Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver, CO 80203 P 303.866.3567 F 303.832.8106 http://mining.state.co.us <br />John W. Hickenlooper, Governor | Robert Randall, Executive Director | Virginia Brannon, Director <br /> <br />November 2, 2016 <br /> <br />Mr. Jack Henris <br />Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company <br />100 N. Third Street <br />P.O. Box 191 <br />Victor, CO 80860 <br /> <br /> <br />Re: Project, Permit No. M-1980-244; <br /> Technical Revision (TR-82) Preliminary Adequacy Review <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Henris: <br /> <br />On September 6, 2016 the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety received a request for a <br />Technical Revision (TR-82) addressing the following: <br /> <br /> Squaw Gulch Valley Leach Facility Phase II Construction Deferment <br /> <br />The submittal was called complete for the purpose of filing on September 6, 2016. The decision date <br />for TR-82 was extended to November 4, 2016 per CC&V’s request. Please be advised that if you <br />are unable to satisfactorily address any concerns identified in this review before the decision date, it <br />will be your responsibility to request an extension of the review period. If there are outstanding <br />issues that have not been adequately addressed prior to the end of the review period, and no extension <br />has been requested, the Division will deny this Technical Revision (TR). <br /> <br />The following comments are based on the Division’s review of the request for TR-82: <br />1) General Comment. The permittee for the Cresson Project (M-1908-244) is Cripple Creek <br />& Victor Gold Mining Company (CC&VGMC or CC&V). It has come to the Division’s <br />attention that the distinction between this permittee name and Newmont Mining <br />Corporation (Newmont) has become somewhat blurred, especially with transmittal letters <br />being written on Newmont letterhead, although frequently signed by a representative of <br />CC&VGMC. This distinction is important to the Division as our jurisdictional relationship <br />is with the permittee, CC&VGMC, not Newmont. This becomes all the more important <br />when revisions are incorporated into the permit and there are commitments by the operator <br />to perform some task or complete a specific submittal and the permittee is subsequently <br />acquired by another company. Please ensure CC&V/Newmont staff are cognizant of this <br />distinction when making commitments in correspondence, and continue to sign letters as <br />a representative of CC&VGMC. Please state commitments are from CC&VGMC <br />(CC&V) or provide an affidavit that Newmont is authorized to act on behalf of <br />CC&VGMC. Comment #2 below is specific to this issue.