DRC-2021-001167 - 0901a06880de9542

Dry e WasTe Management and Radiation Control
JAN 2 6 2021 Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
225 Union Blvd. Suite 600 Lakewood, CO, US, 80228
303 974 2140
www.energyfuels.com
ENERGY FUELS
January 25, 2021
Sent VIA E-MAIL AND EXPRESS DELIVERY
Ty L. Howard,
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
(3 C-202( o o i t 6,7
Re: Transmittal of Plan and Time Schedule under Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit
UGW370004 Part I.G.4 (c) White Mesa Mill (the "Mill")
Dear Mr. Howard:
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(c) for MW-26 for the
fourth quarter of 2020. Part I.G.2 of the Permit provides that out-of-compliance ("00C") status exists when the
concentration of a pollutant in two consecutive samples from a compliance monitoring point exceeds a
groundwater compliance limit ("GWCL"). While consecutive exceedance have been noted in other wells at the
site, a plan and time schedule 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.
This Plan covers Total Dissolved Solids ("TDS") in MW-26 that was identified as being in violation of Part
I.G.2 of the Permit, in the Fourth Quarter 2020 Exceedance Notice, dated January 25, 2021.
Please contact me if you have any questions or require any further information.
Yours very truly,
ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC.
at/ Kathy Weinel
Quality Assurance Manager
cc: Scott Bakken
David Frydenlund
Garrin Palmer
Logan Shumway
Terry Slade Angie Persico (Intera)
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-26 in the Fourth Quarter of 2020
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
225 Union Boulevard, Suite 600
Lakewood, CO 80228
January 25, 2021
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 ("P&TS") required under Part I.G.4(c) of the Permit relating
to violations of Part I.G.2 of the Permit for MW-26 for the fourth quarter of 2020. 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
other wells at the site, a P&TS 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 deteimined by Division of Waste Management and Radiation
Control ("DWMRC") Staff. Specifically, consecutive exceedances, which occurred in previous
reporting periods are discussed in previous SARs submitted to DWMRC. 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 P&TS 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 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 P&TS will not be prepared for monitoring wells with two successive exceedances, if
those successive exceedances were reported in a previous quarter and /or were included
in a previous SAR during the current permit period beginning March 19, 2019, because
the conclusions and actions delineated in those reports were accepted by DWMRC.
Chloroform and methylene chloride are the subject of the ongoing chloroform pumping program
and are covered by State of Utah Notice of Violation ("NOV") and Groundwater Corrective
Action Order ("CAO") State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality ("UDEQ") 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.
Groundwater at the Mill site has been evaluated in multiple recent investigations and reports,
including the Revised Background Groundwater Quality Report (INTERA, 2007a) and the New
Wells Background Report (INTERA, 2008) (collectively with INTERA, 2007b, the "Background
Reports"), the pH Report (INTERA, 2012), an isotopic investigation (Hurst and Solomon, 2008), a
report discussing the occurrence and likely impact of naturally-occurring pyrite on perched
(shallow) groundwater (the Pyrite Report [HGC, 2012a1), and multiple SARs.
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 plus two
standard deviations or the equivalent of background for each constituent on an intrawell basis.
The modified GWCLs became effective on January 20, 2010. A new GWDP was issued on
January 19, 2018. The January 19, 2018 GWDP incorporated the revised GWCLs that resulted
from previous SARs. A revised GWDP was issued on March 19, 2019. The revised GWDP
incorporated the revised GWCLs that resulted from previous SARs among other changes.
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 P&TS 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 previously submitted P&TSs and
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 P&TS covers Total Dissolved Solids ("TDS") in MW-26, identified as being in violation of
Part I.G.2 of the Permit, in the Fourth Quarter 2020 Exceedance Notice.
2. CONSTITUENTS AND WELLS SUBJECT TO THIS PLAN
The following constituents are covered by this P&TS:
Table 1
Constituents and Wells Subject to this Plan
Constituent POC Well GWCL (mg/L) Q3 and Q4 2020 Results (mg/L)
TDS MW-26 3284.19 Q3 = 3880, Q4 = 4860
It should be noted that the Fourth Quarter 2020 Exceedance Notice identifies a number of wells
with consecutive exceedances of other constituents that are not included in this P&TS, for the
reasons stated in Section 1 above and in the Fourth Quarter 2020 Exceedance Notice. This
P&TS is being submitted to DWMRC by EFRI to address exceedances in MW-26 for TDS.
TDS in Q4 2020 in MW-26 has exceeded the GWCL due to laboratory issues and erroneous
results (See Attachment 1).
Nitrate + Nitrite and Chloride concentrations in MW-26 are associated with the Nitrate/Chloride
plume, and are currently covered by the December 12, 2012 Stipulation and Consent Order.
With respect to pH, 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
EFRI has previously 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
TDS in MW-26 falls within the fifth category: Other Constituents. It is important to note that
TDS in MW-26 also falls within the fourth category: Pumping Wells.
Assessment of TDS in MW-26 will follow the process noted below.
3.1. Other Constituents
As shown in Attachment 2, TDS in MW-26 has been relatively stable over time. The first
exceedance noted for TDS in MW-26 was in the third quarter 2020. As required, EFRI
accelerated the sampling frequency.
During the fourth quarter 2020, TDS in MW-26 again exceeded the GWCL. During their data
review, American West Analytical Laboratory ("AWAL"), noted that the fourth quarter 2020
result for TDS in MW-26 was inconsistent with historic results. AWAL also noted that the
calculated TDS for MW-26 exceeded the measured by over 50%, indicating that the analytical
results were suspect. By the time that AWAL recognized that the 4,860 mg/L TDS result for
MW-26 was in error the 7-day TDS holding time had expired. AWAL did not provide
notification of the errors until November 2020, which precluded recollection of the quarterly
sample (which would have had to be recollected in October 2020). As noted in Attachment 2,
out of hold time reanalysis results were consistent with historic results and showed better
agreement with the calculated TDS.
Based on the AWAL investigation, the comparison to historic results and to the calculated TDS,
EFRI believes the fourth quarter 2020 TDS results for MW-26 are incorrect. EFRI also believes
the balance issues were present in the third quarter 2020, but had not yet been discovered by
AWAL. Because the results of the fourth quarter 2020 data are incorrect and the third quarter
results are suspect, EFRI fees it is appropriate to continue data collection and review through the
first quarter 2021.
EFRI will continue accelerated monitoring as required by the GWDP and discuss any additional
findings in the routine quarterly groundwater report for first quarter 2021. If the TDS results are
below the GWCL, EFRI will report the results in the routine first quarter groundwater report and
note therein that no further actions are necessary. If the exceedances continue, a separate P&TS
will be submitted for DWMRC approval.
4. PLAN
4.1. General
This is a P&TS 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.
Given the recent analyses in the Background Reports, SARs, pH Report, and Pyrite Report and
other recent information relating to the Chloroform and Nitrate/Chloride investigations at the
site, EFRI believes that all of the exceedances are likely due to background influences (including
a natural decreasing trend in pH across the site, changing water levels in some wells and other
factors), disruption of the aquifer by pumping, and/or the geochemical influences of the existing
chloroform and nitrate/chloride plumes.
4.2 Other Constituents
The analysis of the TDS exceedance in MW-26 will be to continue monitoring on an accelerated
schedule (from quarterly to monthly) as required by the GWDP. As stated in Section 3.1 above,
an assessment of the TDS results will be completed after the first quarter 2021 data are collected.
If the TDS results continue to exceed the GWCL, EFRI will proceed with a P&TS under separate
cover at that time.
4.2.1 Expert Reports to be Prepared
No expert reports will be completed as a result of the TDS exceedance in MW-26.
5. TIME SCHEDULE
The data will be reviewed after the first quarter 2021 data are collected. A discussion of further
actions, as appropriate, will be included in the routine first quarter 2021 groundwater report
which will be submitted on or before June 1, 2021.
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 means that contamination has
been introduced to groundwater in that well.
Laboratory error is directly responsible for the out of compliance result for TDS in MW-26 in the
fourth quarter 2020. It is likely that laboratory error is also responsible for the exceeding third
quarter 2020 result. Further data collection is warranted at this time to determine the need for
additional studies.
ATTACHMENT 1
American West ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES
Kathy Weinel
Quality Assurance Manager
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
T: 303.389.4134
225 Union Blvd., Suite 600
Lakewood, CO 80228
January 15, 2021
3440 South 700 West
ialt Lake City, UT 84119
Phone: [phone]
Toll Free: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
awalgawal-labs.com
web: www.awal-labs.com
Kyle F. Gross
Laboratory Director
Jose Rocha
QA Officer
Digitally signed by Patnck Patrick Noteboom
DN-cn=Patrick Noteboom, o=American west Analytical NI oe boorn emLab° airi:artitiesa oowal=-ItjT 3 abs com1,, t c=1.15 Date- 2021 01 15 18 30.50 -0700,
Patrick Noteboom
CUSTOMER SUPPORT CHEMIST/MARKETING MANAGER
TEL: (801) OR [phone]
CELL: [phone]
Ms. Kathy Weinel,
The purpose of this letter is to explain the errant Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) data
generated by American West Analytical Laboratories (AWAL) on Energy Fuels Research
Incorporated's sample MW-26 in October, 2020 (AWAL Lab ID 2010547-011).
By the time AWAL recognized the 4,860 mg/L TDS result generated for TDS on MW-26
was in error the 7 day TDS holding time had expired . The TDS error was recognized
during a quality control review when the theoretical TDS (the sum of the major cations
and anions) disagreed with the measured TDS by over 50%. The only recourse at that
juncture was to re-run the TDS outside of holding time. AWAL re-ran the TDS in
duplicate and got 2700mg/L and 2660 mg/L. The out-of-hold TDS better matched the
theoretical TDS (3,005 mg/L).
The root cause of the errant TDS data was an erratic balance.
Initially the report was released without an appropriate data qualifier on the errant TDS
data. When this was recognized the report was revised.
Further discussion is welcome.
ATTACHMENT 2
Report Charts
Results for Total Dissolved Solids
Site: White Mesa Mill
_
12/31/2019
Sample Date
Printed: 01/16/2021 01:19 PM Page 1 of 1