Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDERR-2024-007727 SOUTHWEST JORDAN VALLEY GROUND WATER CLEANUP PROJECT NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE TRUSTEE PUBLIC HEARING _____________________________________________________ TAKEN AT: West Jordan City Hall Council Chamber 8000 South Redwood Road West Jordan, Utah DATE: September 10, 2003 TIME: 6:58 p.m. REPORTED BY: Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR 1 SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 6:58 P.M. 2 P R O C E E D I N G S 3 MS. NIELSON: I want to welcome you here 4 tonight. Thank you ahead of time for taking the time, 5 and having the interest in this proposal to decide to 6 take time from your very busy schedules to be with us 7 this evening. 8 My staff, and I, and members of the 9 Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District, and 10 Kennecott, very much appreciate the opportunity to 11 talk to you about the proposal that we're gonna be 12 discussing tonight, and have an opportunity to answer 13 your questions and receive your comments and feedback. 14 Perhaps I can tell you just a little bit 15 about how we're going to proceed tonight, and then we 16 can do a few introductions and move into the 17 presentation itself. We're gonna take a few minutes 18 to look at a PowerPoint presentation, some of which 19 you've already viewed on the documents, the maps 20 around the hall here. 21 We'll talk about the proposal, what it's 22 designed to do, how the process is going to move 23 forward, and what the result will be in terms of the 24 work that Kennecott and Jordan Valley are proposing to 25 do. 2 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 We'll take an opportunity for a few 2 minutes of clarifying questions, just to make sure 3 that everybody understands the proposal. And if we 4 need to resolve or be a little bit more clear about 5 any part of it, that we have a chance to do that. And 6 then we're going to go to a public comment period. 7 And I'll talk about that a little bit more when we get 8 to that point. 9 Before we begin tonight, though, I'd like 10 to introduce a few of the individuals who you're going 11 to be hearing from and who've been working on this 12 project. First of all I'd like to introduce Doug 13 Bacon from my staff, who's right over there against 14 the wall. 15 Doug is a member of the Division of 16 Environmental Response Remediation for the Department 17 of Environmental Quality. And he is an individual who 18 if you have any questions, want to talk to someone at 19 the Department, if you can't reach me you should feel 20 free to ask for Doug when you call the general number. 21 I want to introduce Paula Doughty from 22 Kennecott. Paula will be making part of the 23 presentation this evening on the proposal. And John 24 Cherry, also from Kennecott. And Richard Bay, with 25 Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District. 3 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 I also want to extend my thanks to Mayor 2 Holladay for the opportunity to meet here this evening 3 in the City Hall and take advantage of the facilities 4 here. And also for the City's willingness to be the 5 repository for the documents that are the basis for 6 the plan that we're gonna be talking about this 7 evening and receiving public comment upon. 8 As you are aware, this is an opportunity 9 to learn about and to provide comment on a groundwater 10 clean-up plan. An opportunity to remove contaminants 11 from groundwater in the southwest portion of the 12 Jordan Valley, and provide that water to the public at 13 municipal-quality drinking water standards for their 14 use. 15 Under a Consent Decree that was signed in 16 1995 the Trustee for natural resource damage, myself, 17 was provided with a plan that the Court approved. And 18 that's the plan to which the proposal that we'll be 19 reviewing tonight was directed. It's the opportunity 20 to meet the requirements of the objectives of that 21 Consent Decree, and to provide clean drinking water 22 for the citizens within the affected area. 23 With that, I think we'll start with the 24 presentation. This is a map -- a general map of the 25 area that we're going to be talking about. You can 4 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 see the cities of West Jordan, South Jordan, Riverton, 2 and Herriman identified here. 3 The two plumes are outlined in -- or 4 colored in light blue. And the concentrations here 5 are sulphate concentrations. The blue being the least 6 contaminated groundwater in terms of sulphate, and the 7 red core being the more contaminated or most 8 contaminated portion of the groundwater. This is the 9 area we're going to be talking about tonight. 10 As part of the Consent Decree that Judge 11 Green approved in 1995 there were specific 12 requirements that Kennecott was directed to meet and 13 that were part of the settlement agreement that was 14 approved. 15 But there was also a provision of funding 16 to enable the Trustee to ensure that these 17 requirements or conditions were met. And in September 18 of 1995 those two components of the financial 19 assurance totaled $37 million. 20 The first of those was a letter of credit 21 for 28 million, an Irrevocable Letter of Credit to the 22 Trustee. And that letter of credit increases at a 7 23 percent rate annually, and has since 1995. 24 The second portion of the financial 25 assurance was a cash amount that was provided to the 5 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 Trustee, which has been held by the state of Utah, has 2 also been interest bearing, and that amount initially 3 was $9 million. It was designed and specifically 4 designated separately to compensate for the lost-use 5 portion of the water that had been damaged. 6 Today, September of 2003, the Irrevocable 7 Letter of Credit is worth $48.1 million, and the 8 lost-use payment, with interest, is worth 13.2 9 million. So at this point the Trustee has $61.3 10 million to go to this project. And you'll learn more 11 about how that's going to be used in the presentation 12 this evening, and also in the documents that are 13 available for public comment. 14 At this time I'd like to turn the project 15 discussion over to Paula. I'd like to invite you as 16 you are listening, if you have questions, to consider 17 those when we come to the end of Paula and Richard's 18 presentation. We'll be happy to try and clarify some 19 of those questions. 20 But if at any time you can't hear what 21 we're saying, please don't hesitate to raise your 22 hand, so that we can be more clear in the 23 presentation. Thank you very much. 24 MS. DOUGHTY: I'm gonna use the -- can 25 you all hear me okay without this? Can you hear back 6 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 there in the back? Okay, great. In the mid 1990s 2 Kennecott joined forces with the Jordan Valley 3 Conservancy District and actually formed a 4 partnership, where we basically are seeking to use all 5 portions of the trust fund on a joint proposal. 6 And that's what we're here to talk about 7 today is this joint proposal that we have -- that we 8 have provided to the state Trustee. This joint 9 proposal we planned and -- I hope I can get this thing 10 to work -- to fulfill all the obligations under the 11 NRD Consent Decree that Dr. Nielson mentioned, as well 12 as all of our CERCLA obligations. 13 This is a list of the obligations and the 14 commitments that we're gonna make with this proposal. 15 And that is that we will be extracting the 16 contaminated groundwater from the acid plume on a 17 five-year rolling average of 400 acre feet per year. 18 And that is what was set in the Consent 19 Decree. As you see, as I get into this a little bit 20 further you'll see what we truly are attacking at the 21 moment, which is above and beyond this requirement. 22 We also are fulfilling the completion of 23 all the source controls -- and I'm gonna as well get 24 into that in a minute -- producing 8,235 acre feet of 25 municipal-quality water that will go back to the 7 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 affected communities. 2 That water will be extracted from the 3 plumes, from the Zone A and Zone B plumes, that we'll 4 talk about here in a minute. And that water will be 5 delivered to the affected communities through the 6 Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District, who is the 7 purveyor of municipal quality water. 8 We also will be containing the sulphate 9 groundwater plume on Kennecott property at 1,500 10 milligrams per liter. And we also have committed to 11 prevent the reduce or spread of the aquifer 12 contamination. 13 Again, just to get you -- make sure that 14 you fully understand where we are, this is the Oquirrh 15 Mountains over here to the west, as you are looking 16 from the valley. That is the Jordan River right 17 there. 18 And for those of you that kind of know 19 the area, that is the town of Copperton located right 20 here with the large Kennecott Bingham pit. 21 Butterfield Canyon here, with Butterfield Creek going 22 to the south here. 23 The sources of the two plumes that we 24 have, the A and B plume, primarily from historic 25 reservoirs that were constructed. In 1930 -- in the 8 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 1930s Kennecott constructed a series of evaporation 2 ponds located right here. And they are the primary 3 source for the Zone B plume. 4 And in 1965 some Bingham reservoirs were 5 constructed right there also, at kind of the mouth of 6 Bingham Canyon. And that was used basically to manage 7 processed leach waters as well as acidic storm waters 8 for -- you know, from 1965 through 1991. 9 The Bingham Reservoir, as well as the 10 evaporation ponds, were built to the standards of the 11 time back in the '30s and the '60s. But unfortunately 12 back then, to tell you the truth, the Clean Water Act 13 was not around, the regulations weren't around. 14 And, to tell you the truth, they just -- 15 they were not -- even though they were built to the 16 standards of the day, they obviously did leak and are 17 the source of the contamination that we're here to 18 talk about today. 19 The characteristics of the plume, the 20 Zone A plume is characterized -- this red area here is 21 primarily what we call the acidic -- the acidic core 22 of the plume. It has a pH between 3 1/2 and 4 1/2. 23 And it has sulfates of greater than 20,000 milligrams 24 per liter. The outer blue contour there is what has 25 been defined as the affected area, and that has 9 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 sulfates of 500 milligrams per liter. So anything 2 above 500 is to the interior of the blue. 3 The Zone B plume has substantially lower 4 sulfates, does not have the characteristics of acidity 5 to it. It averages roughly 750 milligrams per liter 6 of sulphate there for the Zone B plume. Next. 7 The source control activities that 8 Kennecott completed, in the mid 1990s Kennecott built 9 a series of cutoff walls. And what those are 10 basically are dams and 26 drainages off of the Oquirrh 11 Mountains. And all the drainages are the waste rock 12 routes that were on the, you know, on the left-hand 13 side, and that's what you see when you look to the 14 west. 15 Built these dams that go down into 16 bedrock. And as water is collected in the alluvium it 17 is -- it is brought back into Kennecott and captured 18 by those cutoff walls and brought back into 19 Kennecott's system. The waste rock collection system 20 was upgraded in the mid 1990s, and those cutoff walls 21 were constructed then. 22 The large Bingham reservoir, they were 23 actually taken out of service in 1991 and replaced 24 with the small Bingham reservoirs. And then 25 constructed the larger Bingham reservoirs that have a 10 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 triple-liner system with leak detection systems. You 2 know, state-of-the-art reservoir at this point, 3 with -- as well as with monitoring around it. 4 And then also we took out the South 5 Jordan evaporation ponds. And then we as well -- 6 historically, leaching has been going on on the waste 7 rock dumps since, I believe 1912, something like that. 8 And we terminated that active leaching in September of 9 2000. And then obviously there's been a tremendous 10 amount of soil removal, many projects that have gone 11 on over the last 10 to 15 years. 12 The three main components of the proposal 13 that we're presenting today are, as we mentioned, 14 two -- basically two plans that are going to address 15 the two plumes that we've got. We're going to be 16 constructing two reverse osmosis treatment plants. 17 And for those that don't know, reverse 18 osmosis, or osmosis, is basically kind of a selective 19 movement of water across a membrane whereby the -- you 20 are able to contain -- I don't know if that's the 21 right word -- but anyway, keep the contaminants on one 22 side of the membrane, and the water flows through to 23 where you get a purified water coming out. 24 And the Zone A plant is funded by 25 Kennecott and the District, and it will be owned and 11 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 operated and constructed on by Kennecott. It will 2 produce 3,500 acre feet per year of municipal quality 3 water for water rights that are owned by Kennecott. 4 The Zone B plant as well is going to be 5 funded by Kennecott and the District. And when 6 Richard gets up he's gonna show a little bit more of 7 the finances associated with this proposal. It will 8 be owned and operated by Jordan Valley. It actually 9 is located at their current site. 10 It's adjacent to their current site down 11 at 8200 South and 1300 West there, as well as where 12 they will be constructing the Zone B plant. And it as 13 well will be producing 3,500 acre feet per year of 14 municipal water. It will be utilizing water rights 15 that are currently owned by the Jordan Valley 16 Conservancy District. 17 There also is a component which we call 18 the lost use. Whenever you are treating a water with 19 reverse osmosis there is a portion that is lost in the 20 treatment process that you are not -- if you put 21 8,000, you know, acre feet of water into a plant, 22 8,000 feet of good quality water does not come out. 23 There is a portion of the -- basically 24 the contaminant that is a waste by-product that is 25 lost to the treatment process. And to address that 12 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 loss of that additional increment, the lost-use 2 component will be picked up in the Zone B plant. And 3 Richard is gonna get into that as well. 4 The lost-use component actually will 5 produce anywhere from 1,235 to 2,300 acre feet per 6 year of water that also will be delivered out to the 7 affected communities. 8 This is a chart -- this is primarily -- 9 this is not primarily, this is the Zone A RO 10 filtration, with the quality of water that we're going 11 to be producing out of the Zone A RO plant. And these 12 are the drinking water standards here. And as you can 13 see everything is well below, if not significantly 14 below, the drinking water standards out there. 15 The by-product, or the waste that I 16 talked about, this is the quality of that water. That 17 water will be going to Kennecott's tailings line and 18 will be deposited in the tailings impoundment. Our -- 19 we currently discharge -- or have a permit to 20 discharge off of our tailings impoundment. 21 It's a seasonal discharge, depending 22 on -- primarily on rainfall and spring runoff and 23 things like that. When we do discharge, these are the 24 permit limits that -- that the State of Utah Division 25 of Drinking -- or Division of Water Quality has set 13 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 with us. And as you can see, the by-product from the 2 RO plant is substantially below our permit limits. 3 This is the -- this is the location of 4 the Zone A reverse osmosis treatment plant. What 5 we're doing is using the shell of a demonstration 6 plant that was constructed several years ago, and 7 we're now going in and putting the RO skids and 8 membranes within this plant. 9 This is looking west. You can see 10 Kennecott's waste rock dumps in the background there. 11 And it's located there at the mouth of Bingham Canyon, 12 just to the south of Bingham Canyon. 13 Again, this is a more crude picture of 14 the two plumes, the Zone A and the Zone B plumes, with 15 the infrastructure that's in place. And I'm gonna 16 talk a little bit about the Zone A, and we'll defer 17 the Zone B discussion to Richard. 18 These are the -- Kennecott has been 19 extracting through two wells, and actually a third 20 well. These are case 60 and 109 in our sulphate well 21 here. We have historically, since the 1960s, been 22 extracting from these wells for our process. We've 23 been actually bringing it to the concentrator and 24 utilizing that water in our system. 25 Those are what -- those are the wells 14 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 that we will be diverting to the reverse osmosis 2 treatment plants to produce the drinking water. We, 3 as well, have installed -- in 1997 installed an acid 4 well to take out that core acid component that I 5 talked about that was red on that original map there. 6 That water will be extracted at a rate of 7 about 1,500 gallons per minute and go to our tailings 8 line, here, for discharge down to the tailings 9 impoundment, which is located off the plant up to the 10 north there. The tailings that come out of the 11 Bingham pit primarily are neutralizing that, 12 neutralizing, and therefore it has a capacity to 13 neutralize the acidic water that we will be extracting 14 out of that. 15 For periods of time when it does not have 16 that capacity, and it's heavily monitored, we will be 17 supplementing with one and just basically be adding 18 and treating the water there. But on the whole 19 primarily that water -- the tailings itself acts in 20 itself to treat those tailings. 21 This is the location of the Zone A RO 22 plant, right there. And I guess that's -- that's it. 23 And then obviously the product water will end up 24 heading to the east and to the District's distribution 25 system. 15 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 The actions that we've completed to date 2 is that we have completed all the source controls that 3 I discussed a few minutes ago. We've also been 4 extracting the sulphate contaminated water to the tune 5 of about 3,200 gallons per minute. As I indicated, we 6 have been utilizing that water in our process for many 7 years. 8 And this water will start, oh, actually 9 by the end of this year a portion of this will be 10 going to the RO plant for treatment. But will not -- 11 we'll still be bringing it into our system, and 12 probably not until 2005 will it actually be delivered 13 to the District. 14 We've been extracting the acid plume. 15 The current extraction rate is about 1,500 gallons per 16 minute. That second acid level, it brought us up to 17 that level, that rate, only within about a month 18 and-a-half, two months ago. 19 That 1,500 gallons per minute is 6 times 20 the NRD requirement, as I mentioned before, that 400 21 acre feet over a 5-year rolling average. This 1,500 22 gallons is 6 times that requirement and that 23 obligation. 24 In doing so we have, over the last year, 25 removed 98 million pounds of sulphate from the 16 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 contaminated aquifer. And that has allowed, at this 2 point, a significant reduction in sulphate 3 concentrations in the majority of the plume. So we 4 are already seeing some contraction of the plume, the 5 Zone A plume itself, because we have been doing these 6 extractions up here that I've mentioned. 7 Over the past couple years we have 8 completed pilot testing for both Zone A and Zone B on 9 the RO plant. We submitted the remedial design to the 10 state Trustee and the EPA in December of 2002. And 11 then also, as I mentioned, we have already started the 12 construction of the Zone A RO plant. 13 And we anticipate by the end of this year 14 that we will be about 50 percent passing on line for 15 the Zone A RO plant by the end of this year. And with 16 that, I'll turn it over to Richard. 17 MS. NIELSON: If anyone in the back is 18 interested in a seat, there are a few more right up 19 here in front. 20 MR. BAY: I would now like to talk to you 21 about the Zone B portions of this plan and the 22 lost-use portions. Can you all hear me okay with this 23 microphone? This slide shows the location of the 24 combined treatment plant that will treat the deep Zone 25 B groundwater and the shallow lost-use water. 17 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 This is in West Jordan, with the Jordan 2 River in the background. It will be this vacant site, 3 currently acquired by Jordan Valley Water Conservancy 4 District, at about 8300 South. The process will -- 5 will be a reverse osmosis process. 6 The deep groundwater will be collected 7 from seven deep wells that are shown on this map: A 8 row of five wells on 13th West, from 114th South to 9 about 8700 South, and then two additional 10 high-producing wells in the center of this Zone B 11 plume, shown here at about 110th South and about 102nd 12 South. 13 And you can see the collection pipelines 14 in white that collect these pipelines on 27th West and 15 on 13th West streets, up to this treatment plant site 16 at about 8300 South and 10th West. 17 Also at that plant, through a separate 18 process but in the same building, and compatible, will 19 be the lost-use treatment portion. And that will 20 result from a series of five shallower riverbank 21 filtration wells located in the shallow Jordan River 22 aquifer area in the Jordan River Valley. 23 The treated water will be conveyed along 24 7800 South into the Jordan aqueduct, a large-diameter 25 treated-water pipeline on 3200 West. The by-product 18 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 water will be discharged northward, probably on 13th 2 West, to 29th South and the Jordan River. 3 On this map also are shown existing water 4 facilities that will be used for distribution of the 5 treated water. In the Zone A area the treated water, 6 as Paula showed, from the plant will be discharged 7 through this finish-water pipeline to this 8 3-million-gallon storage tank on 102nd South and 70th 9 West. 10 And will be delivered, through this 11 Jordan Valley pipeline system on 102nd South, to West 12 Jordan and South Jordan Cities, southward on 5600 West 13 in this major transmission pipeline, to South Jordan 14 and Herriman Cities, and stored in this tank. 15 And then also delivered in these areas to 16 Riverton City. And -- and then deliveries to existing 17 meter stations on the Jordan aqueduct to South Jordan 18 and West Jordan Cities. And so there's substantial 19 infrastructure, with storage and pumping, available to 20 serve these four affected cities. 21 The process is -- will look like this on 22 the inside. Paula talked about the reverse osmosis 23 process, such as this plant that exists in Brighton, 24 Colorado that's quite similar, treating groundwater. 25 Including some pressure vessels with membranes, that 19 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 Paula talked about, that separate at the ionic level, 2 at the molecular level almost, the salts and the 3 minerals to produce a very pristine stream and a more 4 saline by-product stream. 5 This chart shows the -- some important 6 water quality parameters of that treatment. A series 7 of trace metals are shown, with the product water -- 8 that's the treated water -- having non-detectable 9 levels. 10 Probably two of the more important 11 parameters, to give you a feel for the quality of this 12 water, are sulphate -- the main contaminant that's 13 being removed -- being reduced to 56 parts per 14 million, or milligrams per liter. And total dissolved 15 solids, or an indication of the total salinity and 16 mineral concentration -- shown as TDS here -- at 250 17 parts per million. 18 That means that that water quality is 19 returned to a quality that's comparable to the more 20 pristine Provo River and Weber River sources that 21 Jordan Valley imports into the valley, and the 22 southeastern and eastern groundwater -- deep 23 groundwater sources in the Salt Lake Valley. 24 The by-product -- this is the lost -- 25 this is the lost-use smaller stream that has the 20 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 higher concentrations. And compared with the permit 2 limits for discharging to the Jordan River at 29th 3 South, you can see that those limits are met. Again, 4 the important parameters are the sulfates and the 5 total dissolved solids at just a bit above 8,000 parts 6 per million. 7 The next one is similar for the lost use, 8 the shallow groundwater. And again, very comparable 9 non-detectable metals. Again, the sulfates just above 10 50 parts per million. The total dissolved solids 11 mineral signature of 250, and very comparable 12 by-product. The lost use that is discharged to the 13 north and replaced through the shallow treated water. 14 The Zone A water, 3,500 acre feet treated 15 per year, will have a subsidized price, originally in 16 the range of 15 to 20 percent below normal market 17 prices, as a result of the trust fund contributions. 18 And that will be allocated to the four affected cities 19 to distribute to the affected public in this manner. 20 These allocations to West Jordan, South 21 Jordan, Riverton, and Herriman Cities have been 22 calculated based on a series of evaluations of 23 population, of surface area, of municipal rights 24 impacted, and -- those are the important parameters. 25 The allocations are broken up in these 21 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 volumes of acre feet per year and at these flow rates, 2 fairly steady flow rates, through the year. This will 3 be a great benefit to the four cities in terms of 4 lower-priced water to -- to supplement their sources. 5 The Zone B water and the lost-use water 6 will also have a cost efficiency, with the trust fund 7 bringing it down to the current pricing structure. 8 And Jordan Valley will deliver Zone B, Zone A, and 9 lost-use waters through contracts to the four cities, 10 which are all member agencies of Jordan Valley 11 already. 12 The schedule that we're pursuing that is 13 intended in the project is to, after the public 14 hearings tonight, and during this month and the 15 information time period, assuming that -- Trustee 16 approval and the agreements are also approved by 17 Kennecott and the District in the fourth quarter of 18 this year, then design and construction would 19 immediately begin. With completion of the Zone A 20 facilities in 2005 later in the year, and completion 21 of the Zone B and lost-use facilities early in 2007. 22 I'd like to talk to you now about 23 benefits, to the public, of the project. There are a 24 series of benefits that are required specifically in 25 the Consent Decree, and those are shown here. There 22 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 must be a treatment of contaminated groundwater. A 2 minimum of 8,235 acre feet of treated water must be 3 produced annually, at a municipal high quality, to a 4 local water purveyor. And that is accomplished in 5 this project. 6 It must provide a sustainable, at least 7 40 year, water supply to the affected municipalities. 8 And it must prevent and reduce the spread of 9 contamination in the groundwater aquifers. It must 10 restore the natural resource, the groundwater, to 11 the -- for the benefit of the affected municipalities. 12 And this project also accomplishes the purpose of 13 restoring the lost use resulting from the by-product 14 or concentrate discharge from demineralization. 15 I'd like to talk to you now about some -- 16 some of the benefits that will accrue to the public 17 that go beyond those required specifically in the 18 Consent Decree. And these are possible because of the 19 efficiencies that are built into this project by 20 Kennecott and the District, and negotiated with the 21 Trustee. 22 This project will contribute land and 23 water rights for the -- both Zones A and B and lost 24 use; lands owned by Kennecott and the District, and 25 water rights by Kennecott and the District. There is 23 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 an integration of this project with the Federal EPA 2 Cleanup or Remediation Program under CERCLA. And 3 there's an efficiency in handling that remediation in 4 the Zone A area with this entire Zone A/Zone B 5 project. 6 There is a water quality enhancement 7 beyond the 500 parts per million salinity quality 8 that's specifically required by the Consent Decree, to 9 bring the water dawn to a more pristine 250 parts per 10 million. 11 And the use of Jordan Valley's existing 12 and future water supplies and treatment facilities 13 provide a backup. In case of temporary failure or 14 down time of Zone B, or lost use, there's a commitment 15 to provide those waters from other sources and also 16 backup treatment facilities. 17 Another very intriguing benefit is the 18 funding of the project. While there is a substantial 19 amount of money in the trust fund, $61.3 million, 20 shown here broken up into two components under a 21 letter of credit and under a lost-use cash portion 22 shown here; there are additional funds, $19.3 million 23 provided by Kennecott and $23.3 million provided by 24 the District, over the construction and the full 40 25 years of operation, to bring this to a funding of 24 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 $103.9 million in today's dollars. 2 Additional benefits will include use of 3 existing infrastructure, including storage, pumping 4 stations, pipelines, to distribute this immediately to 5 the affected municipalities. There is a commitment by 6 Kennecott to accept and convey and dispose of the 7 by-product streams, the concentrates, from Zone A and 8 also Zone B, if needed, later in the project in the -- 9 in their tailings pipeline, tailings impoundment. 10 There is the experience that Jordan 11 Valley has in operating water systems and treatment 12 plants to bring to the project, and to -- also there 13 is the -- there is the benefit of no return on 14 investment, since this will be operated by a public 15 agency that's not for profit. 16 There also will be a benefit, as we see 17 it, to gain some experience in reverse osmosis 18 membrane technology treatment as -- so that that 19 benefit will accrue as we grow into another million 20 people in this valley over the next two and-a-half 21 decades. And we foresee that technology need in many 22 other areas to meet those growing demands. 23 Some of the other issues, or the 24 important issues that have been raised and have been 25 considered during the formulation of this project, are 25 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 shown here. One of the issues that has arisen is the 2 question of the impact to the shallow groundwater 3 system. Especially in the Jordan River Valley area, 4 where the five lost-use riverbank filtration wells 5 will operate. 6 And some recent modeling and studies have 7 shown fairly modest impact in drawdown and a -- the 8 Jordan River operating as a boundary condition to 9 prevent effects east of the Jordan River. The 10 principal or the deep aquifer groundwater level impact 11 has been an item of concern and much discussion with 12 the cities. 13 The modeling that Kennecott has provided 14 has shown fairly modest drawdown amounts after 40 15 years in the Zone B area. They've shown some more 16 extensive drawdowns in the Zone A area, which are a 17 result of the remediation and the capture of the 18 higher concentration plume areas. And in discussions 19 with the State Engineer, this seems to be a good 20 trade-off with the benefits of remediation and 21 containing and contracting the plume. 22 Potential migration to areas beyond the 23 plume's current location has been a concern. 24 Groundwater modeling projected over the next 40 years 25 also shows the ability to contract both the Zone A and 26 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 the Zone B plumes substantially, and to make 2 substantial removal of sulfates and contaminants over 3 the 40-year life of this project. 4 By-product discharge, that lost use, the 5 more saline stream requires discharge and has been a 6 concern. It's been -- permits have been accomplished 7 that are within current permitting structures, both 8 for the Zone A discharge into the tailings pipeline 9 on -- through the Oquirrh Mountains area, and for the 10 Zone B and lost use, through permitting, to the Jordan 11 River. 12 Dianne, I think that's a fairly good 13 summary of the project. 14 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much, Paula 15 and Richard. Are there any questions or 16 clarifications that we can provide before we go to 17 public comment? 18 Okay, perhaps if you could come up the 19 aisle and I can give you the microphone, then everyone 20 can hear your question. 21 AUDIENCE MEMBER: As you mentioned, the 22 potential impact on the shallow wells and the deep 23 water wells is you start with product -- project and 24 begin drawing the water out of the wells. There's 25 very possibly some individual personal wells in 27 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 unincorporated areas and city wells that will be 2 affected. 3 You said a modest impact on them. Could 4 you give more detail on what you suspect that would 5 be? And if there are any wells that are ruined 6 because of the project, is there any provisions to 7 help the individual or the municipality replace that 8 well? 9 MS. DOUGHTY: I'll take that. If you 10 look here to the Exhibit 3 to left, these were -- 11 (Ms. Doughty was asked to speak up 12 for the benefit of the record.) 13 MS. DOUGHTY: Anyway, these are models of 14 the aquifer drawdown that are expected over the 15 40-year life of the project. And both of these are 16 models through 2047. If you can, it's somewhat hard 17 to see here, but this area in gray is Kennecott Utah 18 Copper property here, with the primary extractions 19 that we have, you know, here on our property for both 20 the sulphate and the acid plumes. 21 As you can see, here around the 22 extractions that we currently have we will be seeing a 23 substantial drawdown. In fact, up to the tune of over 24 100 feet of drawdown there on Kennecott property. 25 Over the 40 year life what we have done is gone to the 28 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 Cities of Riverton and West Jordan and discussed with 2 them -- they are the primary extractors in the area 3 from their wells here in Riverton and West Jordan -- 4 we discussed with them what we would expect to see of 5 their extractions over the life of the project. 6 Where we have a little bit -- which 7 actually doesn't have a whole lot of difference in the 8 drawdown -- but Riverton, they've given us a number of 9 roughly 4,300 acre feet per year is what they plan on 10 extracting, which we put into the model. 11 As well as West Jordan currently is 12 extracting about 4,000 acre feet per model. But that 13 is our -- some of the data points that have gone into 14 the model. That is modeled with -- with West Jordan 15 actually reducing their extraction rate. 16 All of Kennecott property here, we are 17 expecting to see in this zone here anywhere, over the 18 40 year life, anywhere from 20 to 30 feet of drawdown, 19 or a lowering of the aquifer level there in this area 20 here. And obviously where West Jordan is doing their 21 primary extractions, we're seeing quite a bit of a 22 drawdown in that location as well. 23 There has been a contingency plan that's 24 been developed. Over the life of the project, for the 25 last five years at least, there's been a Technical 29 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 Review Committee that was established early on. And 2 that includes members of the local communities, 3 members of the local governments, as well as the 4 regulatory communities, environmental groups. 5 And we've gone through -- so this process 6 is something that has been worked on through a whole 7 group of people over the last many years. This 8 isn't -- this isn't a project that, to tell you the 9 truth, that Kennecott and the Jordan Valley 10 Conservancy District actually developed. It is a 11 project that a large group of people, with a lot of 12 expertise, and experience, and knowledge, pulled 13 together. 14 And the contingency plan that was 15 developed, that again has been reviewed by the 16 Technical Review Committee, is such that -- and if you 17 want to -- there's actually a slide that we can touch 18 on. 19 The contingency plan is such that, when a 20 third-party person that believes that he's having an 21 impact to his wells, comes to either Kennecott, the 22 Department of Environmental Quality, or the State 23 Engineer with a complaint or an issue. And, as a 24 group, those three entities will basically be 25 evaluating the quality and the quantity. Depending on 30 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 what, you know, what the concern is, whether it's a 2 quality or a drawdown issue. 3 There's several factors that will be 4 looked at. Obviously the seniority of the water 5 rights. I think one of the unfortunate things is 6 that, probably many of you know, since the mid 1980s 7 there's been a significant drawdown and decrease in 8 the water level areas throughout the southwest Jordan 9 Valley that are not associated with the remediation 10 activities. 11 And I guess one of the complexities of 12 this issue is that there -- the evaluation will have 13 to determine, you know, where -- what is the 14 incremental increase and impact that Kennecott's 15 remediation activities are having on that drawdown 16 that has been occurring. 17 The Basin has been over procreated since 18 of 1970s or so, and there definitely are extractions 19 above and beyond what should be extracted from that 20 Basin. And Kennecott, as well, has seen some 21 negatives associated with that drawdown. 22 Kennecott has a lot of senior water 23 rights. There are a lot of people that have junior 24 water rights to Kennecott, that have been extracting 25 and have had impacts to us over the years. This 31 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 evaluation by these three parties actually will 2 determine the difference of what's already existing, 3 which is not Kennecott's responsibility, and what our 4 remediation activities -- the impacts that we're 5 having. 6 From there we will, if it's determined 7 that yes, there are true impacts by Kennecott, we will 8 evaluate the very methods of restoring or repairing 9 that issue. And we'll make that recommendation. And 10 then go through those -- implementing that 11 recommendation. 12 Some of those -- some of those mitigation 13 options may be, you know, that we work with the -- 14 that we actually adjust our pumping. That is we -- 15 there is a significant amount of monitoring that has 16 been going on over the life of the project. 17 Actually there are over 40 -- over 400, 18 excuse me, 400 monitoring locations throughout the 19 southwest Jordan Valley that we will, on a quarterly, 20 semiannual, and annual basis, will be monitoring the 21 groundwater levels that will feed into our model. And 22 continually be upgrading and recuperating that model. 23 So we should see, and be able to kind of 24 forecast as time goes on, the adjustments in the model 25 and where we -- where we expect to see some drawdowns 32 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 occurring. Above and beyond that, there is also 2 another hundred-or-so monitoring points where we are 3 monitoring the quality of the water. 4 There was -- prior to any remediation in 5 years past, there was a significant amount of 6 monitoring that went on to give us a good kind of 7 quantitative and qualitative database kind of 8 pre-remediation. And, you know, we will be comparing 9 that baseline to what we're seeing over the life of 10 the project. So we'll have a good -- kind of a good 11 comparison there. 12 So we can adjust our pumping. You know, 13 obviously we still have to contain the plumes on 14 Kennecott property and want to optimize as best we 15 can. But there may be some reductions in pumping as 16 we feel fit and -- just to optimize the system. 17 We, as well, can go back and we can hook 18 people up to the municipalities. Hook them up to -- 19 to the, you know, one of the four entities. I think 20 the great thing about working with the Jordan Valley 21 Conservancy District is they do have a distribution 22 system that covers the entire area that has been 23 impacted. 24 So we pretty much can get water to 25 anybody, and good quality drinking water to anybody 33 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 that's in the affected area there. As well as we've 2 looked at -- yeah? 3 AUDIENCE MEMBER: Can I bring you back 4 close to his question? 5 MS. DOUGHTY: Sure. 6 AUDIENCE MEMBER: This model layer four, 7 how many feet below the range is that, just in rough 8 numbers? 9 AUDIENCE MEMBER: After you answer the 10 question using this, and if he has a well that's a 11 certain depth maybe you can -- perhaps you can answer 12 that. 13 MS. DOUGHTY: Do you know what model 14 number four is at? 15 MR. CHERRY: Off the top of my head I 16 don't know. It's probably about 4 or 500 feet deep. 17 But that represents the drop in the water level from 18 the surface. From today's current water level that 19 you measure the well, that is the expected -- the 20 projected decrease over 45 years. 21 AUDIENCE MEMBER: And how deep is the 22 zone in 12? 23 MR. CHERRY: Eighty feet. 24 AUDIENCE MEMBER: So when you are 25 modeling shallow wells like this, would they be more 34 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 effective than this, or less? 2 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, the extractions that 3 we're gonna see -- we are at the -- the locations of 4 the extractions that we'll be pulling from range 5 anywhere from 150 feet to about 450 feet, or the depth 6 of what -- of the sulphate wells that we're 7 extracting. 8 We should see, I guess, a reduction. The 9 higher we get up, we should see less and less of the 10 drawdown associated with it. But this is the water 11 level that -- the principal aquifer that we see and 12 with the drawdown we'll be expecting there. 13 AUDIENCE MEMBER: When will his well go 14 dry? 15 MS. DOUGHTY: Where is his well? 16 AUDIENCE MEMBER: Mine is at 80 feet. 17 Most of my neighbors are 2 to 500 feet. 18 MS. DOUGHTY: Are you in the location of 19 that drawdown? 20 AUDIENCE MEMBER: No. 21 MS. DOUGHTY: You're outside of it? 22 MS. NIELSON: Perhaps, if I could 23 suggest. There are going to, I suspect, be questions 24 like this with specific wells. And maybe the ability 25 to talk after the comment period, or to arrange a time 35 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 to specifically address that with Paula or John might 2 be a way to specifically identify a well and be able 3 to better understand where it's going to -- 4 MS. DOUGHTY: I think, yeah, if you look 5 at the mitigation options, one of them is that if it 6 looks like we, you know, we very well may -- there may 7 be a determination that drilling the well deeper may 8 mitigate it. I mean, those will be evaluated at the 9 time, based on your location and, you know, any other 10 factors involved. 11 AUDIENCE MEMBER: My question is 12 basically a financial question. I'd like to ask if 13 Kennecott, for whatever reason, closed their 14 operations, that would have an effect on the Jordan 15 District? 16 MS. DOUGHTY: On the Jordan District? 17 AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah. On the projects 18 you have going now. 19 MS. DOUGHTY: I think, as Dr. Nielson 20 indicated, the bulk of this money actually is included 21 in a trust fund that is held by the state Trustee. 22 AUDIENCE MEMBER: That's true. And you 23 said over a 40-year period, so you've got your own 24 investment put in, isn't it? 25 MS. NIELSON: Perhaps as Trustee I can 36 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 answer that a bit. The Consent Decree requires that 2 Kennecott perform these services for a period of 40 3 years in the -- in the provision of quality water and 4 the extraction and containment of the plume. 5 The project that we're looking at here is 6 the mechanism for getting there. Kennecott will have 7 the responsibility for doing that, and Jordan Valley 8 is assuming part of the responsibility through the 9 Zone B plan. But that will be a responsibility that 10 they will need to continue to perform for the period 11 that was required in the Consent Decree. For 40 12 years. 13 And so one way or another, that will 14 remain a legal responsibility. The money will go to 15 construct the plant and for the operation of the 16 plant. But the legal responsibility will remain. 17 Other clarifying questions? 18 AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah, I got a 19 clarifying one. I think what the gentleman was asking 20 is who's backing the letter of credit? Who's 21 providing backing for your letter of credit? 22 MS. NIELSON: The backing for the letter 23 of credit is Kennecott. The letter of credit and the 24 cash payments will be used to, in part, cover the cost 25 of the Zone A and the Zone B plant, the operation of 37 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 those plants, and the assoc -- some of the associated 2 transportation network for the water. But the letter 3 of credit is provided by Kennecott. 4 AUDIENCE MEMBER: Okay. That means they 5 had the money set aside? 6 MS. NIELSON: That's correct. 7 AUDIENCE MEMBER: You know how to get to 8 it then? 9 MS. NIELSON: I have direct access, as 10 the Trustee, that's correct. Thanks for the 11 clarification. Another -- any other clarifying 12 questions? 13 Mr. Dansie, did you have a question? 14 MR. DANSIE: I don't understand a lot of 15 the aquifers or anything at this stage, and I don't 16 pretend to tell you anything about that. So my 17 question is in your cleanup are you gonna clean this 18 water up and reenter it into the aquifer and leave it 19 to balance that out? Or are you just gonna suck it 20 out and let it continue to go out? I mean, do you 21 understand what I'm saying? 22 MR. BAY: Let's try this microphone. Can 23 you hear this okay? The plan is not to treat and 24 reinject in the water, no. The plan is to extract and 25 to treat to drinking water standards, and then deliver 38 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 that to the public. Some of that water will no doubt 2 return to the aquifer as return flows, but there's no 3 active reinjection. 4 MS. NIELSON: Any other -- maybe another 5 clarifying question, and then I'd like to suggest we 6 go to public comments so we have time for everyone. 7 AUDIENCE MEMBER: I have two clarifying 8 questions before we go to public comment. One is I 9 notice this agreement that's made with the Trustee, 10 Jordan Valley, and Kennecott, it doesn't say who it 11 will be signed by. Is this like an Enron, that there 12 won't be anybody there to perform it when it comes 13 time? 14 Because, I think British Petroleum is the 15 parent company. We're concerned that they have a lot 16 of assets, but those assets could be transferred and 17 an inability to produce. This is a pretty serious 18 document and there is a lot of ifs in it. 19 And I would ask the Trustee to see that 20 whoever signs that has the authority, I think it ought 21 to be binding beyond Kennecott. I know Paula is 22 laughing that they don't have the resources to do 23 that, but I'm sure they do. But I know that good 24 lawyers know how to hide the land, and the water 25 rights, and all the other things so when the time 39 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 comes, if something fails, there's nothing there to do 2 it with. 3 I'd like you to address that when you get 4 to that point. I've got one other question. I think 5 this is a great plan that you've put up here on the 6 board as to how you'll deal with mitigation plans, but 7 I don't think it's in effect today. I don't think 8 it's been done for the past 10 years, particularly 9 with regard to water rights that we own. 10 I can talk to you personally on that 11 more. Out in the southwest corner of the Salt Lake 12 Valley this program has not been followed. And I 13 don't think it will be later. It's a very vague 14 program. It doesn't really cover the problems. 15 In other words, Paula has mentioned many 16 times it's gonna go back to the municipalities or the 17 areas that was affected. We've got areas in the 18 southwest corner that have been affected. None of 19 this has been put into effect, and none of the water 20 has come back. 21 Mr. Bay mentioned that we'll determine 22 this allocation of water based on population, on water 23 rights, and so forth. The area out there where the 24 municipalities will receive the 525 acres of water, 25 assuming they're able to produce it, does not go back 40 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 to the area affected. It's 3 miles west of there. 2 I'm not sure that there's any provision 3 in there that really covers that and deals with it 4 adequately. It just simply doesn't. The water rights 5 were in that area. And other -- the municipality of 6 Herriman had no water rights at all in 1985-1995 when 7 this Consent Decree was envisioned. 8 I think there's some major gaps there. 9 And I'll go into that more in the other part when you 10 can address those. 11 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. Let 12 me emphasize here, clarifying questions may -- I want 13 to provide an opportunity for those who have come 14 tonight to present comments to do so. So if we can 15 take this opportunity, if there are any questions on 16 the presentation, and then we'll go on to public 17 comment. 18 This gentleman over here. Any others 19 besides? Okay. 20 MR. BELCHAK: I'm Tom Belchak. Richard, 21 you made a comment about how the -- for example, South 22 Jordan City was allocated 1,050 acre feet of water. 23 And the -- I'm not clear -- it's not clear as to how 24 the allocation occurred, because apparently it has 25 been and continues to be set at 1,050 acre feet for 41 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 South Jordan City. 2 I got out of your presentation that 3 population, possible growth projections, impact to 4 water rights; is that what -- those were the three 5 factors that I saw. And if you are able to comment, 6 could you comment about what water rights in South 7 Jordan were impacted to come at this 1,050 acre feet? 8 MR. BAY: Yes. The method is more fully 9 described in Appendix F of the joint proposal. But 10 let me just summarize. The three most important 11 parameters were population in the -- in each of the 12 four cities. Current -- 13 MR. BELCHAK: In 1995? 14 MR. BAY: 2003. 15 MR. BELCHAK: 2003, thank you. 16 MR. BAY: Area of the -- area directly 17 beneath the plume, affected areas, that lies within 18 each of the cities in square miles. And existing 19 municipal water rights held by any of the four cities 20 within the impacted area. The affected area or the 21 plume. 22 MR. BELCHAK: Is there a weighting factor 23 as to which one -- 24 MR. BAY: And -- and so when we first did 25 this evaluation we looked at it in four different 42 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 methods. And those four tables are in Appendix F of 2 the joint proposal. 3 Basically it was a weighted average, 4 because only two of the cities had municipal rights 5 that were within the affected area; Riverton City and 6 West Jordan City. The other two didn't. And -- and 7 so that was one of the three parameters. In a 8 weighted-average fashion, we arrived at the 9 allocations. 10 MR. BELCHAK: Thank you. 11 AUDIENCE MEMBER: My first thing is, 12 Dr. Nielson, we are currently blessed with your able 13 performance as Trustee -- 14 (The speaker was asked to use the microphone.) 15 AUDIENCE MEMBER: Dr. Nielson, you're 16 current -- we're currently blessed by having you as 17 our able Trustee to look out for our interests. Does 18 that position go with your position as Director of 19 Department of Environmental Quality, or does that 20 remain with you even after some other person? 21 MS. NIELSON: No. The position of 22 Trustee is an appointment by the Governor of the State 23 of Utah. 24 AUDIENCE MEMBER: And so if we get a 25 different governor or something like that, a different 43 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 person will be appointed to be Trustee? 2 MS. NIELSON: That will be up to the new 3 governor. But at this point I'm acting, and I will 4 continue to act as the Trustee, until there's a 5 decision to make a change. 6 AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you. One of the 7 things that I came across -- not in the presentation 8 but -- was that for all of these wells and the water 9 that goes through the reverse osmosis they'll be 10 testing the influent and the effluent to make sure 11 that the wells are not actually drawing water out of 12 adjacent plumes, or something like that. 13 Because evidently there's more than one 14 plume in the valley, and we don't want -- there 15 doesn't want to be migration of problems from Sharon 16 Steel or something like that into another place. Who 17 is the person who oversees the changes between this 18 and makes decisions about when something needs to be 19 adjusted? 20 MS. NIELSON: As this pumping is going 21 forward, the Department of Environmental Quality is 22 going to be monitoring the chemistry of the water 23 that's extracted, will be monitoring adjacent areas, 24 such as Sharon Steel tailings where we have separate 25 monitoring wells, to make sure that that contamination 44 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 isn't moving, because it will require to maintain that 2 on the site. 3 If there are problems that develop we'll 4 evaluate those, work with Kennecott and the District, 5 and determine the best way to solve those problems. 6 But during the entire period that this cleanup project 7 is going forward, the Department of Environmental 8 Quality will have the responsibility of monitoring the 9 work that is being done and ensuring that the project 10 is operating as designed. 11 And to notify the parties and work 12 through the Technical Review Committee that's been 13 established for the program to evaluate those results 14 and make any mid-course corrections we need. 15 AUDIENCE MEMBER: The Fish and Wildlife 16 representative that commented on the discharge permit 17 to the Jordan River noted that -- oh dear, I have 18 misplaced my notes. 19 That the concentration of selenium in 20 the -- of the discharge may raise the concentration of 21 selenium in the Jordan River to 4 micrograms per 22 liter, or something like that. And that there is 23 evidence that there are wildlife impacts at ranges 24 between 2 and 5 micrograms. 25 In light of that information, I'm curious 45 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 why the decision was made to discharge the water to 2 the Jordan River as opposed to discharging it in the 3 tailings ponds, as was indicated -- the plan in the 4 early stages of the development. 5 MS. NIELSON: The plan for the discharge 6 point I'm going to let Richard talk to, but let me 7 talk for a minute about assuring the quality of the 8 water that's discharged. That discharge from the Zone 9 B plant is by a permit that's granted by a Division of 10 Water Quality within the DEQ. And they will work with 11 Jordan Valley. 12 Jordan Valley will be required to report 13 the concentration of the waters that are being 14 discharged to make sure that those concentrations are 15 within the permit limits. And the Division will 16 review that information, monitor their work, and make 17 sure they adhere to that -- to that permit limit. 18 So the permit was issued recognizing that 19 there are values that need to be protected in the 20 Jordan River. And that the levels that are allowed in 21 the permit would enable that protection of the Jordan 22 River waterway to continue. But it will be monitored. 23 And if there are any changes, corrections as required 24 will be made. 25 I'm going to let Richard talk to the 46 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 decision. And then, in the interest of time what I'd 2 like to suggest is that we go to public comment. And 3 if there are additional questions, that -- I'll be 4 happy to stay, as I know my staff will, after the 5 meeting and address your questions, or find someone 6 who can answer them for you. 7 MR. BAY: Thank you. The Utah Division 8 of Water Quality gave a very thorough review of the 9 discharge proposal, and studies over a year's time 10 were performed. And many comments were considered, 11 including those of U.S. Fish and Wildlife that you 12 mentioned. 13 The resulting permit showed that the 14 discharge could be well within the river parameters. 15 And I'd like to refer to this slide showing, for 16 selenium, the projected 20 micrograms per liter, 17 compared with the permit limit of 48.5. 18 That will, of course, be monitored 19 throughout the project, and up for renewal each five 20 years. 21 MS. NIELSON: Let me talk for just a 22 minute about the process now for public comment. 23 There are a number of opportunities for you to provide 24 comment to the Trustee during this public review 25 period. One of them is to come to the podium this 47 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 evening. And what I'd suggest is that we allow five 2 minutes per comment. 3 When you came tonight you signed an 4 attendance list so that we can provide you with 5 follow-up information. But those of you who were 6 interested in speaking also signed a comment request 7 record. And I will work through those commenters in 8 order of signature, taking first elected public 9 officials at the local level, then the state level, 10 the federal level, and then go to this comment list. 11 If you don't want to speak tonight but 12 you want to make sure that I receive a comment, or 13 perhaps sometime after tonight you have a question or 14 a comment you want to provide, you can do that by 15 writing to the Trustee. And there is a fact sheet 16 that's on the check-in table tonight which has 17 addresses on it, on the back. 18 You can Email a comment to me, and 19 there's an Email address on here. There are also 20 comment sheets that look like this out on the table. 21 And you should feel tree to take one of those if you'd 22 like, write your comments down, leave it of course, 23 and we'll consider it. 24 I'm not going to respond to comments this 25 evening. But I will prepare a complete document of 48 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 all the comments that we've received verbally at the 2 hearings, in writing, Email, fax. And I will provide 3 responses to those comments and make that response 4 document available on the web site, at the records 5 office here at West Jordan -- at West Jordan City 6 Hall, and at the record site of the Department of 7 Environmental Quality. 8 And if individuals want copies, I'd be 9 happy to provide those. That will be available after 10 the close of the comment period on October 2. If you 11 want to provide comments, please mail them, postmark 12 them, or send them by Email with a transaction date 13 that is before midnight on the 2nd of October. 14 And the response document will be 15 available as soon after that point as possible. As 16 soon as we're able to review those comments, determine 17 what the responses are, and be able to provide those. 18 My objective is to receive your comments, 19 understand concerns, recommendations, questions, 20 support. Be able to review that. And make a decision 21 on whether I should approve the proposal as it's 22 provided in the presentation tonight, and more 23 particularly in the accompanying documents that are 24 available to be reviewed here in West Jordan, at the 25 Department, on the web site, to decide if I need to 49 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 make any changes to this proposal before I approve it. 2 My objective is to understand and to be 3 able to consider your comments. And so I very much 4 appreciate the opportunity to do that. We also have a 5 court reporter here this evening with Depomax. The 6 transcript of this evening's presentation, from the 7 point of the Power Point presentation through the 8 comment period, will be available as soon as it's been 9 fully transcribed and edited, reviewed, whatever it is 10 that is done with transcripts. 11 Anyway, what is that, about two weeks? 12 And we will make copies of that available to you on 13 the web site, and also make hard copies available and 14 put them at the records site. I think I have covered 15 everything. Questions? 16 MR. DANSIE: Dr. Nielson, is it possible, 17 because of the length of this agreement between 18 Kennecott, Jordan Valley, and the Trustee, and the -- 19 there is a lot of information that we have had made 20 available to us in the last, say since the first of 21 September. 22 Is it possible to request an additional 23 60 days to comment? This is a pretty serious matter. 24 And we think that, based on the technical information 25 that's there, the information in that agreement, and 50 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H1-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 1. H1 H1-1 1 some of the clauses in there, we're concerned that -- 2 well, we all have to have jobs and work too, to help 3 pay the taxes for this program. We would like to ask 4 for an additional 60 days beyond that time period. 5 MS. NIELSON: You have -- yes, you have 6 the ability to make that request. The request 7 should -- 8 MR. DANSIE: I'm making that now. 9 MS. NIELSON: Okay. It has been received 10 on the record, Mr. Dansie. I'll consider it. And if 11 I decide to extend the comment period, I will make a 12 public notification of that extension. 13 MR. DANSIE: And when will you do that? 14 MS. NIELSON: I won't do it this evening, 15 but I'll consider the request -- 16 MR. DANSIE: I understand. If you are 17 gonna tell me that the clock is running, I've only got 18 17 more days or whatever number of days is left, 19 that's really short. If I've got 60 days plus 20 whatever there is, then that's a little better. Thank 21 you. 22 MS. NIELSON: I appreciate that. There 23 is also another public comment period which will be on 24 September 25 at the Department of Environmental 25 Quality's office on North Temple at 1950 West, and 51 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 that address is also in the information sheet. 2 With that I'd like to first ask the Mayor 3 of West Jordan, Mayor Holladay, if is he here. Mayor, 4 did you have any comments that you wanted to make this 5 evening? 6 MAYOR Holladay: No. We're just glad 7 that you guys -- you seem surprised that we've offered 8 our building. We charge $1,000. 9 (The audience is laughing.) 10 MAYOR Holladay: No, actually it's just 11 half that. But we appreciate all the cooperation 12 we've had with Kennecott and with all the work that's 13 being done. And we're happy to see you here. We're 14 very glad to be involved any way that we can. So 15 thank you. 16 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. Mayor 17 Money, would you want to make a comment? 18 MAYOR MONEY: Yeah. 19 MS. NIELSON: I'm gonna ask if you, when 20 you are making your comment if you would come up here 21 to the podium. I'm going to put this microphone back 22 in the stand. But realize that you do need to speak a 23 bit closely to it so that everybody can hear. 24 MAYOR MONEY: Thank you Dr. Nielson. 25 It's a pleasure to be here with you tonight. It's 52 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H2-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. .3. H2 H2-1 H3 '1 good to see so many people here to comment on this. 2 This is a -- this is a very monumentous thing that 3 we're discussing here. 4 With regards to South Jordan, as you see 5 in the map and so forth, that plume is directly under 6 South Jordan. All of South Jordan is included within 7 that plume. We do not have one city well in South 8 Jordan. Every drop of water -- of drinking water that 9 we get is from the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy 10 District. 11 And that's very concerning to me as a 12 Mayor. I was not involved in any of the discussions 13 in 1995 as this process went forward. I'm sure 14 sharper minds than mine have come to the decisions in 15 the implementations that we have heard about today. 16 And so I'm trusting that group of 17 individuals, that they have come up with a program 18 that's going to work. I think one of my concerns is 19 is this reverse osmosis, the cost of that, compared to 20 the normal treatment plant that Jordan Valley water 21 has. 22 I don't know what the additional cost is 23 and who has to bear those, those additional costs. 24 And then I also wonder about the -- are we saying that 25 within a period of 40 years that this plume is going 53 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H3-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 12. H3-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 6. H3-1 H3-2 1 to be cleaned up to where we can drill wells, and we 2 will not have to go through this additional expensive 3 water purification that apparently we're gonna have to 4 go through? Those are a couple of the questions I 5 have. 6 But anyway, I appreciate -- I support the 7 plan. I appreciate Kennecott's involvement. I 8 appreciate them stepping up to the plate. Let's face 9 it, in 1912 when they started, and even in 1965, we 10 didn't -- we didn't understand things like we do 11 today. And it's tough to point fingers. 12 I'm involved in a landfill out near the 13 International Airport. And when they -- when they say 14 they met the standards of the time for these ponds, 15 these evaporation ponds that they built, the standards 16 of the time was to dig a hole, period. 17 And the same way with the garbage dumps, 18 both Transjordan and the one I'm involved in out west 19 at the airport; they just dug a hole and dumped it 20 there. They didn't understand the problems then like 21 we -- we understand them today. 22 So I give credit to Kennecott, and the 23 DEQ, and others for getting together and working up a 24 plan to where we at least have a vision. We at least 25 have a future for the use of this contaminated plume. 54 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H3-3 See the Response to Common Comment No. 3. H3-4 See the Response to Common Comment No. 3. H3-3 H3-4 1 Hopefully at some point in time our children will look 2 back to this time and say, a job well done, because 3 it's cleaned up. Thank you. 4 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much, Mayor. 5 Mayor Evans with Riverton, did you want to make a 6 comment? 7 MAYOR EVANS: I'm Mayor Mont Evans, Mayor 8 of Riverton. It's my pleasure to be here tonight. 9 The City of Riverton certainly endorses this plan and 10 we're very supportive of it. It's interesting, when I 11 was on the City Council some 20 years ago we had 12 Kennecott out and were discussing the pollution that 13 was following. 14 And it was interesting to watch later as 15 the Conservancy, at one point in time the Attorney 16 General's office -- the legislative leadership, the 17 Governor's office, and others had signed off on a plan 18 that would have not cleaned this up. It was the 19 Jordan Conservancy District, that appealed this all 20 the way to the Supreme Court, that has brought us here 21 today. 22 And I do applaud Kennecott for their 23 efforts in moving it forward. And I especially 24 appreciate -- do we have anybody from the Conservancy 25 District here tonight? They did a great job. They 55 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H4-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 3. H4 H4-1 1 honestly did. Because when everybody else in the 2 state had signed off on this plan that they did not 3 clean it up, why, the Conservancy District held their 4 ground all the way to the Supreme Court of the United 5 States. And they -- and we don't recognize public 6 agencies and what they do sometimes. 7 I -- we do have a caveat that we're 8 concerned about, and that has to do with Riverton is 9 not in the direct path of the main plume like South 10 Jordan is, but our entire water system is drawn -- our 11 culinary water system is drawn from the ground. And 12 we're concerned about the -- as the drawdown occurs, 13 about maintaining our -- what happens to our level of 14 where we're pulling water out of the ground. 15 We obtain better water at certain levels. 16 And as that level changes, why then it might present 17 some problems to us. And I would certainly like that 18 included in the record that those concerns are there. 19 And it's my understanding that if that occurs, we do 20 have problems, why, they'll be addressed as part of 21 the ongoing reclamation. 22 Again, appreciate everything that's been 23 done. Appreciate Kennecott, appreciate Jordan Valley, 24 and the great progress that's been made in this area. 25 And again, on behalf of the City of Riverton, the 56 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H4-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 10 regarding water rights, quantity and quality, and procedures for addressing concerns. H4-3 See the Response to Common Comment No. 3. H4-2 H4-3 1 citizens of Riverton, we endorse this plan. Thank 2 you. 3 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much, Mayor. 4 Mayor Crane of Herriman. 5 MAYOR CRANE: I don't have a lot to say 6 tonight, except that Herriman is happy to be involved 7 in this process. And I would like to thank, not only 8 UDEQ, but Kennecott and the Jordan Valley for at least 9 making efforts to mitigate the problem that exists 10 with the contamination. 11 Our city may have less impact than some 12 of the others, but certainly there is impact for the 13 City of Herriman. And many of the residents that are 14 here, who are on individual wells, I think are 15 concerned about how it may affect -- this project may 16 affect them in the future. 17 And most of the comment I have heard is 18 concern about drawdown in our area. I am -- like 19 Mayor Money, hope that mind is greater than might. 20 And people that have been trained and have expertise 21 to create a plan to mitigate the problem that exists 22 in the southwest sector of the valley, I would hope 23 that it works. 24 It's gonna be a benefit to everybody, 25 improve water services in our region if it does work. 57 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H5-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 3. H5-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 10. H5-3 See the Response to Common Comment No. 3. H5 H5-1 H5-2 H5-3 1 And we certainly support the effort to -- to get 2 started at it. 3 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much, Mayor. 4 Are there other local elected officials who would like 5 to speak? Any state elected officials? 6 SENATOR HOGUE: I'm Representative Dave 7 Hogue and I represent the south part of the valley 8 here, which is part of South Jordan, all of Riverton, 9 and Herriman in the area that we've been talking about 10 this evening. And until the redistricting I had the 11 West Jordan area and Copperton area as well, so I'm 12 familiar with the issues here. 13 My concern is that as we've grown here, 14 we've grown into more of a metropolitan area and away 15 from an agricultural area. And we're gonna see 16 thousands of more homes going into the South Jordan 17 area. And obviously this is going to mean a lot more 18 water delivery. 19 I was pleased to see the Jordan Valley 20 District getting involved in it. Obviously that's 21 going to come out of taxpayers' money for that 22 investment, so we need to be a watchdog over that 23 pretty closely to see what they're spending and what 24 we're getting in return. 25 I would say it's probably the development 58 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H6-1 The Trustee recognizes the issues regarding growth are availability of water in the Valley. It is not the objective of this proposal or the Consent Decree to address growth and the demand for additional water. However, it is the responsibility of the Trustee to restore, replace, or acquire the equivalent of the damaged groundwater resource for the benefit of the public in the Affected Area. H6-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 12. H6 H6-1 H6-2 1 of cheaper water is what they're gonna use that money 2 for. Because what we're hearing tonight is that the 3 water that's coming out of this is going to be cheaper 4 water. And that it's going to the Jordan Valley. 5 They're gonna distribute it. 6 But another concern I have is the -- 7 those that have wells, there's a few of them that made 8 mention of tonight. Gradually we've pushed out a lot 9 of the smaller folks in this area. And those that 10 have had wells for years and years and years, they may 11 end up not having wells ever again. 12 If they do, there ought to be some way of 13 compensating them, to make sure that they are able to 14 at least recover what they've put into that over 15 generations of their families being out there with the 16 wells. 17 But I'm pleased, too, that Kennecott and 18 the state have come to the table on this, because a 19 few years ago when they made that original settlement 20 I was a little disappointed as well. In fact on those 21 original hearings that we had, there was some comments 22 made by the engineers that said those evaporations 23 ponds evaporated every few days. 24 Well, doesn't seem possible to me. And 25 to see those large evaporation ponds just disappear. 59 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H6-3 See the Response to Common Comment No. 10. H6-3 1 But we know now where it was going to. And now that 2 everybody is on board, hopefully we'll resolve that 3 issue. Whether or not we'll ever cure the problem 100 4 percent, I don't know. 5 But obviously it's gonna be a big impact 6 to this part of the valley, which is exploding in 7 population. And it's something that we're going to 8 continue to address is our water here in the south 9 part of the valley. So I know as long as I'm up there 10 at the legislature, I'll stay involved with it and 11 keep an eye on what's going with the state. 12 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. Are 13 there other state elected officials? Federal elected 14 officials? 15 All right, the first individual on the 16 comment list tonight is Diane Hemingway. If you would 17 come to the podium. Please identify yourself for the 18 recorder. And if you are representing an 19 organization, if you would note that also. 20 MS. HEMINGWAY: Thank you. Good evening. 21 My name is Diane Hemingway. I'm the Environmental 22 Projects Coordinator for United Steel Workers of 23 America. Many of our members live in the Salt Lake 24 vicinity and work at area companies, including the 25 Kennecott mine, concentrator, refinery, and smelter. 60 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H6-4 The Trustee welcomes the opportunity to brief legislators on an ongoing basis. An initial briefing was provided to the Legislative Management Committee in November 2003, and the Trustee has offered to provide additional briefings as the project progresses. Information will also be available on the Utah Department of Environmental Quality website www.deq.utah.gov H6-4 H7 1 United Steel Workers has long been 2 committed to the health and safety of our members, as 3 well as to the health of the communities in which our 4 facilities operate. As a Union, we recognize that 5 economic and environmental sustainability go hand in 6 hand, and are achievable only through the protection 7 of the very resources necessary for industrial, 8 community, and personal survival. 9 We offer the following preliminary 10 comments, which are based on only a cursory review of 11 selected documents, given the short time frame. I 12 won't elaborate or give details on the first point 13 that I wanted to make, because the issue has already 14 been raised. And for the sake of time I'll cut my 15 comments short. 16 But we have submitted a letter to the 17 Trustee requesting a 45-day extension to the public 18 comment period. And we have provided justification 19 for that. Sixty days would be even better. We feel 20 that it's necessary, given the large volume of 21 documents, the seeming lack of adequate public notice. 22 And we believe that a request for 23 extended public comment period is reasonable and 24 justified. And that more widespread publicity of this 25 project is warranted in an effort to engage more 61 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H7-1 See the Response Common Comment No. 1. H7-1 1 members of the public. 2 I have divided my comments into topics. 3 And I actually will be putting together even more 4 comments to be submitted later, but this is the 5 initial comments. The first concern is on the Great 6 Salt Lake. 7 The issue is, while the Great Salt Lake 8 is a unique and no doubt fragile ecosystem, it does 9 not appear that there has ever been adequate 10 ecological studies or even a risk assessment of this 11 system to assess the impacts of area industries, 12 including the impacts of this project. 13 According to the project plan, waste 14 concentrates from both Zone A and Zone B, quote, will 15 be directly disposed to the Great Salt Lake via a, 16 quote, concentrate discharge line if they cannot be 17 disposed of in the impoundment for various reasons, 18 such as mine closure. 19 The impacts of selenium and other toxic 20 metals on aquatic wildlife are well documented, yet a 21 dilution-is-the-solution approach has been taken with 22 the above disposal option. Further, even if water 23 quality standards for selenium of 5 micrograms per 24 liter is met, effects on wildlife has been observed at 25 levels as low as 2 micrograms per liter. And I've 62 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H7-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 9 regarding impacts on the Great Salt Lake and its ecosystem. H7-2 1 given sources of this information. 2 Failure to implement a precautionary 3 approach to protect the food chain, including 4 migratory birds dependent on brine shrimp, brine 5 flies, and algae from the lake, may result in serious 6 wildlife damage and costly future remediation. 7 Is the current plan to discharge waste 8 concentrate to the Great Salt Lake once the Magna 9 tailing ponds impoundment has been -- has reached 10 capacity? That is a question. I ask a number of 11 questions here. So there is a concern about what 12 happens when the impoundment has reached capacity, 13 will we then be also discharging these wastes into the 14 Great Salt Lake. 15 Another point: Proper baseline 16 assessment and risk assessment of the Great Salt Lake 17 should be initiated and performed by an independent or 18 otherwise third party, such as U.S. Fish and Wildlife 19 Service. Funding of such a project might be obtained 20 from any party seeking air or water discharge permits. 21 New topic: Zone A. The issue is that, 22 according to the fact sheet provided to the public, 23 extraction of acidic waters, quote, will withdraw 24 2,400 to 4,000 acre feet of water in order to reduce 25 the acid and metals contamination, end quote. 63 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H7-3 If the tailings impoundment is closed, reaches capacity or is otherwise not usable, Kennecott and the District will identify an alternate disposal plan for the reverse osmosis concentrates. The discharges could go to the Great Salt Lake only if they meet water quality standards and if a discharge permit is granted. See the Response to Common Comment Nos. 7 regarding use of the tailings impoundment for reverse osmosis concentrate disposal. H7-4 As indicated in Response to Common Comment No. 9, the DEQ Division of Water Quality has established the process to determine numeric standards for the Great Salt Lake. Selenium is the focus of the initial work. Some funding has been identified and additional funding will be sought for the work. H7-5 In the fact sheet section entitled “Consent Decree,” requirement No. 2 states that Kennecott was required to drill a well or wells into the low pH/heavy metals ground water plume and begin to remove contaminants. Other project documentation (NRD Consent Decree, Supporting Document, and the Joint Proposal) also references the requirement that under the 1995 Consent Decree, Kennecott was required to H7-3 H7-4 H7-5 1 This statement believes -- leads the 2 public to believe that this project is proposed and 3 that extraction has not yet begun, when in fact the 4 extraction of acidic water actually commenced in 5 August of 1997. 6 According to a letter dated 8/26 of this 7 year, a Kennecott to Dianne Nielson, as of August 21, 8 after five years of operation, 2,293.9 acre feet of 9 acid water had been extracted, and a total of over 10 136,595 tons of sulphate had been removed. There is 11 some question about why at least one of the wells, 12 case 60, needed to be replaced. 13 Questions and concerns: Why was it not 14 made clear in the fact sheet that pumping of the acid 15 plume has been occurring for at least six years? 16 Point 2: Where have the by-products 17 and/or concentrates of this process been disposed to 18 date? 19 Point 3: Was well case 60 damaged by 20 acidity -- by the acid water? If so, what assurance 21 does the public have that destruction of wells will 22 not be a common occurrence, and that they will be 23 monitored appropriately and replaced to ensure ongoing 24 remediation? 25 This is a special concern once Kennecott 64 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX begin an extraction program to remove water from the low pH/heavy metals plume. Kennecott began pumping from the low pH/heavy metals plume in 1997 to extract on a have five year rolling average, 400 acre-feet per year, to address the need to gain containment of this portion of the plume and to begin removing the contaminants of concern. The reference to a Kennecott letter to the State Trustee dated August 26, 2003, makes note of the total amount of acre-feet of contaminated water removed from the low pH/heavy metals plume since extraction began in 1997. The intention of this letter was to notify the Trustee that Kennecott was meeting the Consent Decree settlement requirement prior to the required anniversary date and was on task to meet the next removal increment ahead of schedule. H7-6 The water that has been removed from the low pH/heavy metals plume has been primarily pumped to the Kennecott tailings pipeline for delivery to the North Expansion Impoundment in Magna, Utah. Kennecott has been and continues to neutralize the acidity of the extracted water by either using the neutralization potential of the tailings material or by adding lime to the tailings circuit. Water in the impoundment was and is currently recycled from the North Expansion Impoundment into Kennecott’s process circuit during yearly operations or discharge from the impoundment under an approved UPDES permit. H7-7 K60 was replaced because of its age, not because it was damaged by acid. The well was originally installed in the 1960s with a steel casing that typically has a 20 to 30 year life. This and other sulfate extraction wells are monitored and will be replaced when and if needed, just like any other well. H7-6 H7-7 1 has attained the balance of their ILC -- and I will 2 address that in another minute -- and/or after the 3 40-year time period, if the remediation is not 4 complete. 5 Issue: The current plan is to dispose of 6 treatment concentrates from the reverse osmosis 7 plants, as well as the extracted acid core water to be 8 piped to the Magna tailings impoundment. 9 Questions and concerns: Point 1, has 10 there been a study to determine the feasibility of 11 recovering some of the soluble toxic metals from this 12 waste stream? This should be considered as an option, 13 as it may be a rich source of valuable resources, as 14 well as future jobs. 15 MS. NIELSON: Ms. Hemingway, could you 16 bring your comments to a close? 17 MS. HEMINGWAY: I will try. 18 MS. NIELSON: Okay. 19 MR. HURST: Ma'am, I'm the next speaker, 20 Robert Hurst. 21 MS. NIELSON: Yes? 22 MR. HURST: I defer my time to my sister 23 from the United Steel Workers of America. She can 24 have my five minutes. 25 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. 65 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX The Final Remedial Design that was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee and approved by EPA and the State of Utah details the containment, extraction and groundwater- monitoring program. Over 300 monitoring wells are currently in place within and around the plume and are monitored on a monthly to annual basis. Data collected from this monitoring program will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the containment and extraction program and make adjustments if necessary. H7-8 Kennecott evaluated the possibility of recovery of metals from the acid/heavy metals plume water, however none were economically feasibile. Such extraction could be considered at a future time if it were economic. H7-8 1 (An inaudible comment was made from the audience.) 2 MS. HEMINGWAY: Okay. In addition to 3 reverse osmosis, were other treatment technologies 4 considered? Was a treatment train or multiple types 5 of treatment technologies considered, since the waste 6 in this case may require more than one treatment 7 technology and/or recovery technology before disposal 8 or release to the environment? 9 One source of information may be the 10 National Research Council, whose various committees 11 published several reports on this topic. 12 Given the limited information available 13 to the public on the web site, it is not possible to 14 become familiar with the chemistry of the waste 15 stream. However, of particular concern, toxic metals. 16 For example, while still in the groundwater system, 17 selenium and aluminum may not be readily available to 18 the wildlife. 19 However, once on the earth's surface, 20 they may become readily available as they enter the 21 food chain, where they are known to bioaccumulate and 22 cause harmful effects, especially in sensitive 23 ecosystems. 24 Next point: The impact of the acid on 25 certain toxic metals, such as lead, tends to render 66 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H7-9 Early on during the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS, CERCLA activities) Kennecott was operating a pilot nanofiltration plant to determine the feasibility of this technology to pretreat the water from the low pH/heavy metals plume prior to final treatment at the proposed Reverse Osmosis facility. A small fraction of the extracted water from the low pH/heavy metals plume was used in this pilot project to determine its treatability with this technology; concentrates from this pilot plant were directed to KUCC’s tailings pipeline for disposal into the North Expansion Impoundment. Both Kennecott and JVWCD have reviewed other technologies and proposals. The Joint Proposal enables other technologies to be implemented at a future time, provided it meets the technical requirements of the Consent Decree and Joint Proposal. H7-10 See the Response to Common Comment No. 7. H7-9 H7-10 1 them more bioavailable. This is a particular concern, 2 as wind blowing across the tailings impoundment may 3 distribute them through the environment and/or food 4 chain, causing human and wildlife exposures. 5 Another issue: Under the NRD settlement 6 agreement Kennecott will fund all operational, 7 maintenance, and replacement expenses. However, the 8 first five years the Trustee will annually release 15 9 percent of the $48.1 million -- which was originally 10 28 million -- in the ILC. At the end of the five-year 11 period, Kennecott will receive the balance of the 12 monies and of the fund. 13 Questions and concerns: What incentive 14 is there for Kennecott to continue treating 15 groundwater once the balance of this money has been 16 given to them? Given the history of groundwater 17 pump-and-treat projects of a much lesser magnitude, it 18 is not likely that the plume will be remediated for 19 many decades. Perhaps well beyond the 40 years. 20 What happens if Kennecott files 21 bankruptcy, sells the company, reorganizes, or uses 22 any of the other tactics that workers, taxpayers, and 23 shareholders have been painfully witnessing in recent 24 years in this country, and indeed in the state of 25 Utah? 67 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H7-11 Kennecott is contractually obligated under the terms of the Project Agreement and the 3-Party Agreement to provide 3500 acre feet of treated water per year from Zone A and ensure that the Zone A Plant is operated for the Operational Period of forty years. JVWCD is contractually obligated under the terms of the Project Agreement and the 3-Party Agreement to deliver 3500 acre feet of treated water per year from Zone B and 1235 acre feet per year of municipal-quality drinking water representing the Lost Use water from the Zone B Facilities or from other sources available to JVWCD for forty years. Project Agreement, Sections 4 and 5; 3- Party Agreement, Section I.C. This is consistent with the terms of the Consent Decree, Section V.D.2.b (iii). If either Kennecott or JVWCD fails to satisfy its contractual commitments, the Trustee has all remedies available at law and in equity, including the right to recover damages and to seek specific performance. See Section VII.B of the 3-Party Agreement. If either Kennecott or JVWCD fails to satisfy its obligations under the Project Agreement, the H7-11 1 Why is Kennecott not providing long-term 2 trust funds that would better ensure commitment to the 3 communities in which they have operated and made their 4 profits? Taxpayers should not end up footing the bill 5 for remediating the groundwater. A bond or trust fund 6 should be established and secured to ensure that the 7 groundwater is fully remediated well beyond the 8 planned life of the project. 9 I will stop here. My comments are not 10 well developed for further making them. But they do 11 include more about Zone B, and drawdown impacts, and a 12 number of other issues. Thank you for your time. 13 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. 14 Mr. Hurst, you have approximately two minutes left if 15 you wanted to make a comment. 16 MR. HURST: I'm Robert Hurst. I am a 17 citizen of West Jordan for over 20-plus years. I'm 18 also a worker of Kennecott Copper for over 29-plus 19 years. My concerns are that my sons, my 20 granddaughter, they're both living here in West Jordan 21 and they continue -- will continue to live here in 22 West Jordan. 23 My comment and my concern is who's gonna 24 watch -- who's gonna be the watchdog over Kennecott 25 that's going to watch them up there, that's going to 68 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX other has all remedies available at law and in equity, including the right to recover damages and to seek specific performance. See Section 14.2 of the Project Agreement. Under Section 17.9 of the Project Agreement, neither Kennecott nor JVWCD may assign its obligations without consent of the other. Additionally, Section 17.10 requires Kennecott or JVWCD to provide other assurances of performance if it disposes of any assets that would materially impair its continued financial viability or materially impair its ability to perform all of its remaining obligations under the Project Agreement. H7-12 See the Response to Common Comment No. 12. H8-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 13 regarding oversight of this groundwater cleanup project. Regarding oil spills, Kennecott’s operations are regulated under the Utah Groundwater Protection Act and the H7-12 H8 H8-1 1 keep polluting the groundwater? They have the world's 2 largest truck industry up there at the mine. They're 3 dropping oil every day. They're dropping diesel oil 4 every day. 5 On my right we have over 500 years of 6 service between these people out here. And every day 7 we see contaminating of Kennecott that's putting on 8 the ground that's going into our water. Who's gonna 9 be the watchdog that's gonna watch Kennecott? Who's 10 gonna be the person that's gonna take care of this if 11 Kennecott folds under? 12 There's only 10 to 15 years of life left 13 up there at that mine. Rio Tinto owns Kennecott, who 14 is the world's largest polluting of -- mining industry 15 in the world. Who's gonna watch them? They can just 16 fold up this operation and take off. They're well 17 known for that. Who is gonna watch them? That's what 18 I want to know. 19 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. Next 20 speaker is Mr. Ron Dansie, followed by Roger Payne. 21 Mr. Dansie? 22 MR. DANSIE: May I borrow a pointer? And 23 have someone flip that back to Chart A? 24 MS. NIELSON: Yeah. And what you do is 25 turn it like this and you'll have a laser point if you 69 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Inspectors from the DEQ Divisions of Water Quality and Solid and Hazardous Waste regularly inspect the operations and take action when violations are identified. Kennecott is also required to report spills in accordance with state environmental laws. H8-2 See the Response to H7-10, above. H8-2 H9 1 need it. Or just -- yeah, there you go. Just make 2 sure that you point it at -- 3 MR. CHERRY: Which chart are you looking 4 for? 5 MR. DANSIE: Excuse me? 6 MR. CHERRY: Which chart are you looking 7 for? 8 MR. DANSIE: The very first one. I'm 9 sorry, I think it was A. 10 MR. CHERRY: That one? 11 MR. DANSIE: No. Next one down. Let's 12 go to the -- show the A -- Zone A and Zone B. 13 MR. CHERRY: Plume map? 14 MR. DANSIE: Yes. 15 MR. CHERRY: That one? 16 MR. DANSIE: Yes, that will be fine. I'd 17 like to say thanks to the Trustee for the opportunity 18 to come here and make comments. And I would like to 19 say thanks for the Jordan Valley and Kennecott for the 20 efforts they are making. I think they fall short, but 21 I think it is a good step in the right direction. 22 I was appalled when Paula and Richard 23 tried to tell me that one of the side benefits of this 24 particular project was the use of public facilities 25 that have been paid for by tax dollars. I think 70 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H9-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 3. H9-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 12. H9-1 H9-2 1 Senator Hogue brought that out. We'll have to look 2 closely at Jordan Valley and how they spend their 3 money. 4 This is a benefit to everybody here in 5 this area. But we also pay that to the Jordan Valley 6 in our water rates, so I don't think it's a real 7 benefit. The fact that Jordan or Kennecott Copper was 8 gonna donate the land where the treatment plant is 9 gonna go, I think that's great. However, the polluter 10 in this particular instance is Kennecott. The largest 11 in the United States. No one else. 12 Anyway, I don't want to be too negative. 13 I want to be positive. But I want to get on with 14 this. I think those kind of comments would be better 15 left unsaid. I think you should talk about the things 16 you're really doing, but don't try to fool us. We've 17 been around too long. 18 I think that Paula mentioned some of the 19 sources of pollution started in 1930s and went on in 20 1965. I think that we also have to recognize that the 21 area -- I'm in Zone A over in Herriman, I'm not as 22 concerned. I'm very concerned for the citizens down 23 in here. But we're over near the Herriman area where 24 I'm concerned. 25 I'm speaking for myself, and for my 71 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 family, and for the water rights that we own and the 2 land that we own, which are significant in this area 3 right here. This was -- pollution took place 4 during -- from '65 on, to make precipitate copper. 5 And consequently there was profits that flowed from it 6 to make that. It amounted sometimes to a third of the 7 production of copper at Kennecott. 8 The area south of there, where we're at, 9 was not in the plume, but there was hundreds of 10 thousands of tons of sulfuric acid that was dumped on 11 these dumps to the south. Not to make copper, not to 12 sell it, but simply as a disposal. It was hauled by 13 Hatchco Trucking for a period of 7, 8, 10 years. 14 And I sat in meetings at the mine where 15 the mine superintendent got a phone call from the 16 person at the smelter who said, We've got too much 17 acid, we can't use it, we need to get rid of it, what 18 can we do? 19 He said, Well, if you'll pay for the 20 transportation, we'll let you dump it at the mine in 21 the dumps. Not to get copper there, but just simply 22 to waste it. And to get rid of it. Now, that is 23 pollution in its greatest, in its most extreme source. 24 And we're sorry that that happened, and 25 we hope that we can forget that. However, we can't 72 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H9-3 The studies conducted as a part of the Consent Decree evaluated contamination caused by Kennecott’s mining and leaching operations resulting in increased levels over baseline of total dissolved solids, including sulfates, and pH levels lower than baseline, among other contamination. The studies were used to define the area of contamination and to value the natural resource damage claim. See Attachment 10 of the Supporting Document to the Consent Decree. The Consent Decree did not identify an injured resource in the area suggested by the comment. H9-4 See the Response to H9-3, above. H9-3 H9-4 1 forget that our water has been affected in Herriman by 2 that. Now, it doesn't show a plume out here in 3 Butterfield Creek. Our wells are right in this area 4 here. It doesn't even cover them in that particular 5 plume. However, we believe that they are affected. 6 And I think everyone recognizes they are affected. 7 And Paula says, Well, we have this great 8 plan when we start this program -- which we haven't 9 started yet -- and we will let you -- we will help you 10 determine how you've been affected and we'll get water 11 back to you. But all 550 acre feet of water, that's 12 gonna go to the municipality of Herriman. That's 13 great, we're proud of that. Hope that happens well. 14 However, in 1995 this was brought up. 15 Herriman didn't exist as a municipality. Herriman was 16 a little town. There was two water sources: One, 17 Herriman pipeline, and the other one was Dansie Water. 18 We have had no water come back. We've had total 19 dissolved solids go up to 950 instead of 250, or 300, 20 or 400 prior-to-mine activity. 21 So these are the type of concerns that we 22 have with this particular program. I think they've 23 done a good job of moving forward. But there are 24 certainly not enough safeties and enough controls to 25 assure that the people of this valley will be 73 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H9-5 Assuming the water mentioned is that derived from the commenter’s wells, such wells are located outside of the Affected Area defined in the Consent Decree. Concerns about impacts to the water quality or quantity of the wells can be addressed through the review procedure established by Kennecott, which is identified in the Response to Common Comment No. 10. H9-6 See the Response to Common Comment No. 13. H9-5 H9-6 1 protected long-term. 2 I think they've made good strides, and I 3 want to compliment them on that. But this particular 4 program, this agreement, which is a long one, covers a 5 lot of things, but I think some of the provisions 6 under it do not deal with what the Consent Decree 7 calls for. 8 The Consent Decree says we will get water 9 back to the affected area. Well, they're trying to 10 get water back to Herriman. But we're three miles 11 west of Herriman. We're not part of Herriman. We're 12 Salt Lake County. We are a separate water system. 13 We're not a municipality, we're a public water system. 14 And there's no provisions in here that cover that. 15 So I think this particular proposal is 16 deficient because it doesn't get the water back to the 17 affected area. Yet Mr. Bay said, Oh, well, we're 18 allocating this based on the water rights of the 19 municipalities, the plume that was underneath them, 20 and all that's affected. 21 Herriman had no water rights. They had 22 no water rights. Probably in 2002 they had bought 23 some, but I doubt they had any wells that would pump 24 any water out. This part of the plan is deficient, 25 it's arbitrary, capricious, and without basis. And 74 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H9-7 The Joint Proposal provides the greatest efficiency in use of the trust fund to provide water to the public in the Affected Area by delivering treated water to the four Affected Municipalities. The allocation made to Herriman was based upon the same criteria in allocating water to the four Affected Municipalities. Those criteria included population of the municipality, area of the municipality encumbered by the contaminated plume, and any municipal water rights held by the municipalities within the contaminated area. Unincorporated lands west of Herriman could, for example, receive the benefits by incorporating into the City. H9-7 1 should be rejected by the Trustee. 2 I appreciate the fact that you said you 3 were the Trustee, and you were also the head of the 4 Department of Environmental Quality for the State of 5 Utah, which means you are the top EPA cop in Utah. 6 The same as -- we think someday when the appointment 7 is completed -- that Governor Leavitt will be the top 8 EPA for the United States. 9 We expect more from DEQ and the State of 10 Utah with regard to the south end of this plume. 11 Maybe we need to define a new plume, if that's not in 12 that one. And this needs to be on the record. 13 MS. NIELSON: Thank you Mr. Dansie. 14 Could you start to conclude your comments, please? 15 MR. DANSIE: I'll try. But I don't think 16 we should be limited too tight, because this is a 17 public hearing. 18 MS. NIELSON: Let me suggest this. I 19 appreciate that, and -- but I'd also like to allow 20 time for everyone else who signed up. I'd be happy to 21 extend additional time to you at end of the period, 22 after everyone else has had a chance to talk. If 23 there's still time. 24 MR. DANSIE: But I'll be glad to end mine 25 very quickly and do that. But I'll be at your 75 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H9-8 The Consent Decree, defines the “Affected Area” as that area in the “southwestern portion of the Salt Lake Valley where surface and ground water have been injured by Kennecott’s mining and leaching operations.” Consent Decree Section I.A. The damages in the Consent Decree were calculated based upon restoring the safe annual yield of the Affected Area. The Consent Decree explicitly preserves any claims that the Trustee might have for injuries to ground water outside of the “Affected Area.” EPA and DEQ require that Kennecott continue to monitor ground water quality in the Southwestern portion of the valley, both inside and outside of the “Affected Area”. That data has been made public through the CERCLA process, was presented in the proposal, and was made available at the public meetings. The data does not show any need to define a “new” or “additional” plume. H9-8 1 other -- I'll be (Inaudible) -- 2 AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Inaudible) my five 3 minutes. 4 MR. DANSIE: -- written comments. This 5 is a major concern to me. It affects us dollar-wise, 6 health-wise. I haven't even talked about the things 7 with the other half, I've talked about only the things 8 that affect me. And I would ask that, as Trustee, you 9 look at it two ways: One, from the Consent Decree; 10 and second, as the top EPA cop in the state of Utah. 11 Kennecott, State Engineer, Division of 12 Oil, Mining, Gas, DEQ, has known what's been going on 13 here for 30 years. We used to get reports saying, 14 Well, don't get too concerned now. Kennecott's put up 15 $5 million to do these things to see really what's 16 happened. 17 And we appreciate that. But now that we 18 know what's happened, and now we've got a plan to 19 clean it up, but we haven't got a way to compensate 20 for what has happened. Not just as individual claims, 21 but as a degradation of state resources. 22 Thank you for your time. And I'm sorry 23 if I was offensive to anyone on this, but those are 24 the facts. 25 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much, 76 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 Mr. Dansie. 2 (The audience applauds.) 3 MS. NIELSON: Roger Payne, followed by 4 Wayne Lantz. 5 MR. PAYNE: Thank you for the opportunity 6 to make comment. My name is Roger Payne. I'm 7 employed by the City of West Jordan as Manager of 8 Utilities. I have been involved in this project for 9 over the last four years or so. 10 I have opportunity to attend and observe 11 the actions of the Technical Advisory Committee. And 12 certainly recognize the expertise and the talents that 13 have gone into the efforts and the study regarding 14 this plan. They have been extensive. I have 15 witnessed a lot of extensive work. 16 The City certainly has interest and 17 concern in the protection of groundwater of the City's 18 well sources that lie on the north edge of the Zone A 19 sulphate plume, as these are an important part of the 20 City's total water supply. 21 However, we feel that Kennecott, in their 22 efforts to do this cleanup project, are doing the 23 responsible thing. Rather than leaving this problem, 24 they're working towards a remedy to clean up the 25 groundwater. And commend them on the effort and the 77 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H10-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 3. H10 H10-1 1 type of expense that is going into the program. 2 We recognize the project results in 3 significant benefits. Benefits that the City of West 4 Jordan will be able to take advantage of. And the 5 ability of a new source of water. Very clean, 6 pristine water source at a high elevation within the 7 city, which is a benefit. 8 And we are looking forward to being able 9 to take advantage of that resource. The City of West 10 Jordan then speaks in support of the plan, and wanted 11 to make that comment tonight. That's all I have. 12 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. I 13 apologize if I'm mispronouncing the last name. Is it 14 Lantz? 15 MR. LANTZ: Lantz. 16 MS. NIELSON: Wayne Lantz, followed by 17 Tom Belchak. 18 MR. LANTZ: I just have a couple of quick 19 comments. I guess the first one is that this doesn't 20 just affect the southwest part of the valley, it 21 affects the whole Salt Lake Valley. And the valley 22 being now little bit more. 23 The other thing is that I would like some 24 additional time also. I think we need to have the 25 period extended at least 60 days, just getting into it 78 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H11-1 One of the goals for this proposal is to develop a source of water that is currently unavailable (due to contamination) for the benefit of the public in the Affected Area. Communities in the Affected Area are growing due to developmental pressure. As this growth continues, treatment of the resources will provide needed drinking water. Along with the provision of drinking water, the extraction proposal will assist in preventing the two plumes from migrating further and will assist in reducing the mass of contaminants over time. Absent containment, the two plumes would eventually make their way to the Jordan River and north, contaminating additional groundwater resources. The State Trustee, Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation and the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District all recognize the significance of this proposed project and the range of impacts if it is not implemented. H11-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 1. H11 H11-1 H11-2 1 and just a couple other things. 2 The only other thing that I had is that I 3 would hope that the ILC isn't only backed by the word 4 of Kennecott. That there be another bank or 5 something, or the money's in the bank somewhere, or 6 the bank is backing that. I wouldn't just go on a 7 word that says, Yeah, we'll go ahead and pay it. 8 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much, 9 Mr. Lantz. Tom Belchak, followed by Kent Ryan. Do 10 you need a stand for that? 11 MS. DOUGHTY: Take down that other one. 12 MR. BELCHAK: Can I put it on the side of 13 that one somehow? 14 MS. NIELSON: Well, we can take this down 15 and put it right in here. 16 MR. BELCHAK: I'm Tom Belchak. I didn't 17 find a pointer yet, but -- thank you. I live in South 18 Jordan. I'm a professional geologist. That doesn't 19 mean anything. It's a license that can be granted by 20 the state. I have to do it this year because we're 21 able to be grandfathered, so they're gonna let the 22 young man in. 23 There was a couple of bookkeeping -- or 24 housekeeping I'll call it -- items. One is, in these 25 documents the property is continually referred to as 79 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H11-3 As required by Section V.D.2 of the Consent Decree, Kennecott provided the Trustee with an irrevocable letter of credit (ILC), by which the issuing financial institution agrees to pay the described amount to the holder (in this case, the Trustee) upon satisfaction of any conditions and presentment of the letter to the issuer by the holder. The current ILC is held for the Trustee by a bank registered to do business in the State of Utah. The replacement ILCs will be similarly held for the Trustee. H12-1 Use of the term “Southwest Jordan Valley” is consistent with the Consent Decree and earlier EPA’s remedial project activities and H11-3 H12 H12-1 1 the Jordan Valley. But I would like all references to 2 Jordan Valley to pertain to Jordan Valley, which is 3 the Water Conservancy District. This is the Salt Lake 4 Valley that we're talking about. And there's -- the 5 Jordan River runs through it. 6 The river goes through it? Okay. 7 The -- so that's one of my requests, is 8 the concern that the Jordan Valley Conserve -- Water 9 Conservancy District is not confused -- that I'm not 10 confused, that the Valley is owned by the Salt Lake 11 Valley, not the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy 12 District. A little statement there. 13 There have been about 30,000 days of 14 pollution, roughly, from -- if we gave three weeks off 15 a year for vacation -- from the pollution. And it 16 continues. It's been about 18 years since 19 -- the 17 early '80s, when the first groundwater issues were 18 studied by the EPA. 19 And whoever initiated those studies, I'm 20 just thankful, because this has been going on a long 21 time. I -- in graduate school I went to the -- to the 22 pit to do a study of the pit. And I was told by staff 23 that -- I said, What are you gonna do with these 24 dumps? They could just cave up, they're fairly steep, 25 when you get your truck over the edge. 80 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX documents. To maintain continuity of the project documentation and EPA’s remedial project documentation, the State Trustee will continue to use the referneced project title, Southwest Jordan Valley Ground Water. 1 Don't worry about 'em. We own everything 2 all the way down to Redwood Road. 3 (The audience is laughing.) 4 MR. BELCHAK: It was not called Kennecott 5 Valley then. It's still the Salt Lake Valley. 6 (The audience is laughing.) 7 MR. BELCHAK: So there's been about eight 8 years since we've talked about the Consent Decree. 9 I've had eight days to look at 500 pages of documents. 10 I'm not satisfied that I've done an adequate job yet. 11 Five hundred pages of very technical, legal, 12 operational, water right issues, financial, and 13 economic issues are addressed here. Financial and 14 economic are quite a bit different. 15 I'm requesting 90 additional days of 16 public comment from the end of the public comment 17 period as currently scheduled. We just don't have 18 enough time. This is fairly serious. Ninety days 19 would help. But hopefully it will move -- the project 20 will move along onward. 21 Kennecott, Utah Copper and its 22 predecessors caused the contamination. I don't know 23 that liability has been accepted or offered, but it's 24 clear to me that a liability is there on the side of 25 Kennecott. 81 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H12-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 1. H12-3 The Consent Decree was entered into in satisfaction of the State’s natural resource damage claim against Kennecott for injury to, destruction of and loss of surface and ground water resources. It also obligates Kennecott’s obligations to extract contaminants from the low pH/heavy metals plume, complete source control measures, and pay as damages cash and provide an ILC to be held by the Trustee in a Trust Fund. These obligations have been satisfied. Kennecott has made great strides to eliminate sources to groundwater contamination and begin cleaning up the groundwater, expending over $300 million to do so. H12-2 H12-3 1 My dad told me, If you break something, 2 you fix it. Even though the kids broke my bike, I 3 fixed it. Even though -- but, you know, dad helped. 4 In this case I'm very disappointed 5 that -- I was expecting a one-party agreement, in that 6 Kennecott would be stating how they wanted to clean up 7 their mess. Jordan Valley did not make the mess. 8 Kennecott made the mess. The -- I was expecting a 9 one-party agreement, with technical assistance from 10 Jordan Valley, but it be a Kennecott agreement. 11 On just a cursory review I see a 12 two-party agreement that has to do with the technical 13 proposal, the Kennecott and Jordan Valley joint 14 proposal. It's to be a Kennecott proposal under the 15 Consent Decree. The second proposal is the Kennecott 16 and the Jordan Valley operational agreement. That 17 seems to be a Kennecott and Jordan Valley financial 18 agreement. 19 I haven't -- it's -- we can wade through 20 it, but it's happening pretty fast. It's been worked 21 on for a while, but most recently very fast. The 22 third party that I was expecting is the Kennecott, 23 Jordan Valley, and Department of Environmental 24 Quality. It appears to be a Kennecott, Jordan Valley, 25 and Department of Environmental Quality. It seems to 82 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H12-4 See the Response to Common Comment No. 12. H12-4 1 be in order. 2 There are several beneficiaries that 3 are -- are coming up. It would seem that the -- 4 Kennecott is in the process of going out of the mining 5 business and into the land development business. So 6 there are two entities that I know of, and there may 7 be more, that -- the Kennecott Land Company and the 8 Oquirrh Mountain Enterprises -- are involved in land 9 development. 10 The Consent Decree is on -- the 1995 11 Consent Decree states: Kennecott shall not receive or 12 beneficially use any of the surface or groundwater 13 resources provided to the public and which are 14 developed or credit -- for credit, or developed by 15 expenditures of the Trustee. 16 Someone asked about watchdogs, and I have 17 a comment about that. So we really understand, from 18 the Consent Decree, that any entity of Kennecott is 19 not allowed to use one drop of water for beneficial 20 use. That's stated in the Consent Decree and needs to 21 be enforced. 22 As far as a watchdog, I have watched the 23 Federal Reserve watch my money. And they're able to 24 print it whenever they want the money. It isn't 25 always my money, but they're able to print it. 83 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H12-5 See the Response to Common Comment No. 11. H12-5 1 There's some deal worked out that you can print money. 2 But you cannot print water. You cannot just say, Let 3 it be. There's only one guy that I know does that. 4 All right. 5 So, the point I'm making is that water is 6 an incompressible fluid. It cannot be created or 7 destroyed. The second law of thermodynamics, it just 8 evaporates and goes to Colorado. What I'm proposing, 9 for my fourth point, is that there is a tribune 10 formed. 11 And I'll just read what a tribune is out 12 of the Encyclopedia that I bought for my little boys 13 in 1986. It really hasn't been outdated that much. 14 15 (As read): A tribune is an 16 official in Ancient Rome. There 17 were two kinds of tribunes: 18 Military tribunes and tribunes of 19 the people. 20 21 Sounds similar, you know, of the 22 people.... Fill in the blank. 23 24 There were military tribunes, 25 but there were tribunes of the 84 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 people, where officials elected to 2 protect the rights of plebeians. 3 4 I stand here as a plebeian. A commoner. 5 I have water rights. I'm concerned about them too, 6 but I'm also concerned about the plebeians. 7 8 According to one account, the 9 plebeians left Rome in 494 B.C. and 10 refused to return until they were 11 allowed to elect their own 12 defenders -- 13 14 MS. NIELSON: Mr. Belchak? 15 MR. BELCHAK: We're almost done. 16 MS. NIELSON: Okay. 17 MR. BELCHAK: The tribunes could defend 18 citizens against unfair acts by 19 officials. 20 21 In a sense, they could veto bills. 22 23 In the A.D. 1830s an Italian 24 patriot named Delorensa (phonetic) 25 took the title of Tribune when he 85 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H12-6 See the Response to Common Comment No.10. H12-6 1 led the common people in their fight 2 for freedom from the nobles. Those 3 who defend the common people are 4 often called tribunals. 5 6 Thank you. 7 (The audience applauds.) 8 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. Kent 9 Ryan, followed by David Schmidt. 10 MR. RYAN: Hi, my name is Kent Ryan. I'm 11 a professional engineer. I have done hydraulic 12 engineering for some time. I'm a former employee of 13 the Division of Water Rights. And I have a couple of 14 questions, I guess. And that is, how many of us will 15 be around in 40 years to check our hydrologic model or 16 groundwater model to see if it's accurate? 17 And Kennecott was well aware, I think, 18 before the year 2000, that they were polluting the 19 groundwater. Why would they continue to use that 20 water to leach their dumps until the year 2000? 21 AUDIENCE MEMBER: Money. 22 MR. RYAN: Kennecott, I know, owns 23 substantial rights. Substantial water rights. They 24 are intending to use these rights, along with Jordan 25 Valley, to withdraw a substantial amount of 86 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H13-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 13. H13-2 Kennecott began to construct various source controls in the early 1990s. The most significant source control activities were the replacement of the Large Bingham Reservoir and the installation of cut off walls along the eastern flank of the Oquirrh Mountains to contain leach water from the waste rock dumps. The installation of the cut off walls and replacement of the reservoir essentially eliminated additional contamination to the aquifer well before 2000 as demonstrated by down gradient groundwater monitoring. Cessation of dump leaching reduced the volume of contamination which the collection system manages on an ongoing basis. H13 H13-1 H13-2 1 groundwater. In reality, what should happen is that 2 they should desist use of that water in other areas. 3 So, I know that they have a lot of rights 4 that they have non-use claims on. And it would be 5 interesting to me to see how all these water rights 6 work, and if Kennecott is going to discontinue some 7 uses in order to withdraw this other water. 8 Anytime you withdraw water and affect an 9 area of groundwater that is projected to withdraw at 10 least -- or to lower the groundwater at least 100 11 feet, to me that is an infraction of -- of water 12 rights. And it will have a great impact on a number 13 of water right users throughout the southwest part of 14 the valley. 15 And it will probably have substantial -- 16 more substantial impact than what is being projected, 17 is what I feel. I have a well in the southwest part 18 of the valley, and there is concern on my part that it 19 will be impacted. 20 So my questions are how will Kennecott 21 and Jordan Valley, what rights are they using? And 22 are any of their rights being currently used now that 23 they will have to discontinue the use for the new use? 24 I know there's a lot of us that -- as one person we 25 don't have much power or much impact on -- against 87 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H13-3 Kennecott and JVWCD are using their respective water rights. H13-3 1 huge entities, but collectively maybe we can have a 2 little bit more. 3 I would like to also to request an 4 additional time to study the issues. I appreciate the 5 opportunity of being here, thank you. 6 (The audience applauds.) 7 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much, 8 Mr. Ryan. David Schmidt, to be followed by Ross 9 Herzog. 10 MR. DAVID SCHMIDT: Well, I can see why 11 all the cities are in favor of this. They're getting 12 a real windfall. They're getting all this wonderful 13 cleaned-up water at the expense of Kennecott, but also 14 at the expense of the other people that -- I hear how 15 it's gonna take care of the cities, but I don't hear 16 how it's gonna really take care of the well -- the 17 people that have wells right now. 18 These cities suddenly are gonna have this 19 windfall of extra-clean water that's supposedly coming 20 from a Kennecott right. And as Kent Ryan mentioned, I 21 think those rights can be questioned, because I think 22 they might be rights that were never used or have gone 23 out of use. 24 And that they plan on -- Kennecott plans 25 on pumping and using all the water they've ever used 88 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H13-4 See the Response to Common Comment No. 1. H14-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 10. H14-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 10 regarding individual well owner concerns H13-4 H14 H14-1 H14-2 1 to run their operation. And they're using water 2 rights that have probably lapsed for non-use. And 3 they're gonna pump it and give it to the cities. 4 They're gonna lower this -- they're gonna lower the 5 water level. And the rest of us that have wells, it 6 looks real fuzzy how we're gonna be compensated. 7 We have in West Jordan, right on the edge 8 of this plume, we have wells that -- and water rights 9 for a hundred acre feet. We have pumped that every 10 summer. And if the water level goes down -- and for 11 myself, I think it is gonna go down substantially, 12 because we're already over appropriated. 13 We're appropriating more water, when 14 already the State Engineer says you are way over 15 appropriated. They have stopped all permits a long 16 time ago. And yet they're gonna go back and take 17 permits that haven't been used for years, and pump 18 water, and give it to the cities. 19 And so that's gonna affect anybody 20 that -- my request is when you talk about affected 21 people you should be talking about the people that 22 have wells. And if that water goes down to where they 23 can't pump, then they need to furnish that water to us 24 at whatever pumping -- whatever our pumping cost would 25 be as though we were pumping out of the well, and 89 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX and the Response to Common Comment No. 11 regarding the allocation of treated water and related water rights. 1 deliver it through the municipalities. 2 Otherwise, those that are dependent on 3 wells are gonna get hurt. Especially in the shallow 4 wells; the hundred, 200-foot wells. And I think that 5 the whole water rights system that Kennecott is basing 6 this whole thing on needs to be questioned. Thank 7 you. 8 (The audience applauds.) 9 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much, 10 Mr. Schmidt. 11 Ross Herzog, followed by Howard Schmidt. 12 MR. HERZOG: My name is Ross Herzog. I'm 13 a new resident to Riverton City. One of the first 14 things I noticed on moving into Riverton was the taste 15 of the water. It was quite lousy. I grew up on the 16 east side. I'm used to the water coming out of the 17 Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons. 18 My big concern is what the taste and the 19 quality of the water is that we're gonna be having 20 from the groundwater from this contaminated water. I 21 know that, through the osmosis and everything that 22 they're talking about, I'm just wondering are we still 23 gonna have good quality water for our dependents and 24 their dependents? 25 I'm already spending close to $40 a month 90 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H15-1 The potable water supply produced from the project will have a quality comparable to the quality of Provo River water and eastern Salt Lake Valley groundwater currently available in Salt Lake Valley. The total dissolved solids (salinity) concentration will be approximately 250 mg/L and the hardness will be less than 100 mg/L. H15-2 The drinking water produced from this project will be similar to the quality of H15 H15-1 H15-2 1 on potassium for my soft-water conditioner. How much 2 more are we gonna have to put out because we didn't 3 put lime and other chemicals in the water to take -- 4 to soften our water? That's another concern that I 5 have. 6 And how long before they start raising 7 the rates, saying that they need more money to 8 condition our water? I'd like to know also the 9 difference between having a water treatment plant and 10 having the reverse osmosis. I'd like to know the cost 11 difference, and also the quality of the water. 12 And I'm also concerned, when Paula was 13 talking she said that Kennecott has senior water 14 rights. I would like to know more about those rights 15 and how it concerns the other people who have well 16 rights, water rights. And what they consider is 17 secondary water rights. I think that's important to 18 the other people here in the Valley as well. 19 And I'd like to turn the remainder of my 20 time over to Mr. Dansie. He still has a few more 21 things that he would like to talk about. 22 MS. NIELSON: All right. Could I suggest 23 this, Mr. Herzog. We have one more speaker. I'd like 24 to provide five minutes for him. And then find out if 25 there are others who want to speak. And, provided the 91 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX the water currently delivered to residents in the Affected Area by Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District. The quality of water to be produced by this project will match the quality of the water currently being delivered by Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District from the Provo River. Some of the residents in the Affected Area currently receive water of lower quality that is delivered from groundwater sources under the control and operated by the Affected Municipalities. H15-3 JVWCD and KUCC have established the cost allocations in the Joint Proposal in order to draw upon the trust fund for funding the portions of the project that pertain to groundwater remediation. The remaining net costs that JVWCD will bear, including the operation of a reverse osmosis plant, are compatible with the normal and current cost of developing and treating a water source for public water supply. Therefore, the water rates to JVWCD's member agencies will not be adversely impacted. The treated water quality will will be blended or remineralized to reach a total dissolved solids concentration of 250 mg/L, as described in the Joint Proposal. H15-4 See the Response to Common Comment No. 10. H15-3 H15-4 1 court reporter is okay, we'll be able to continue 2 comments till 9:30. Would that be okay? 3 MR. HERZOG: I thought I had five 4 minutes. 5 MS. NIELSON: You do. But rather than 6 allow Mr. Dansie to speak for three minutes and then 7 have to interrupt him and bring him back again, I'd 8 like to suggest that we hear the last individual who 9 signed up. And then I'd be happy to come back and 10 allocate the rest of your time. If you would identify 11 yourself for the record, please. 12 MR. HOWARD SCHMIDT: Howard Schmidt. I 13 don't know a lot about this system, but it seems to me 14 like if there are pollutants that are in the ground 15 and we lower the water table, we're probably gonna 16 leave the pollutants in the -- in the ground. 17 And it would make sense to me that water 18 should be injected back into the ground to actually 19 flush the system. That's how you would clean plumbing 20 pipes. That's how you would clean other circumstances 21 around. So that was one of the comments. But I think 22 it would make sense to actually see water come back 23 in. 24 I'm concerned that, also, about the water 25 levels being lowered for the private well owners. And 92 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H16-1 The nature of the contamination is such that calcium sulfate (gypsum) and other minerals, have been precipitated in the aquifer. These minerals will be left as the water table lowers, and it will take a long time to flush out as described in the Remedial Investigation. The concept of re-injecting clean water into the aquifer to further dissolve these minerals has been studied and has not been completely ruled out. However, returning clean water to the aquifer does not seem to be the best use of the resource at this point. Precipitation and infiltration will continue to recharge and flush the aquifer naturally. H16-2 As referenced in the Response to Common Comment No. 1, the Trustee has established a Stakeholder Forum to provide H16 H16-1 H16-2 1 I would suggest that it would be -- part of the 2 watchdog committee should be -- private water well 3 owners should be able to form some sort of an 4 organization. 5 I think the cities will -- will have a 6 lot of impact and input with Jordan Valley, but I 7 don't think the individual well owners will. And I 8 think it would be very, very useful to have an 9 organization of private well owners that would also 10 have impact and say on -- on how this is working. 11 And I think it's a great program. I 12 think it needs to happen. But I think we need more 13 time to evaluate it. And I would request that -- a 14 longer time, 60 to 90 days. Thank you. 15 MS. NIELSON: Thank you very much. I 16 know Mr. Dansie is interested in presenting additional 17 comment. Is there anyone here who has not had the 18 chance to speak yet who would like to address us? 19 Provide comment this evening? 20 Is there anyone else who would like to 21 talk or present additional comment beyond what they 22 were able to provide during the five minute period? 23 Okay, Mr. Belchak and Mr. Dansie. Let me suggest 24 this, are you -- 25 (A recess was requested.) 93 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX information and receive information from well owners and others as the project proceeds. Further information addressing well owner concerns is provided in the Response to Common Comment No. 10. H16-3 See the Response to Common Comment No. 1. H16-3 1 MS. NIELSON: Okay, let's take a five 2 minute break. When we come back I suggest that I 3 allow another five minutes for Mr. Dansie and five 4 minute for Mr. Belchak. And then if there are other 5 comments, questions, or anyone who would like to 6 speak, we'll provide an opportunity to do that at that 7 time. 8 (A recess was taken from 9:02 to 9:11 p.m.) 9 MS. NIELSON: If I could bring the 10 hearing back to order, please. At this point I have 11 two requests to be able to provide additional comment: 12 Mr. Dansie and Mr. Belchak. Is there anyone else who 13 would like additional time to speak this evening? 14 Okay. Mr. Dansie, I'd like to suggest 15 that I -- that we provide an additional five minutes 16 for you to speak, and five minutes for Mr. Belchak. 17 And then if there are any concluding comments or 18 questions, we can address those. Mr. Dansie. 19 MR. DANSIE: Thank you very much for the 20 opportunity to make a few additional comments. Five 21 minutes is a short time for something that's taken 15 22 years to develop, and 10 years of lots of attorneys 23 and time involved. So thank you very much. 24 My concern goes a little bit more. You 25 know, I've had geologists and water people tell me 94 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H17-1 The aquifer cleanup will be substantially accomplished within the 40-year life of the H17 H17-1 1 that it might take 800 to a thousand years to clean 2 this plume up. I think 40 years is probably beyond my 3 lifetime, but I'm hoping that this Trustee will take a 4 look at that. I think 40 years is not adequate with 5 regard to what goes on here. 6 I think Kennecott has been mining for -- 7 or Kennecott's predecessors, and I'll address that in 8 just a little bit -- since about 1860-1880. So that's 9 about 120 years. So that's about a third of the time 10 that they've been polluting that they want to clean it 11 up, or at least they want to be absolved of any 12 further responsibility. 13 I want to just talk a little bit about 14 that responsibility issue for a minute here. 15 Kennecott was acquired two or three times in the last 16 20 years by British Petroleum and by -- I can't 17 remember the other. But at least now it's owned by 18 Rio Tinto. 19 Rio Tinto, I think -- I don't have 20 firsthand information -- did an audit called a 21 liability audit when they acquired the Bingham Canyon 22 Mine and properties. So they were aware of what was 23 happening. There had been -- in other words, the 24 mining industry has top-rate geologists, chemists, and 25 hydrologists, like Paula, that know what's happened 95 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX proposed project. Acid water will be removed from the acid plume and substantial sulfate removal will be accomplished in Zone A and Zone B. JVWCD anticipates the continued need for demineralization treatment in Zone B after 40 years. This is because the background total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration will too high for municipal quality drinking water provided by JVWCD. See also the Responses to Common Comments No. 5 and 6. H17-2 Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation (KUCC) was the named defendant in the Consent Decree approved by the U.S. District Court in 1995 and remains the operator. Has all of the responsibility of the original owner. The Consent Decree and other environmental permits provide that, as part of any change of ownership and control, the new owner assumes responsibility. H17-2 1 and know what's going on. 2 I'm not saying they turn their head. I'm 3 saying that maybe the rules weren't as stiff at that 4 time. Nonetheless, the damage has been done. And 5 when Rio Tinto acquired this property, which is the 6 largest mine -- was the largest mine in the world, I 7 think there's some larger now -- knew that there was 8 some obligation that went with the properties. 9 I don't know how far they go back, but 10 they certainly are not since 1930-1965. They at least 11 go back to 1902, and I think before. And we have been 12 shortsighted and blind sided by Kennecott on the 13 environmental issues that stand out there now with 14 regard to water, with regard to soils that were 15 contaminated from previous mining operations. And I'm 16 not happy with what's happened there at all. 17 And I think that, as the state Trustee 18 looks at this, they should look at whether there's 19 additional plumes or additional things. This is an 20 important thing. We should not leave this area in the 21 condition that it has been. It's been improved a 22 little bit, but there are still a very lot of people 23 being affected by the pollution that was caused by 24 previous mining operations making large profits. 25 And I want to talk about that just a 96 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 little bit from the standpoint of who has to deal with 2 that now. This is great. Jordan Valley has come 3 forth, and we applaud. And they took Kennecott and 4 went to the Federal District Court, to the Appeals 5 Court, and got a favorable ruling to increase the 6 amount of money to clean this up. 7 But let's also put this into perspective. 8 Jordan Valley received money, and water rights, and 9 benefits for their own individual claims as well. So 10 they -- they've had an interest in doing this too. No 11 one else could have done it, because it cost a couple 12 million dollars. 13 We couldn't go back, as individuals in 14 this room, and deal with the situation that Jordan 15 Valley did. But they also benefitted from it, too. 16 And that's good. But I think one of the major 17 concerns is these cost projections that we've made, I 18 hope they're accurate. 19 I think they've been done by experts, and 20 I think they've been done as good as possible. 21 However, one of the problems that comes to my mind is, 22 so what? If it doesn't work, Jordan Valley can 23 increase 4 percent, or 9 percent, or 16 percent their 24 water rates. They could increase for the cost of 25 service. 97 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H17-3 The Consent Decree provides specific requirements regarding funding and water rights as part of the groundwater cleanup. See the Response to Common Comment No. 12. H17-3 1 We said, Well, this is one of the great 2 benefits that we were gonna get was no one was making 3 a profit. But there's no cap on what they have to -- 4 what they can charge the -- increase the water rates 5 to pay for this cleanup if Kennecott can't do it, or 6 if it doesn't do it, or at least their portion. 7 So I would ask that we have a strong 8 look, we have some auditors take a look at what money 9 is being spent by Jordan Valley on this project and 10 whether, down the road, we're just shifting the cost 11 of polluting by Kennecott to the end water user. 12 In other words, why should this water 13 have to be cleaned up at the expense of anyone that 14 drinks it today when it was polluted by Kennecott, for 15 profit, and just simply to avoid cost? So those are 16 some concerns. 17 And I don't want to be negative with what 18 Kennecott is doing today, because it's not the same 19 people. But I think it's the same company, it's the 20 same assets, the profits flow to the same 21 organization. And I think that's why I'm concerned 22 about it. 23 I believe that the Consent Decree ought 24 to have Rio Tinto's name on it, not Kennecott. It 25 just says Kennecott. It doesn't says its president, 98 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 its environmental manager, or anything else. It's 2 vague. It's not adequate. It simply needs to be 3 stronger. Enron, WorldCom, all those companies go out 4 of business. Kennecott is no different. 5 Mining companies fail every day of the 6 year and go out of business. Workers are laid off, 7 and so on and so forth. The difference being profit. 8 It's the cost to produce the pound of copper. And 9 Kennecott is very vocal about that when it comes to 10 their labor relations. 11 Well, I think they need to be very vocal 12 about how they're gonna pay for these costs down the 13 road. I don't think they should be shoved onto Jordan 14 Valley and shoved on back to me, and you, and everyone 15 in this room that drinks water and buys it out of 16 those pipelines. 17 The next thing I've got here is I've got 18 a letter dated August 16, 1999. It's to Robert 19 Morgan. It was hand delivered. It's from Kennecott 20 Copper Company. It says: Proposal for restricted 21 pumping in the southwestern Salt Lake Jordan Valley. 22 I'm gonna read this letter, but I'm gonna 23 ask a question. Why should Kennecott receive 24 preferential treatment, over anybody else that owns 25 water rights in this valley, to help them clean up a 99 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H17-4 See the Response to Common Comment No. 12. H17-4 1 problem that they caused? 2 Now, maybe we have to do it because the 3 problem is there. But if they caused it, then they 4 should pay the bill. And they should compensate the 5 people for what's affected. I'm gonna read this 6 letter. 7 (As read) Dear Mr. Morgan, 8 Kennecott Copper Corporation hereby 9 submits a request for the creation 10 of restricted pumping zone in 11 certain parts of the former 12 management of Area 8 -- 13 14 That's southwest part of Salt Lake 15 County. 16 17 -- of the interim Groundwater 18 Management Plan. The proposed 19 restriction area over -- over flies 20 contaminate -- overlies contaminated 21 water in the principal aquifer of 22 southwestern Jordan Valley, as 23 documented in the enclosed Remedial 24 investigation and Feasibility Study 25 done under CERCLA and State review 100 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 (CD-ROM attached). 2 As part of its responsibilities 3 under CERCLA and the Natural 4 Resource Degradation Damage 5 Settlement the State and Kennecott 6 has completed source controls at its 7 facilities to prevent degradation of 8 groundwater -- further degradation 9 of groundwater in the basin. 10 11 That's admirable. 12 13 Kennecott also has in place an 14 extraction well for acid water in 15 the groundwater basin. Kennecott -- 16 groundwater plume, excuse me. Two 17 extraction wells at the leading edge 18 of the elevated sulphate plume in 19 the Bingham Canyon, and an 20 extraction well at the leading edge 21 of the sulphate-contained water near 22 Kennecott -- contaminated water near 23 Kennecott water. 24 Kennecott is currently 25 conducting a joint study with Jordan 101 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 Valley Water Conservancy District -- 2 3 We've got the two parties right there, 4 Kennecott and Jordan Valley. I think they're the 5 beneficiaries, and maybe the cities are too. They've 6 bought them off to some degree. 7 8 -- the feasibility of 9 extracting and treating elevated 10 sulfate groundwater and providing 11 the treated water for municipal use. 12 13 Well, that's good. 14 15 Part of the effective 16 remediation plan must include 17 measures to protect the groundwater 18 users and prevent further mitigation 19 of existing contamination. Although 20 much of the affected aquifer on 21 Kennecott -- is on Kennecott 22 property -- 23 24 What does that have to do with? How do 25 you keep water on Kennecott property? I would really 102 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 like to know that. You know, you tell me, Well, it's 2 all on Kennecott property. Kennecott doesn't own from 3 the Oquirrh Mountains to the Wasatch Range. It isn't 4 all Kennecott property. 5 6 -- when Kennecott can control 7 groundwater development -- where 8 they can control it. Kennecott is 9 particularly concerned about the 10 future groundwater development along 11 the outskirts of South Jordan, West 12 Jordan and in the cities -- and in 13 the Town of Herriman. 14 15 They're concerned about development. 16 Why? Because they don't want to have to be affected 17 in their pumping operations. 18 19 Privately owned water rights in 20 these existing areas or communities 21 may require diversion of external 22 rights to areas of part of 23 development requirements. 24 Unrestricted use of the water 25 rights could draw the elevated 103 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 sulfate and total dissolved solids 2 into the currently clean aquifer, 3 causing additional damage to the 4 waters and exasperating the 5 groundwater condition. 6 7 Well that -- that's good, they're trying 8 to control. But at whose expense? Not Kennecott's, 9 the polluters. Not Jordan Valley's. They've already 10 been paid for their assets and their water rights. 11 It's you people that are here tonight that are 12 concerned about your water rights and your drawdowns. 13 14 Kennecott would like to 15 propose -- 16 17 Kennecott. Why are they the king of 18 anything? 19 20 -- would like to propose a 21 series of restrictions on future 22 use. 23 24 This is not the State in here. This is 25 Kennecott asking the State Engineer to do this. Who 104 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 the heck do they think they are? Jordan Valley has 2 already been paid for their water now, remember. Two 3 foxes in this chicken house. 4 MS. NIELSON: Mr. Dansie -- 5 MR. DANSIE: -- and well development in 6 these areas. These restrictions 7 would include: 8 Completion depth and pumping 9 restrictions on wells drilled within 10 3000 feet of the known 250 11 milligram -- mg/L-sulphate 12 concentration in the Herriman area 13 as shown on the map. 14 Completion of depth pumping and 15 restrictions on the wells drilled 16 within 3000 feet of the north 250 17 sulphate concentration. 18 19 Who is Kennecott to come in and say, 20 State Engineer, you do this? 21 MS. NIELSON: Mr. Dansie -- 22 MR. DANSIE: They don't own the water 23 rights. I'm sorry, I'll go on. I apologize. 24 25 Prohibition of new wells within 105 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 the sulphate isolation area and the 2 operation -- evaporation pond until 3 Kennecott installs the NRD A pump 4 system, achieves the hydraulic 5 contaminants of underground plume. 6 7 That's fine, they're trying to control 8 it. But at whose expense? Not Jordan Valley's, not 9 Kennecott's, but the water users. Anyway. 10 11 Appropriate completion depths 12 and pumping rates will be determined 13 on a case-by-case basis using the 14 most up-to-date information on 15 location and depth of contamination, 16 aquifer properties, and user needs. 17 Kennecott will supply the 18 information to the State Engineer -- 19 20 Boy. 21 22 -- and any water upon 23 request -- water user upon request. 24 The restricted area will shrink the 25 remediation and natural attrition 106 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 rate of the size of the contaminated 2 zone. 3 4 That's great. Now, this is the part 5 that's important and then I'll stop. 6 MS. NIELSON: Okay. 7 MR. DANSIE: Kennecott recognizes these 8 restrictions may adversely affect 9 the water rights of private water 10 users in these areas. 11 12 Thank you for the admission. 13 14 Kennecott stands ready -- 15 16 Now, how does this fit into the Consent 17 Decree, Trustee and top EPA enforcer? 18 19 Kennecott stands ready to 20 assist the affected property 21 owners -- 22 23 Huh. 24 25 In accordance -- in assistance 107 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 in setting and completing -- 2 3 Excuse me, I mean, I lost my place. 4 5 -- in obtaining adequate water 6 supply -- 7 8 Huh. That's pretty good. Let's get that 9 in the Consent Decree. 10 11 -- by certifying ad -- 12 alternative water sources. 13 14 Where are they gonna come from, the rain? 15 Utah Lake? Kennecott has water rights in Utah Lake. 16 17 -- and providing technical 18 assistance in siting and completing 19 supply wells, and providing 20 supplemental financing in cases 21 where the presence of the 22 contamination causes an additional 23 cost burden to the property owner. 24 25 I'm gonna give you this copy of this 108 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 letter, which I'm sure you already have, and ask the 2 U.S. Trustee and his top EPA enforcer for this State 3 require this to be done. Thank you very much. 4 (The audience applauds.) 5 MR. DANSIE: Do you want this for the 6 record? 7 MS. NIELSON: Yes. If you want to give 8 it to me, I'll make sure that it's part of the record. 9 MR. BELCHAK: I'm Tom Belchak again, and 10 I didn't get a chance to use the pointer last time. I 11 had this very same letter that I was -- that Ron 12 Dansie was reading from, and there are two comments. 13 The ccs went to W.R. Williams, General Manager of 14 Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation; M. Shoop, Associate 15 General Counsel, Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation; 16 and Dallin Jensen of Parsons, Behle & Latimer. 17 As water right owners we just don't have 18 good representation. We're independent. I suspect 19 that my group, Lance Consulting Group, is very 20 interested in understanding this entire issue and 21 being able to explain it to some of the private water 22 right owners. 23 We've taken a look at the Salt Lake 24 Valley. I really want those documents to say Salt 25 Lake Valley. I've never heard this place referred to 109 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H18 H18 1 as the Jordan Valley. This red area that we see 2 outlined on here is a -- a manifestation of this 3 letter. 4 This letter was very successful because 5 the -- it went to the quantity people, being the State 6 Engineer's office and the Division of Water Rights. 7 And the 3,000 feet from the known 250 milligram is the 8 blue, roughly. And this map that we're seeing here 9 that was presented this evening is quite a bit smaller 10 than the maps I've seen that I have in my possession. 11 We can let that go. But watch what 12 happens here with this yellow spot right here. This 13 is -- this is the same red spot here, presented in 14 very general terms. But if you -- if -- this is more 15 specific. I had to go -- look hard for this 16 particular red spot. But I'm seeing red. 17 I see black and white over here. And 18 that's the size of the -- the Salt Lake. That's 19 Antelope Island, in this very small picture. This 20 area is 78 square miles. You can look at it real 21 quickly, even on this little map on the Internet, and 22 see two townships. 23 Six miles by 6 miles is 36 square miles. 24 That's a township. Each one of these big squares are 25 townships, 6 miles by 6 miles. There's 78 square 110 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 miles of yellow. I'm seeing yellow here. We can't 2 see what's happening in the subsurface, but there's a 3 lot happening. 4 And if you take the Salt Lake Groundwater 5 Management Plan that was implemented in 19 -- in 2002 6 from the State Engineer's office, who regulates 7 quantity. The Department of Environmental Quality 8 deals with environmental quality. The two agencies 9 are overlapping and providing some very good benefit 10 to the polluter. 11 We think this is wrong. There's 12 incorrect logic here. We would like to see the 13 polluter pay, and not the taxpayers and the private 14 water right holders. There's something radically 15 wrong with that idea. However, the private water 16 right owners are not represented. 17 I look at Jordan Valley's checkbook on a 18 monthly basis, and there's a lot of money spent on 19 attorneys fees. And more so when this is going on. 20 Very well represented. Jordan Valley has a Washington 21 lobbyist that is paid well. His contract was up a 22 little bit this year. He makes more than I do, for 28 23 hours a month. 24 There's something that needs to be done 25 here. Every one of these people that own water rights 111 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H18-1 See the Response to Common Comment No. 12 regarding funding of the groundwater cleanup and the Response to Common Comment No. 10 regarding the processes for addressing problems raised by well owners. H18-1 1 are either in the yellow or outside of the yellow. 2 These people need to be represented. These -- the 3 valley is over appropriated. 4 The State Engineer has made a 5 determination through -- through some adequate study, 6 that there's 165,000 acre feet of safe yield 7 available. It's approximately three times over 8 appropriated. Sometimes I've -- I've had quotes of 9 six times over appropriated. 10 But there's quite a bit of water that's 11 tied up in paper. It's paper water. We need H2O to 12 live on. And I'm making a plea that something happens 13 to unite the private property right owners that have a 14 pertinent water right. 15 And I firmly believe it's not the state 16 Trustee's responsibility. It's a responsibility of 17 Kennecott to negotiate, in good faith, with all 18 private property owners. Their land is impacted 19 because without water your land is virtually 20 worthless, because you can't bring people to the land. 21 It's the people that want to buy the land. 22 I think that's about it. There's quite a 23 few questions I have. I think the 90-day extension is 24 fair. I think 8 days to review the documents to make 25 intelligent discussion, and I just haven't had it. 112 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX H18-2 See the Response to Common Comment No. 1. H18-2 1 This one particular page is the one page that I have 2 out of the -- the joint proposal, which is about an 3 inch and-a-half thick I suppose. I didn't take the 4 time to count pages, I estimated about 500 pages. 5 Sixty days isn't enough. Ninety days 6 would move it down the path of understanding a bit 7 more. Thank you. 8 (The audience applauds.) 9 MS. NIELSON: I'd like to thank Jordan 10 Valley and Kennecott for their presentation this 11 evening. And to thank all of the commenters for their 12 time, and comments, and their recommendations. I 13 realize that there was a short period of time between 14 the initial notice of request for comment on this 15 agreement and this initial hearing. 16 The reason we did that is because we 17 wanted to provide an opportunity to look at the maps, 18 to discuss, ask questions, early on in the process, so 19 that -- so that we could attempt to answer concerns 20 and help to clarify issues. 21 We have provided an additional public 22 comment period later in the -- in this period. It 23 will be the 25th of September. It's at the offices of 24 the Department of Environmental Quality. And it will 25 be at 3:30 in the afternoon. It will follow the same 113 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 format that we've followed this evening. 2 There's also an opportunity to provide 3 comment in writing. And to mail or fax that. To 4 provide it over the Internet. Again, to provide it at 5 the public comment at the end of the month. 6 I will take the request for additional 7 time into consideration, and make a determination as 8 promptly as I can. 9 Again, I'd like to thank everybody for 10 their time tonight. Thank the court reporter for 11 being so judicious in following our comments. And ask 12 you all to drive safely home. Thank you. And we'll 13 close the hearing. 14 (The hearing was closed at 9:34 p.m.) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 114 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX 1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 3 This is to certify that the foregoing 4 proceedings were taken before me, KELLY L. WILBURN, a 5 Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public in 6 and for the State of Utah. 7 8 That the proceedings were reported by me in 9 stenotype and thereafter caused by me to be 10 transcribed into typewriting. And that a full, true, 11 and correct transcription of said proceedings so taken 12 and transcribed is set forth in the foregoing pages, 13 inclusive. 14 15 I further certify that I am not of kin or 16 otherwise associated with any of the parties to said 17 cause of action, and that I am not interested in the 18 event thereof. 19 20 ___________________________ 21 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR My Commission Expires: 22 May 16, 2005 23 24 25 115 Kelly L. Wilburn, CSR, RPR DEPOMAX REPORTING SERVICES: (801)328-1188/1-800-DEPOMAX