REV99939

• Permit No: C1981022
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 12/27/2001
• Doc Name: Internal memo - adequacy review
• From: J. Dudash
• To: JIM BURNELL
• Type & Sequence: PR4
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

III IIIIIIIIIIIII III
999
STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Deparimem of Natural Resources
1 J 13 Sherman SL, Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
DIVISION OF
MINERALS
GEOLOGY
RECLAMATION
MINING•SAFE TY
DATE: December 27, 2001
Bil I Owens
Governor
Greg E. Watcher
TO: Jim Burnell E*eculive Direcor
Michael B. Long
FROM: Joe Dudash Division Director
RE: Adequacy Review, Permit Revision No. 4, Sanborn Creek Mine, Permit No.
C-81-022, Oxbow Mining, Inc.
I am finished with my review of the December 2001 submittal by Oxbow Mining Inc. (OMLLC)
for PR-04. The following are [he questions that were previously unresolved. The remainder of
the questions from the Division's original adequacy letter have been satisfactorily answered in
previous responses. The numbering of [his memo follows the numbering of the Division's
original adequacy review letter.
9. In Table 2.04-7-T/, on page 2.04-40 of dre PR-04 submittal, the laborarory pruumeters
list for surface water is incomplete. This incomplete parameter list nppnrerrtly occurred
in un earlier tec{nricnl revision and was not caug{rt in the review process. P/ease provide
u reviser! tnhle.
The Division has reached an agreement with OMLLC concerning the hydrologic
monitoring plan.
/0. On PR-04 proposed page 2.04-5/, in Table 2.04-7-T4, and on Mcrp 2.04-M6, no mention
is nrnde of t{te Oliver Steam Electric Punrp venter right. It appears tlrnt this page was
revised in Technical Revision No. 35 and the reference to this water right was reproved
from the table. Please explain why this water right is no longer listed in the table.
The Division received Map 2.04-M6, sheets 1 of 2 and 2 of 2 on August 21, 2001.
However, the two map sheets had unsigned engineer's certifications. When the Division
requested that the engineer's certifications be signed, OMLLC responded that the
information on the maps did not warrant an engineer's certification. The Division finds
this acceptable. For the sake of clarity however, the unsigned engineer's certifications
should be removed from the two maps. Please submit Map 2.04-M6, sheets 1 of 2 and 2
of 2, with the unsigned engineer's certification stamps removed.