Laserfiche WebLink
~ ~ III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />STATE OF COLU1~Uv <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman 5t., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 866J567 <br />FA\:1303) 832-8106 <br />July 15, L999 <br />PV R~fC FR UF~cjCE <br />F/~E. ICE ~~PY <br />SITE U - 'Z <br />RECEIVED ~~~``~~ w ~ <br />L\~ <br />DIVISION OF <br />MINERALS <br />GEOLOGY <br />RECLAMATION' <br />MINING•SAFETY <br />Michelle Rehmann <br />International Uranium (USA) Corp. <br />1050 Seventeenth St., Suite 950 <br />Denver CO 80265 <br />IUi- ~ 9 1999 <br />Divlslon of tdlnerah 8 Geology <br />Re: Van 4 Shaft, File No. M-97-032, I l0 Permit Application, Second Adequacy Review Letter. <br />Dear Ms. Rehmann, <br />Bill p.vcns <br />Governor <br />Greg E. Wall her <br />Executive Dirttmr <br />nr~n,el B. Long <br />Division D'veclor <br />I have reviewed the adequacy responses submitted to our office, which were to address the questions raised in our <br />initial review of the above-named application. Your response submittal appears to answer many of the issues <br />contained in our letter to you, but there are still a few which were not addressed, and a couple new items which now <br />appear to need clarification. These are listed below in the order of the application item or exhibit to which they <br />pertain, and identified as to that pertinent part. Items you have responded to and which are not referenced again in <br />this letter are considered at [his time to be adequate. <br />(Please note, while I appreciate the numbered items in the last letter, due to the ordered nature of the application, <br />please identify all responses in your next letter by the exhibit they are intended to address. [request this because <br />your response is not a complete rewriting of the entire application exhibit package. This requested format will <br />allow these follow-up adequacy responses to be more easily integrated into the overall contents of the permit during <br />future review of the permit file, by personnel in our office and possibly yours also.) <br />Application Item 9 -Contact Information <br />The phone numbers shown on the most recently submitted page (received on 10/13/98) aze not current. As noted in <br />my last adequacy review letter, eve must receive a fully updated contact information page. <br />Exhibit B -Site Description <br />Soil resources are not clearly described in your application or in your recent response. In addition to simply <br />naming the soils, please provide their descriptions and a map showing their distribution if necessary. Research of <br />the existing permit file for the Thunderbolt Group (Permit No. M-77-287, of which the Van 4 Shaft site is still a <br />part), contains general information from a 1972 survey, which may or may not still be accurate, but which does not <br />appear to correlate to the soil names you recently submitted. Please clarify. If assistance is needed, you might <br />consider contacting the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service office in Norwood, phone 970/327-424. <br />Permanent man-made structures were inspected by the Division on l/13/99, and most of them were described to <br />some extent in that inspection report. Your response submittal included a statement about the Division's <br />inspection, but does not provide any additional specific information. There are some details about a few of the <br />listed structures, however, which were not known or noted at the time of the inspection, and were therefore not <br />included as details within the text of that report. Since these were not provided in your response as requested, [his <br />office will use its best estimate when necessary for bond calculation purposes. I must interpret your reference to <br />the Division's report, and absence of specific detail about certain structures in your response, to constitute your <br />acceptance of the Division's measurements, assessments or estimates related to the onsite structures. <br />