Laserfiche WebLink
<br />M-97-032/Adequacy letter <br />11/18/98 <br />page 2 <br />Application Item 9 -Contact Information <br />The phone numbers shown here are incorrect or not current. Please provide a corrected or <br />updated contact information page. <br />Exhibit A -Legal Description and Location Map <br />The legal description ofpre-existing disturbance is complete and correct. The exhibit <br />requirements, however, include submittal of the names of the immediately adjacent landowners. <br />The exhibit materials date from the May 1997 application submittal by Energy Fuels Nuclear, and <br />state that the lands are under the control of EFN. It is understood that the application was <br />transferred to IUC, by whom it is now submitted. Whether the claim block itself is now under the <br />control of IUC is not clear. Please submit further information as to the identity of the landowners <br />and/or claimants of all lands to be affected and all lands within 200 feet of affected land. <br />The map shows [he vent shaft on the Rodman 4 claim, and you include a half acre of land for it, <br />but there does not appear to be any existing road access to it. If a road must be constructed for <br />this purpose, it must become part of your permitted acreage. Please continent on this and revise <br />your description if needed. <br />The legal description of the possible location of the future shaft places it on the Curley 3 or 4 <br />claim. Again, if there is currently no road access to this half-acre area, all roads to be constructed <br />must be included as part of the permitted acreage. Please comment or revise as appropriate. <br />Exhibit B -Site Description <br />The vegetation information appears adequate, but there are no soil charactistics included in the <br />exhibit, though that is required. Please submit the soil information (or refer to any existing <br />information already contained in file M-77-287 for this site). <br />Permanent manmade structures are listed with their owners' names. The reference to the onsite <br />strictures being owned (at the time of the 5/97 application) by EFN should be updated if they are <br />now owned by IUC. Amore complete description should be included for each of the onsite <br />structures which will be removed during reclamation, since that will affect the reclamation cost. <br />Also be sure to obtain a damage agreement for each of the structures not owned by IUC, if they <br />are within 200 feet of the area you will affect. <br />Please further describe the drainage control consisting of earthen berms around the toe of the <br />waste dump. Will the berms act to contain all particulates from the ores which are placed on the <br />surface? Are there other structures or practices which will help to contain storntwater nmoff and <br />sediments on the site? (Is any of this infonna[ion in the existing Stormwater Management Permit <br />No. COR-040114, which Umetco holds for the Thunderbolt Group, and which may apply to this <br />portion of the overall permit?) <br />