|
Fifth Adequacy Letter, Amended CN -01
<br />May Day Idaho Mine Complex, M- 1981 -185
<br />Please ensure all portions of the existing 9.9 acres permit area are located within the
<br />new boundary of affected lands. Please submit a corrected Figure D -1 of Attachment D-
<br />2, and Figure F -1.
<br />4. Pursuant to Rules 6.2.1(2), 6.4.3, 6.4.4, and 6.4.6, the application must provide accurate
<br />maps which identify and outline the affected lands of the proposed operation. As
<br />explained below, there are numerous and substantial contradictions in the application
<br />regarding the boundary of affected lands.
<br />a. On page 4 of Exhibit A, Legal Description, the application indicates a 50 foot wide
<br />corridor of affected lands for all access roads. The boundary of affected lands shown
<br />on Figures C -1, C -2, C -3, C -4, C -5, C -6, C -7, D -5, G-1,1-1, U -1 and SWMP -1
<br />consistently delineate the same 50 foot wide road corridor for all access roads and
<br />are in agreement with Exhibit A. All of the maps which agree with Exhibit A and
<br />listed in this paragraph were stamped and signed by a Certified Professional
<br />Geologist.
<br />b. On Figures D -1, D -2, D -1 of Attachment D -2, D -1 of Attachment D -3, D -1 of
<br />Attachment D -4, F -1, F -2, F -3, F -4, and F -5A, the corridor of affected lands for the
<br />access roads are consistently delineated at approximately 100 feet wide. All of the
<br />maps listed in this paragraph were in conflict with Exhibit A and contradicted the
<br />maps listed above in paragraph 4.a. Figures F -1, F -2, F -3, F -4 and F5 -A were
<br />stamped, signed and dated by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer.
<br />c. Attachment D -1 of Exhibit D included approximately 26 engineer drawings prepared
<br />by CLC Associates. According to CLC drawings C4.11, C4.12, C4.13, C4.14, C4.21,
<br />C4.22, C4.23, and C7.00, the corridor of affected lands for the roads is variable and
<br />ranges from approximately 44 feet to 180 feet wide. The engineer drawings
<br />appeared to be in conflict with Exhibit A and the other maps of the application which
<br />delineate a different boundary of affected land for the same road segments. All of
<br />the engineer drawings from CLC Associates were stamped, signed and dated by
<br />Colorado Registered Professional Engineer.
<br />Please correct the inconsistencies identified in paragraphs 4a, b and c.
<br />d. Figure D -1, Environmental Protection Plan, delineated a permit boundary and
<br />boundary of affected lands which is different from all other maps of the application.
<br />Figure D -1 also delineated affected lands located outside of the permit boundary
<br />and on lands owned by Doyle E. Huckabay and the United States of America. The
<br />application did not demonstrate a legal right to enter lands owned by Doyle E.
<br />Huckabay or the United States of America. Pursuant to Rule 6.4.14, the application
<br />is required to describe the source of the Applicant's legal right to enter and initiate a
<br />mining operation on the affected lands. If Figure D - is correct, please revise all
<br />other maps of the application to reflect a consistent boundary and describe the
<br />3
<br />
|