GENERAL33391 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St., Room 215 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone: (303) 866-3567 FAX: (303) 832-8106 Apri12, 2003 ' Terry V. Wetz Director of Project Development International Uranium (USA) Corp. Independence Plaza, Suite 950 1050 Seventeenth Street ~EC~'~~~ APR 0 92003 Division of Minerals and Geology DIVISION O F MINERALS GEOLOGY RECLAMATION MI NING•SAFETY Bill Owens Governor Greg E. Walther Executive Director Ronald W. Cottony Acting Division Director Denver, CO 80265 Re: Sunday M~, M-1977- 8 ,Revised Maps and Corrective Actions. ~}'~1.~ ~ (r 0 OwWI-Yi~N' I'~ Dear Mr. Wetz, This letter is a follow-up to my 2/14/03 letter to you, which was written in response to the packet of materials you sent to describe several proposed changes to the affected area boundary and to address the corrective actions. This letter seeks to clarify or correct a couple items in my earlier letter. Boundary Chances International Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUC") proposes changes in the boundary of this 112 permit. The set of maps submitted to this office by IUC clearly show these changes, which mainly consist of small departures from the original boundaries so that all existing disturbances which occurred under this permit could be definitively brought inside the new boundary. I had stated that I agree with the proposed changes, though I also asked for a few clarifications from you. IUC is approved for up to 40 acres of disturbance in this permit, and the itemized list of all affected areas shows that there are, indeed, presently 40 acres of disturbance. The points of clarification referred to above could result in slight additional acreage, possibly bringing the total affected area to a figure higher than the approved total. This could be offset by deleting an azea which has not and will not be disturbed under this permit. However, though I accept the direction your revisions propose, these items detailed in my previous letter must be addressed before any boundary change can be approved, and it would be better to include them all so that they may be approved all at once. Pending whatever additional information may be forthcoming in this matter, and after discussion of this matter with staff, I do not view the boundary changes as constituting a formal release of part of the permitted land, nor a formal addition of new land, for reasons explained in the paragraphs below. There have been several ongoing problems with the permit maps, marking of the boundaries, and defining the extent of permitted activities which are subject to reclamation liability. Our past discussions regarding the boundary locations, adequacy of maps, and possible disturbances outside of the perceived boundaries have always included the point that these possible offsite excursions were due to the actions of the previous permitted operator(s) of the site and only came to the Division's attention after IUC succeeded as the permittee in 1997. In addition, the maps available to IUC at the time of the permit transfer did not contain adequate topographic or location information to definitively tie down the exact boundary location. Finally, you stated that certain of the