Laserfiche WebLink
~ ~ III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />STATE OF COLUI~vv <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Deparlmeni of Nilural Resources <br />11U Sherman SL, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorodo 80203 <br />Phone (3071 866-356; <br />FAX. 13031 832~A106 <br />November IS, 1998 <br />Ms. Michelle Rehmann <br />Internation Uranium (USA) Corp. <br />1010 Seventeenth St., Suite 950 <br />Denver CO 80265 <br />RECEIVED D~,;~V`~ ~'~ <br />Division of Minerals 8 Geo~~F' ~~ q} COp~, DEPARTMENT OF <br />T~, v l d ~ L NATURAL <br />Per~+; ~ ~`^- 4-- S RESOURCES <br />~PP~TCa rah ~./ ' Rov Romer <br />/-D `~1Q Governor <br />Y <br />lames S. Lochhrad <br />E~ecuove Director <br />Michael B Lung <br />Division Direcbr <br />Re: Van 4 Shafr, File No. M-97-032, Technical Adequacy Review Letter. <br />Dear Ms. Rehmann, <br />Your last submittal, of the items required for the above-named permit application to be found <br />complete, has been received. You were sent a letter dated 11/3/95 notifying you of that, plus that <br />the Division's decision date on the application is set for 12/3/98. Please ensure that you have <br />published the required notice and mailed notices to all adjacent owners of property. <br />I phoned yoLl last week to discuss the decision date. I left a message regarding the possibility of <br />you waiving the right to a 30-day decision (meaning a request f'or an extension of the decision <br />date). My call to you was made after amining-related incident was reported to our office, which <br />incident could possibly demand your full and timely attention, thereby giving responses to this 30- <br />day review a lower priority. Since I received tto response to that call, I atn reiterating my concern <br />herein, which is that a lack of timely response could cause the denial of the application. <br />I have included in this letter numerous items which must be answered or claritied before the <br />Division can approve the application. Please note that if no timely response is received from you, <br />or the response is inadequate, ttte Division's decision will have to be to deny this application. <br />Also, Xve received a letter from Montrose County, dated 8/13/98, which included concerns about <br />the application materials. The topics of concern appear to fall within the purview of the Division. <br />Since we have no record of a written response from you or resolution of the concerns, eve will <br />include those concerns in our adequacy review. If your responses are satisfactory to the Division, <br />Montrose County stated that there will be no formal written objection filed. <br />Most of the specific area in your application is already included in the permitted acreage for a <br />permit called the Thunderbolt Group, permit no. M-77-257, operated by Umetco. <br />My questions and concerns are listed below in the order of the application item or exhibit to <br />which they pertain. <br />