INSPEC23960

• Permit No: M1977285
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Date: 10/10/2002
• Doc Name: response to inspection
• From: dmg
• To: terry
• Inspection Date: 12/18/2001
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OP MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman $[., Room 21 S
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
October 7, 2002 V
Terry V. Wetz
Director of Project Development
International Uranium (USA) Corporatiori~
Independence Plaza, Suite 950
1050 Seventeenth Street
Denver, CO 80265
~ ~c~~~fi",~'°"9
~rrkrO CT's ?~~
~o/~j~e`g/ay,,y
~~~
"».
DIVISION OF
MINERALS
GEOLOGY
RECLAMATION
MINING•SAFETY
Bill Owens
Governor
Greg E. Walther
Executive Director
Ronald W. Cattany
Acting Division Director
Re: Sunday Mine, Permit M-1977-285, Review of Updated Permit Map (Preliminary), Submitted in Response
to Inspection of 12/18/01.
Dear Mr. Wetz,
I have reviewed the packet of preliminary maps for all the sites affected in the "Sunday Mine Group." Though your
packet included maps and text materials for all five of the separate permit files for the mines in this group, I have
limited this letter to those responses which address the issues associated with the single permitted mine named
above, as well as a few comments about the five sites considered collectively. My responses concerning the other
permitted sites, considered individually, are contained in separate letters.
First, let me thank you for the quality and comprehensiveness of the products you submitted; they are the type of
maps I had hoped would be submitted and I feel they will be of great help in future monitoring and reporting of this
site. The map scales and types of information are appropriate and clearly depicted. I understand the maps were
generated at no small expense, but this depth of endeavor should not have to repeated soon.
With these preliminary maps in-hand, we may now define exactly which of the features shown are to be regarded as
currently disturbed under each of the separate permits, which of the permitted features were disturbed but which
might now be considered reclaimed (though not necessarily "released"), and which of the features may be
considered "pre-law" and not subject to reclamation liability. For the items which are to be included in the
inventory of active (and therefore, permitted) features, these maps will allow us both to begin to document greater
detail concerning an updated, more realistic reclamation cost figure. This will include details about the size or
extent of a feature, its construction or characteristics, and the type of reclamation required in the final plan.
I have tried to number and arrange my responses below in the order of the items in your letter, for ease in your
review. Not all of the following items require a response from you.
1. General Location Mao.
Producing this map was a good idea since, as you know, the spatial relationship of this group of sites cannot readily
be understood on single-permit (or partial-permit) maps, as they have existed until now. It is very helpful for those
permits with remote sites such as vent holes, and the roads and overhead power supply structures associated with
them. You offered to submit a copy of the final version of this map for each of the five permit files, which I
appreciate. I think that the general location map would be most beneficial for this file and perhaps for the West
Sunday file. However, since we maintain duplicate copies of these files (one in both the Denver and Durango