DRC-2010-002167 - 0901a0688016e6c4

- -ooio-m-^'u:'!
DENISOr«^i
MINES
i Rectwed^
^ Raii\a\^^°" conyo^ *»y
DMiiaen MbMS (USA) Corp>
109017th Streot Sutta 990
Oenvvr, CO 80269
USA
Tel:3016»-7798
Fax:[phone]
wwfw.deniaonniiiws.eoin
^?/ U015;
Febmary 23, 2010
VIA PDF AND FEDEX
Dane L. Finerfrock, Co-Executive Secretary
Utah Water Quality Board
Utah Department of Enviromnental Quality
168 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144810
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4810
Re: Application for Variance of or Exercise of Enforcement Discretion With Respect to
Part I.E.2 of Ground Water Discharge Permit No. UGW370004 for the White Mesa
Uranium Mill
Dear Mr. Finerfrock:
This is an application for a variance of, or exercise of enforcement discretion with respect to,
certain provisions of Part 1.E.2 ofthe White Mesa Mill's (the "Mill's") Ground Water Discharge
Permit No. UGW370004 (the "Pemiit").
A new requirement was added to the Permit on March 17, 2008, which required the Mill to begin
quarterly sampling of wells MW-20 and MW-22 starting with the first quarter 2008 sampling
event. Under this new requirement, Denison is also required to submit by March 1, 2010 a
Background Report for MW-20 and MW-22 that contains statistical and other analyses of the
first eight consecutive quarters of sampling.
This new requirement was one of several modifications to the Pennit that became effective on
March 17, 2008, with the issuance of a modified Permit on that date. Denison received a copy of
the modified Permit on March 19, 2008.
The Mill did not sample MW-20 and MW-22 in the first quarter of 2008. Given the short period
of time between the day the modified Permit was received by Denison and the end of the first
quarter 2008, Denison does not believe it was realistic to expect that MW-20 and MW-22 could
have been sampled during the first quarter 2008 groundwater sampling event. The first quarter
2008 sampling event ended on Wednesday, March 19, 2008, the day of receipt ofthe modified
Permit, and the samples were sent to the Mill's contract analytical laboratory on Thursday,
March 20, in order to meet the holding time and sample temperature requirements. The
following Monday, March 24, 2008 the Mill commenced the first quarter 2008 chloroform
sampling. That sampling event was finished and the samples were collected on Wednesday,
March 26, 2008 and shipped to the laboratory on Thursday, March 27, 2008. This left very little
time in the first quarter of 2008 to schedule and properly collect the samples for MW-20 and
MW-22 under normal Mill sampling procedures.
The requirements to commence sampling MW-20 and MW-22 in the first quarter of 2008 and to
file a Background Report on or before March 1, 2010 were agreed to in the fall of 2007, when
the revisions to the Permit were discussed between the Division of Radiation Control ("DRC")
and Denison, and are summarized in the October 24, 2007 Statement of Basis prepared by DRC.
The public meeting in respect of these modifications to the Permit was held on November 27,
2007. Denison expected at that time that the modified permit would be issued prior to or early in
the first quarter of 2008, thereby allowing MW-20 and MW-22 to be sampled along with the
other groundwater monitoring wells during the scheduled first quarter sampling event. Denison
does not believe it was ever contemplated that such a short period of time would be allowed to
complete the first round of samples for MW-20 and MW-22 or that a special sampling event
would have to be scheduled for those two wells alone. The very short sampling window appears
to be the unintentional result of the relatively long period of time between the end of the public
comment period in November 2007 and the issuance ofthe modified Permit in March, 2008, and
the failure of Denison and DRC to realize at the time that the performance dates in Part I.E.2
needed to be adjusted to take into account the delay in issuing the modified permit.
Sampling of MW-20 and MW-22 commenced with the second quarter of 2008. As a result, there
are only seven consecutive quarters of sample results to date. It is therefore not possible to
analyze eight consecutive quarters of data at this time, as required by Part I.E.2 ofthe Permit and
as required to perform the statistical analyses on the data.
As a result ofthe foregoing, Denison requests that the requirements of Part I.E.2 ofthe Permit be
varied, or that enforcement discretion be exercised, to require that quarterly sampling of MW-20
and MW-22 commence with the second quarter of 2008 and that the Background Report
contemplated by Part I.E.2 ofthe Permit be required to be submitted by June 1, 2010, after the
collection of eight consecutive quarters of samples. This would effectively push back the
sampling and Background Report filing requirement by one quarter. Denison submits that these
adjusted performance dates are more in line with the perfonnance criteria Denison, and
presumably DRC, had in mind when agreeing to the dates in October 2007.
If you have any questions, or require any ftirther information, please contact me at your
DENISO
MINES
jyh
convenience.
YoursMily.
Dayid C: Frydenlund
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Counsel
cc: Ron Hochstein
Harold R. Roberts
Jo Ann Tischler
David E. Turk
DENISO MINES
r^ii