Laserfiche WebLink
°~ <br />INTERNATIONAL <br />URANIUM ~USA~ <br />CORPORATION <br />Independence Plaza, Suite 950 • 1050 Seventeenth Street • Denver, CO 80265 • 303 628 7798 (main) • 303 389 4125 (fax) <br />December 16, 2003 <br />e~;~~d <br />Bob Oswald G~~, <br />v Environmental Protection Specialist Y ~ p 2~0 <br />Division on Minerals & Geology ~ ~~ pV aofa ~ 3 <br />Department of Natural Resources ~~~', s~o cfp9~F,,rclp~~~ <br />701 Camino del Rio ~ ,~Nt, s ~ cep <br />Durango, CO 81301 ~C ~'~, Z ogy <br />Re: Carnation Mine Permit M-1977-416 tef eso~- 6 Pi1/6~,16 w _Q ~ " <br />Response to December 1Q 2003 E>I~1ail Comments ~o'(Ibaw-v~ , <br />Dear Mr. Oswald: <br />Thank you for reviewing the Carnation Mine, Permit M-1977-416 (the "Permit"), Technical <br />Revision Request, dated November 24, 2003. International Uranium (USA) Corporation (the <br />"Operator") has received the Approval of Technical Revision TR-1, dated December 11, 2003, from <br />the Division of Minerals and Geology (the "Division"). <br />The following information in this letter is provided in response to your e-mail of December 10, <br />2003 regarding the Technical Revision Request and the revised site map for the Carnation Mine. <br />Your questions and comments are presented in italics, and the Operator's responses follow. <br />1. The boundary shown on the newest map is fcne, even though it doesn't include the northern <br />concrete slab. That's a minor item, but I appreciate your committing to include it in the <br />final reclamation. No need to further revise the map or boundary corners. <br />Response: The original Permit boundary was modified slightly under the Request for Technical <br />Revision for Boundary Clarification. This was done to fully encompass all mine-related <br />disturbances under the Permit, and also to match the Permit boundary with the Affected Area _ _ <br />boundary for the Sunday Mine (Permit M-1977-285) immediately to the east. The previously <br />identified Affected Area of 9.76 acres under the Permit was not changed in the boundary <br />clarification. Consequently, encompassing all disturbance areas was a tight fit, resulting in the <br />northern building slab falling just outside the Permit boundary. As noted, the Operator is not <br />attempting to exclude this slab from reclamation, rather the map constraints lead to this minor <br />inconsistency. <br />2. OK for pre-[aw vent hole to remain as is, with no closure requirement. <br />Response: No response. <br />