it did state that they were "updating some new equipment" (if the equipment is new, then I am not sure what is meant by "updating"). FYI - Once they submit their application, they will be subject to the new Licensing Time Frames Rule. This rule is intended to expedite the review/permitting process - which means both parties (ADEQ and the applicant) are under specific time-frames. On one hand, the rule is applicant-friendly if the applicant is submitting adequate information. On the other hand, if they are not submitting adequate info, inevitably it means the applicant will have fewer opportunities to address the deficiencies prior to the expiration on the time-frames (which may result in denial of the permit and fee forfeitures).