DRC-2014-002321 - 0901a06880415c4c

%m m ENE ENERGYFUELS
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
225 Union Blvd. Suite 600
Lakewood, CO, US, 80228
303 974 2140
www.energyfuels.com
March 18, 2014 DRC-2014-002321
VIA PDF AND EXPRESS DELIVERY
Mr. Rusty Lundberg
Director of the Utah Division of Radiation Control
State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality
195 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144850
Salt Lake City, UT 84116-4850
^£6 o
6V Ra
Dear Mr. Lundberg:
Re: Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit No. UGW3700004
White Mesa Uranium Mill - Notice Pursuant to Parts I.E.7 f) and I.G.3 of the
Permit
Please take notice pursuant to Parts I.E.7 f) and I.G.3 of the White Mesa Mill's (the "Mill's")
State of Utah Groundwater Discharge Permit No. UGW370004 (the "Permit"), that Energy Fuels
Resources (USA) Inc. ("EFRI"), as operator of the Mill and holder of the Permit, identified and
will repair damage to the Roberts Pond Liner System as described in more detail below.
Mill operations notified the EFRI Quality Assurance Manager on Thursday, March 13, 2014 at
12:30 pm, of liner damage to Roberts Pond that was noted, during routine operations, apart from
routine inspections. Photographs are included as Attachment 1 to this letter. EFRI provided
initial verbal notification to the Division of Radiation Control ("DRC") of the liner damage by
telephone at approximately 2:45 pm on Thursday March 13, 2014, as contemplated by Parts I.E.7
f)and I.G.3 of the Permit.
1. Facts and Background Information
a) Part I.E.7 f) of the Permit requires that the licensee conduct daily inspections for each
of the tailings cells and weekly inspections of Roberts Pond. According to Part I.E.7
f):
"In the event that any liner defect or damage is identified during a liner system
inspection, the Permittee shall: 1) report and repair said defect or damage
pursuant to Part I.G.3 by implementation of the currently approved Liner
Maintenance Provisions, and 2) report all repairs made pursuant to Part I.F.2."
b) Although Part I.G.3 of the Permit is stated to apply to circumstances where the
Permittee fails to maintain Discharge Minimization Technology ("DMT") or Best
Letter to Rusty Lundberg
March 18, 2014
Page 2
Available Technology ("BAT") standards, Part I.E.7 f) requires that the notification
provisions of Part I.G.3 also apply to liner defects or damage, regardless of whether or
not the liner defect or damage constitutes a failure of DMT or BAT. Under Part I.G.3,
the Permittee is required to submit to the Director a notification and description of the
defect or damage orally within 24-hours of the Permittee's discovery, followed by
written notification within five calendar days.
c) The liner damage was identified, at 12:30 pm during routine operations, on March 13,
2014, apart from a liner maintenance inspection. The damage incident occurred as a
result of maintenance activities, when Roberts Pond was in empty condition during the
planned maintenance outage in July 2012.
d) Roberts Pond was empty and out of service in June 2012 for routine maintenance and
preparation for Mill startup. Roberts Pond underwent cleanout of accumulated
sediment during the month of July 2012. The long-arm bucket excavator used for
solids removal created a tear in the flexible membrane liner ("FML") of Roberts Pond
at approximately 1:30 pm on July 5, 2012. Reference is made to the EFRI letter dated
August 6, 2012. Roberts Pond was empty at the time of the July 2012 incident, and
remained empty, due to the maintenance outage until August 2012.
e) Repairs to the liner were performed and completed during the weeks of July 5 and July
12, 2012, in accordance with the Mill's Liner Maintenance Provisions. The Mill
returned Roberts Pond to service during the week of August 6, 2012, and it received
process fluids, as necessary, thereafter.
f) EFRI estimates that the liner damage in March 2014 most likely was caused by heavy
equipment contact with the liner itself during the July 2012 maintenance outage or was
a result of stresses to the liner caused by the maintenance activities in July 2012. The
July 2012 maintenance activities are believed to be the source of the liner damage
because no other maintenance activities, involving the use of heavy equipment, have
been performed in the interim.
g) The liner damage or liner stress was not noted at the time of the July 2012 maintenance
outage because residual sediments, several inches thick, were left in place by the heavy
equipment used during the July 2012 maintenance activities.
h) The weekly liner inspections and freeboard measurements specified by the GWDP were
conducted as required. The weekly inspections did not note the liner damage due to
the residual sediments left after the 2012 maintenance activities and because additional
sediments have accumulated during use.
Letter to Rusty Lundberg
March 18,2014
Page 3
i) As contemplated by Parts I.E.7 f) and LG.3 of the Permit, EFRI provided notification to
Mr. Thomas Rushing of DRC at 2:45 pm and again to Mr. Russ Topham at 3:35 pm on
March 13, 2014, within 24 hours of the Quality Assurance Manager receiving
information from Mill personnel regarding the incident.
j) This Notice constitutes the 5-day written notice contemplated by Parts I.E.7 f) and I.G.3
of the Permit.
2. Actions Taken
Upon receipt of the initial identification, the Mill's Environmental Coordinator notified the Mill
Manager immediately. The following plan of action was immediately put into place:
a) Pumping of residual fluids in Roberts Pond was immediately implemented.
b) Mill staffing was increased by 12 for manual removal (by means of hand shovels) of
the sediments in Roberts Pond to complete a thorough inspection of the liner in Roberts
Pond.
c) EFRI will develop an Action Plan to address any impacted soils that may be present
beneath the liner. The Action Plan will be submitted to DRC on or before April 8,
2014 after the sediments have been removed and a complete and thorough inspection
of the liner has been completed.
3. Actions That Will be Taken to Prevent a Reoccurrence of this Incident
Actions to prevent recurrence of this incident were delineated in the EFRI letter dated August 6,
2012 relating to the July 2012 tear. The actions specified in the August 6, 2012 letter are still in
effect and have not changed since the time of issuance of the August 6, 2012 letter. The
maintenance activities that resulted in the action have not been repeated since 2012 and as such
the actions to prevent recurrence are still valid. The actions taken to prevent recurrence are
reiterated below.
The following actions taken to prevent a reoccurrence of this incident delineated in the August 6,
2012 letter are:
a) The Mill will perform cleanouts of Roberts Pond on a more frequent basis, to minimize
the volume of solids accumulated, and reduce the size of equipment needed for solids
removal.
b) If heavy equipment is required for solids removal from Roberts Pond, the Mill will use
equipment smaller than the long-arm bucket excavator used in July 2012, where
possible.
Letter to Rusty Lundberg
March 18, 2014
Page 4
c) A repair report and further documentation of the repairs will be submitted to the
Director with the quarterly DMT Report following the incident, as discussed in Section
4, below.
4. Required Reporting
As required by Part I.F.2 of the permit and by the Mill's Liner Maintenance Provisions, a repair
report will be submitted to the Director with the next quarterly DMT Report following
completion of the repairs and implementation of the action plan. Repairs are planned to be
completed during the second quarter of 2014. The repair report will be submitted with the
second quarter 2014 DMT Report on or before September 1, 2014. The repair report will contain
the following elements:
• Repair narrative describing the nature of the damage and the repair work completed to
repair the damage.
• Repair material type used to complete the repair
• Repair material description
• Post repairs test specifications
• Test Methods (ASTM or other)
• Daily reports during the repair work
• Repair test results
• Quality Assurance/Quality Control Information
5. Affirmative Defense
EFRI does not believe that identification of a defect or damage to the Roberts Pond liner caused
by maintenance activities constitutes a failure of DMT under the Permit. With respect to the liner
damage, the damage was not intentional and we believe it was not negligent. Further, EFRI has
taken adequate measures, has an adequate plan and schedule for meeting GWDP requirements.
Please contact me if you have any additional questions or require any further information.
Yours very truly,
ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC.
Kathy Weinel
Quality Assurance Manager
cc: David C. Frydenlund
Dan Hillsten
Harold R. Roberts
David E. Turk
Attachment 1
Roberts Pond Liner Damage Photographs
mm
>3
1
is ft
S »