The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDRC-2015-008729 - 0901a068805d0228ENERGYFUELS Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. 225 Union Blvd. Suite 600 Lakewood, CO, US, 80228 303 974 2140 www.energyfuels.com Div of Waste Management and Radiation Control December 3,2015 DEC 0 h 2015 Sent VIA E-MAIL AND OVERNIGHT DELIVERY DRsC-ZO\3^-00STZct Mr. Scott Anderson Director of Waste Management and Radiation Control State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality 195 North 1950 West P.O. Box 144880 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4880 Re: Transmittal of Plan and Time Schedule under Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit UGW370004 Part I.G.4 (d) White Mesa Mill (the "Mill") Dear Mr. Anderson: This letter transmits Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.'s ("EFRI's") Plan and Time Schedule pursuant to State of Utah Groundwater Discharge Permit UGW370004 (the "Permit") Part I.G.4(d) for Violations of Part I.G.2 of the Permit. Part I.G.2 of the Permit provides that out-of-compliance ("OOC") status exists when the concentration of a pollutant in two consecutive samples from a compliance monitoring point exceeds a groundwater compliance limit ("GWCL"). On November 18, 2015, EFRI submitted a letter to the Director under Part I.G.l(a) of the Permit providing notice that the concentrations of specific constituents in groundwater monitoring wells at the Mill exceeded their respective GWCL's for the 3rd quarter of 2015 and indicating which of those constituents had two consecutive exceedances during that quarter. This Plan and Time Schedule addresses constituents requiring a Plan and Time Schedule for the 3rd quarter of 2015. Please contact me if you have any questions or require any further information. Yours very truly, ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC. Kathy Weinel Quality Assurance Manager cc: David C. Frydenlund Harold R. Roberts David E. Turk Scott Bakken Logan S hum way WHITE MESA MILL State of Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit UGW370004 Plan and Time Schedule Under Part I.G.4 (c) For Exceedances in MW-3 in the Third Quarter of 2015 Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. 225 Union Boulevard, Suite 600 Lakewood, CO 80228 December 18, 2015 1. INTRODUCTION Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. ("EFRI") operates the White Mesa Uranium Mill (the "Mill"), located near Blanding Utah, under State of Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit UGW370004 (the "Permit"). This is the plan and time schedule (the "Plan") required under Part I.G.4(c) of the Permit relating to violations of Part I.G.2 of the Permit for the MW-3 for the third quarter of 2015. Part I.G.2 of the Permit provides that out-of-compliance status exists when the concentration of a pollutant in two consecutive samples from a compliance monitoring point exceeds a groundwater compliance limit ("GWCL") in Table 2 of the Permit. While consecutive exceedance have been noted in MW-3 and other wells at the site, a plan and time schedule and Source Assessment Report ("SAR") have not been required or appropriate in light of other actions currently being undertaken by EFRI or in light of other reports submitted by EFRI, and as determined by Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control ("DWMRC") Staff. Specifically, consecutive exceedances which occurred in previous reporting periods are discussed in the SARs submitted to DWMRC October 10, 2012, May 8, 2013, August 30, 2013, December 17, 2013, January 13, 2014, March 19, 2014, and the Plan and Time Schedules submitted December 4, 2014, May 19, 2015, and September 10, 2015. Additionally, pH was addressed in reports dated November 9, 2012 and December 7, 2012. A description of the other actions and reports which have affected the requirement to submit a plan and time schedule are as follows: 1. Nitrate + nitrite and chloride in monitoring wells at the site have been the subject of ongoing investigations at the Mill. Based on the results of the previous investigations, EFRI and the Director of Waste Management and Radiation Control (the "Director") acknowledge that it has not been possible to date to determine the source(s), cause(s), attribution, magnitudes of contribution, and proportion(s) of the local nitrate + nitrite and chloride in groundwater. EFRI submitted a Corrective Action Plan ("CAP") in February 2012 for nitrate + nitrite and chloride in groundwater. The CAP was approved on December 12, 2012 and the activities associated with the CAP are on-going. Based on information provided by DWMRC in teleconferences on April 27, and May 2, 2011, due to the ongoing activities and actions, the 30-day plan and schedule for assessment is not required for nitrate + nitrite and chloride exceedances at this time. 2. As discussed in previous quarterly groundwater sampling reports, the background levels and GWCLs for pH were established based on eight or more quarters of laboratory data, which are historically higher than field data. EFRI's letter to the Director dated January 31, 2011 proposed the recalculation of the GWCLs for field pH. Following the statistical evaluation of pH data by EFRI's geochemical consultant, INTERA, Inc., EFRI compared the Mill's groundwater pH data from Q2 2011 and noted that all of the June 2011 groundwater results, and many of the other results from Q2 2011, were already outside the revised GWCLs that were to be proposed in the June 30, 2011 letter. Pursuant to teleconferences with DWMRC on December 5, and December 19, 2011, EFRI submitted a Work Plan and Schedule on January 20, 2012 and a revised plan based on DWMRC comments on April 13, 2012. Based on the approved Work Plan and Time Schedule, EFRI and DWMRC entered into a Stipulated Consent Agreement ("SCA") dated July 12, 2012. The SCA required the completion of the pH Report and the Pyrite Investigation and associated report. The pH Report and Pyrite Investigation Report were submitted November 9, 2012 and December 7, 2012 respectively. By letter dated April 25, 2013, DWMRC accepted the conclusions that the out-of-compliance results for pH are due to background effects within the aquifer matrix and are not caused by Mill activities. DWMRC also approved the recalculation of the GWCLs. As a result, the 30-day plan and schedule for assessment is not required for field pH exceedances. 3. A Plan and Time Schedule will not be prepared for monitoring wells with two successive exceedances in if successive exceedances were reported in a previous quarter and were included in the Source Assessment Reports ("SARs"), submitted October 10, 2012, May 8, 2013, August 30, 2013, December 17, 2013, January 13, 2014, and March 19, 2014. A Plan and Time Schedule will not be submitted for those constituents covered by the previously mentioned SARs, because the conclusions and actions delineated in those reports were accepted by DWMRC as documented in DWMRC correspondence dated April 25, 2013, July 23, 2013, September 17, 2013 January 7, 2014, March 10, 2014, and June 5, 2014 respectively. Chloroform and methylene chloride are the subject of the ongoing chloroform pumping program and are covered by State of Utah Stipulation and Consent Order ("SCO") Docket No. UGW-20- 01. As a result, the 30-day plan and schedule for assessment of chloroform and methylene chloride exceedances is not required. The Permit was originally issued in March 2005, at which time GWCLs were set on an interim basis, based on fractions of State Ground Water Quality Standards or the equivalent, without reference to natural background at the Mill site. The Permit also required that EFRI prepare a background groundwater quality report to evaluate all historic data for the purposes of establishing background groundwater quality at the site and developing GWCLs under the Permit. As required by then Part I.H.3 of the Permit, EFRI submitted the following to the Director: • A Revised Background Groundwater Quality Report: Existing Wells For Denison Mines (USA) Corp.'s Mill Site, San Juan County, Utah, October 2007, prepared by INTERA, Inc. (the "Existing Wells Background Report"); • A Revised Addendum: - Evaluation of Available Pre-Operational and Regional Background Data, Background Groundwater Quality Report: Existing Wells For Denison Mines (USA) Corp.'s Mill Site, San Juan County, Utah, November 16, 2007, prepared by INTERA, Inc. (the "Regional Background Report"); and • A Revised Addendum: — Background Groundwater Quality Report: New Wells For Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 's Mill Site, San Juan County, Utah, April 30, 2008, prepared by INTERA, Inc. (the "New Wells Background Report, and together with the Existing Wells Background Report and the Regional Background Report, the "Background Reports"). Based on a review of the Background Reports and other information and analyses the Director re-opened the Permit and modified the GWCLs to be equal to the mean concentration of background for each constituent on an intrawell basis plus two standard deviations or the equivalent. The modified GWCLs became effective on January 20, 2010. Part I.G.4 c) of the GWDP states, with respect to exceedances of GWCLs, "that the Permittee shall prepare and submit within 30 calendar days to the Executive Secretary a plan and a time schedule for assessment of the sources, extent and potential dispersion of the contamination, and an evaluation of potential remedial action to restore and maintain groundwater quality to insure that Permit limits will not be exceeded at the compliance monitoring point and that DMT or BAT will be reestablished." Pursuant to this requirement, EFRI has submitted nine Plans and Time Schedules and eight associated SARs to address previous dual exceedances (as required in light of other actions currently being undertaken by EFRI and as determined by DWMRC Staff and stated in teleconferences with EFRI on April 27 and May 2, 2011). This Plan covers the constituent that was identified as being in violation of Part I.G.2 of the Permit, in the Third Quarter 2015 Exceedance Notice, dated November 18, 2015. 2. CONSTITUENTS AND WELLS SUBJECT TO THIS PLAN The following constituents are covered by this Plan: Table 1 Constituent and Well Subject to this Plan Constituent POC Well Current GWCL (mg/L) Q3 2015 Results (mg/L) Sulfate MW-3 3663 3670 It should be noted that the Third Quarter 2015 Exceedance Notice identifies a number of wells, with consecutive exceedances of other constituents. None of those constituents are included in this Plan, for the reasons stated in Section 1 above and in the Q3 2015 Exceedance Notice. This Plan is being submitted to DWMRC by EFRI to address the exceedance in MW-3. As noted above, this Plan covers the constituent that was identified as being in violation of Part I.G.2 of the Permit, in the Q3 2015 Exceedance Notice, dated November 18, 2015. With respect to pH (and as stated previously), EFRI and DWMRC entered into a Stipulated Consent Agreement ("SCA") dated July 12, 2012. The SCA required the completion of the pH Report and the Pyrite Investigation and associated report. The pH Report and Pyrite Investigation Report were submitted November 9, 2012 and December 7, 2012 respectively. By letter dated April 25, 2013, DWMRC accepted the conclusions that the out-of-compliance results and site-wide decrease in pH are due to background effects within the aquifer matrix and are not caused by Mill activities. The site-wide decrease in pH due to background effects within the aquifer matrix has continued. 3. CATEGORIES FOR ANALYSIS Previously EFRI has categorized wells and constituents in several categories as follows: • Constituents Potentially Impacted by Decreasing pH Trends Across the Site • Newly Installed Wells with Interim GWCLs • Constituents in Wells with Previously Identified Rising Trends • Pumping Wells • Other Constituents Sulfate in MW-3 falls within the third category: Constituents in Wells with Previously Identified Rising Trends. However, assessment of the well construction for MW-3 has raised issues regarding the data collected in MW-3. In 2004, DWMRC noted several well construction issues that they felt had a direct bearing on the quality of data collected from MW-3. To address the construction issues and assess the effects on the data quality potentially resulting from well construction, assessment of sulfate in MW-3 will follow the process noted below. 3.1. Constituents in Wells with Previously Identified Rising Trends Sulfate in MW-3 was identified in the Background Report (Table 16) vas having statistically significant rising trends, due to natural background influences Specifically, an unusual well sump and stagnant groundwater which accumulates in the sump may be affecting the analytical results reported for MW-3. The specific actions to assess MW-3 are described below. 4. PLAN 4.1. General This Plan is a plan and time schedule for assessment of the sources, extent and potential dispersion of the contamination, and an evaluation of potential remedial action to restore and maintain groundwater quality to ensure that Permit limits will not be exceeded at the compliance monitoring point and that, to the extent applicable, discharge minimization technology and best available technology will be reestablished. Exceedances of cadmium and zinc were noted in MW-3 in second quarter 2015. A Plan was submitted on September 10, 2015 to address those exceedances. DWMRC approved the Plan in correspondence dated November 10, 2015. EFRI will include the assessment of sulfate in MW-3 using the same strategy and data collection procedures proposed in the September 10, 2015 Plan and as described herein. The first step in the analysis will be to perform an assessment of the potential sources for each exceedance to determine whether the exceedance is due to the previously reported increasing trend or if the exceedances are due to the construction of MW-3 or both. The construction issue will be addressed using the methodology described below. MW-3 was constructed with a 9 -10 feet of blank casing below the screened interval. This "sump" water becomes stagnant between sampling events. Purging prior to sampling eliminates most of the stagnant water present in the sump, but it is not possible to remove all water within the sump during purging. During sampling, groundwater enters the well through the screen and mixes with the remaining stagnant water in the sump. The mixing of fresh and stagnant water, and/or stirring up any sediment accumulating in the sump, may be affecting the analytical results. The analysis of the exceedances in MW-3 will be completed by first isolating as much of the MW-3 sump as practical. The sump will be isolated through the installation of an inflatable, inert packer. The packer will be installed below the well screen to prevent any mixing of the stagnant water and/or sediment which accumulates in the sump with the fresh water entering the well through the screen. This approach should allow for the assessment of the influences resulting from the sump and the stagnant water/sediment residing there. Normal purging and sampling procedures will be followed after the placement of the packer. Full suite samples will be collected for 4 quarters after the installation of the packer. After collection of 4 quarterly samples, EFRI will review the analytical data and discuss the findings with DWMRC to determine a path forward regarding the reporting format for the findings of the study. The format and contents of the final report will be determined by DWMRC and will be submitted in compliance with a schedule to be set by DWMRC after review of the data. In addition, the analytical results will be reported on an interim basis, as they are collected, in the routinely scheduled quarterly groundwater monitoring reports. 5. TIME SCHEDULE The field installation of the packer will be completed by February 8, 2016 as required by the previously approved Plan dated September 10, 2015. The quarterly sampling described above will commence the first quarter following the installation of the packer. 6. CONCLUSION Given the varied background groundwater quality at the site it cannot be assumed that consecutive exceedances of a constituent in a monitoring well necessarily indicates that contamination has been introduced to groundwater sampled by that well. With respect to MW-3, preliminary analysis suggests that sulfate increases are due to the previously reported increasing trend. However, construction issues may be affecting the analytical results in MW-3 and causing erroneous exceedances. The location of MW-3 is important when determining potential sources of contamination. MW-3 is located approximately 2,000 feet downgradient from the Mill's tailings cells, and it is extremely unlikely that any potential tailings cell leakage could reach MW-3 during the 30 years the Mill has been in operation. As indicated in previous reports, travel times in the perched aquifer at the Mill are estimated to be approximately 0.90 feet per year in the area between the Mill's tailings cells and MW-3, resulting in a predicted travel time from the tailings cells to MW- 3 of over 2,000 years.