REVISION - 4/20/2009, 11:24:03 AM-JWD

Home Browse Search

FOGNANI &FAUGHT,PLLC Mr. Allen C. Sorenson d,lers a[ Ln;c April 15, 2009 Page 5 C.R.S. § 34-32-103(12); see also MLRB Regulations Section 1.1(43) (employing identical language). The activities described in the Notice of Intent Modification, including the aquifer pumping test, are precisely the type of activities defined as "Prospecting" activities in the statute and regulations. In the case of in situ leach recovery operations, an essential part of "searching for or investigating" the mineral deposit is determining the location, contours, and physical/ geochemical characteristics of the aquifer and geologic substrata, because that information is essential to a determination of the quantity of the mineral deposit as well as a determination whether extraction of the minerals, as and where they are situated, is commercially viable. Moreover, installation and operation of the aquifer pump testing well is necessary to "extract ... samples prior to commencement of development or extraction operations." All of the activities described in the Notice of Intent Modification are related to and necessary for achieving the desired exploration objectives in an effective, safe and environmentally sound manner and in accordance with applicable laws, regulations and industry standards, and thus fit firmly within the definition of "Prospecting." The Western Mining Action Project's claim that the aquifer pumping test is not "Prospecting" but is instead "Development" is based on two fundamental misconceptions. First, the proposed activities do not qualify as "Development" activities, which are defined in the MLRA and regulations as: The work performed in relation to a deposit, following the prospecting required to prove minerals are in existence in commercial quantities but prior to production activities, and aimed at, but not limited to, preparing the site for mining, defining further the ore deposit by drilling or other means, conducting pilot plant operations, constructing roads or ancillary facilities, and other related activities. C.R.S. § 34-32-103(4). As discussed earlier, the work described in the Notice of Intent Modification is work required to search for or investigate the mineral deposit; it is not work intended to prepare the site for mining or in any other way to develop the potential mine. The prospecting activities included in the Notice of Intent Modification simply do not qualify as "Development" activities under the statutory definition. Second, Section 5.1.1(2) of the MLRB Regulations requires DRMS to determine whether an activity is "Prospecting" or "Mining," not whether the activity is "Prospecting" or "Development." The real question, then, is whether the activities conducted under the Notice of Intent are "Mining." The MLRA and MLRB Regulations typically tie the term "Development" to "Extraction." Indeed, the MLRA defines "Mining Operations" as "the development or extraction of a mineral." C.R.S. § 34-32-103(8). By definition, therefore, "Development" is intended to describe the activities necessary for the imminent extraction of the mineral deposit. None of the activities described in the Notice of Intent Modification is related to the imminent extraction of the mineral deposit. Under Section 5.1.1(2) of the MLRB Regulations,