Laserfiche WebLink
C <br />_ :r <br />energy fuels coal, inc. <br />eouNflsltl ml~ro • pwt oHlu h0>< NB • Iloroncs, colorotlo B1?2e • (71Y) 78/-0395 <br />October 23, 1995 <br />Ms. Christine E. Johnston <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />'; : III IIIIII~IIIIIIIII <br />NOV 13 1g95 <br />Division of mmelais a 4:;uicay <br />RE: Pond and Refuse Pile Inspection Reports -Responses to DMG Questions/ Comments <br />dated 7/19/95 and 8/1/95 <br />Southfield Mine -Your File No. C-81-014 <br />Deaz Christine: <br />With this letter and accompanying information, Energy Fuels Coal, Inc (EFCq is responding <br />to your letters referenced above. These responses aze numbered in the same order that <br />appears on your letter. <br />Copies of your letters were provided to the consulting Professional Engineer for his review. <br />We met with the engineer at Southfield on September 11, 1995, during a scheduled quarterly <br />inspection, to review your questions and address the requirements of the inspection. The <br />following responses are provided. <br />Refuse Pile Inspection Reports: <br />1) The engineer inspecting the refuse pile has been inspecting the structure since 1985. <br />He was provided a copy of the Refuse Pile Stability Report (1/14/92) and its attachments, <br />upon approval of TR-14 in June, 1992. Further, he understands the design changes which <br />involved finished slope angles, lift thiclmess, and the layered placement of coarse and fine <br />refuse. <br />The plan referenced in the inspection reports is superseded by the stability report <br />submitted with TR-14. The engineer will modify or delete the language referencing the 1982 <br />report in future inspection reports. <br />2) Mr. Brent's recommendations aze excerpts from the 1992 stability report in Exhibit <br />18. His statements verify that he has reviewed the report. <br />We reviewed these recommendations with Mr. Brent during our September meeting. <br />He indicated that the recommendations do not indicate a wncern with what he observed in the <br />field, but a reminder to EFCI to be aware potential changes in the clay content of refuse <br />material. EFCI has not observed high clay content in the refuse from changes in geology or <br />mining practices. <br />