DRC-2017-000682 - 0901a068806a45d4

Ute Mountain Ute ‘TriSe
Environmental Programs Department
P.O. Box 448
Towaoc, Colorado 81334-0448
[phone]
Div of Waste Management
and Radiation Control
January 20, 2017
Mr. Scott Anderson
Director of Waste Management and Radiation Control
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
195 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-8440
DRC-aoiT' 000&8Z
Re: White Mesa Uranium Mill Modified Ground Water Compliance Limits (GWCLs) for MW-24
Dear Mr. Anderson,
It has come to our attention that recent correspondence between the Utah Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC) and Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. (EFRI) outlines
plans to raise compliance limits for a point of compliance (POC) monitoring well, MW-24, at the White
Mesa Uranium Mill facility in San Juan County Utah (December 20, 2016 letter from Scott Anderson,
Director, Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control to Kathy Weinel, Quality Assurance
Manager, Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc., Re: Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. November 17, 2016,
Transmittal of Revised Statistical Analysis for Cadmium and Thallium in MW-24, White Mesa Mill
Groundwater Discharge Permit No. UGW370004 (Permit). As you are aware the Ute Mountain Ute Tribal
community is located in close proximity downgradient of the mill facility and relies on groundwater
resources for community supply and to support biologically and culturally significant ecosystems.
MW-24 is a POC well located adjacent to Tailings Cell 1 on the south west side. As recognized by
UDWMRC in the 2004 Statement of Basis for the Groundwater Discharge Permit (GWDP) for the White
Mesa Uranium Mill, POC wells serve as the primary leak detection system for the three older tailings
cells (Tailings Cell 1, 2 and 3) since these tailings impoundments were installed without double liner
systems or functional leak detection systems. Technical analysis performed by DWMRC for the GWDP
led to the selection of 38 specific indicator parameters which were selected because of multiple factors:
feedstock materials, process reagents, source term abundance and contaminant mobility.
Cadmium and thallium were specifically selected by DWMRC as indicator parameters of facility impact
to groundwater due to their presence in Arizona Strip Ores and alternate feed materials.
The 2009 EPA Unified Statistical Guidance document cited as justification for using statistical procedures
employed to calculate updated background values is clear that updating of background values is
The September 14, 2016 letter from Scott Anderson, Director Division of Waste Management and
Radiation Control to Kathy Weinal, Quality Assurance Manager, Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc., Re:
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. June 24, 2016 Transmittal of Source Assessment Report for
Monitoring Well MW-18 and MW-24 White Mesa Uranium Mill Groundwater Discharge Permit No.
UGW370004 (Permit) includes DWMRC review and approval of EFRI Source Assessment Report (SAR)
regarding fluoride, pH, cadmium and thallium in MW-24.
DWMRC cites four reasons in the September 14 letter for supporting EFRI's SAR concluding that water
chemistry trends at MW-24 are not caused by tailings solutions. Each of these cited reasons are
fundamentally flawed, and the Tribe strongly believes relying on them in a regulatory approach is
inadequate and contrary to good scientific practice and contrary to the protection of human health and
the environment.
The first reason cited: "a review of indicator parameters concentration trends" fails to account for the
intent of the 2004 Statement of Basis for the initial GWDP. Technical analysis performed by DWMRC for
the GWDP led to the selection of 38 specific indicator parameters which were selected because of
multiple factors: feedstock materials, process reagents, source term abundance and contaminant
mobility.
The intent of selecting 38 specific parameters for analysis in the POC well system is to serve as an early
warning indicator of groundwater pollution. Under this approach, compliance is determined in each well
and for each parameter. Under the GWDP contamination may be indicated and regulated based on a
determination of significance for any of the 38 indicator parameters.
Significant increasing trends for cadmium, thallium, fluoride and a decreasing pH trend are more than
adequate reason for concern of tailings or mill operations influence at MW-24 and should require
regulatory action in a more thorough source investigation report (SAR) including additional isotopic
analysis at a minimum.
The second reason cited: "the 2007/2008 University of Utah Study which included groundwater age
dating of the water in tailings cell 1 and comparison with groundwater age and which included
monitoring well MW-2 (near MW-24) which found that stable isotope fingerprints do not suggest
contamination of groundwater by tailings cell leakage, evidence that is corroborated by trace metal
concentrations similar to historically observed concentrations."
The University of Utah study (dated 2008 using 2007 data) is older than the observed changes of water
chemistry in well MW-24 (cadmium and thallium increases dramatically starting in 2009). MW-24 was
not included in the University of Utah Study, and cadmium and thallium were not among the trace
metals sampled in any of the wells that were sampled during that study. Cadmium and thallium are also
not increasing in well MW-2 making it an unsuitable well for comparison. As noted in the GWDP, the
monitoring scheme is designed on an intrawell, each well for each parameter, basis making MW-2
"Irrelevant and inapposite in this context for a variety of reasons. The University of Utah Study did
conclude that there is active groundwater recharge and flow dynamics across the site which along with
the study's numerous recommendations for further investigations is a compelling argument for
additional isotopic testing and investigation at MW-24 prior to any serious discussion of raising
compliance limits.
The third reason cited, "potential geochemical influences from pyrite oxidation in the perched
groundwater causing site-wide decreases in pH and dissolution of metals including cadmium and
thallium"
To date, there is no scientific evidence that proves pyrite oxidation in the Burro Canyon Formation is
causing pH declines. Numerous scientific reports document that the unconfined Burro Canyon
Formation has been oxygenated for a long period of geologic time. Testing by EFRI consultants during
the course of the pyrite investigation support that the formation has been oxidized, but there was no
pyrite detected by X Ray Diffraction analysis for any of the samples collected from the vadose zone.
At a minimum, further investigation and testing regarding the validity of the pyrite theory need to be
conducted immediately, and solid scientific evidence should be presented/reviewed and approved prior
to using this theory to raise compliance limits for indicator parameters of tailings cell solutions.
The fourth and final reason cited is, "potential analytical influences caused by an EFR change of
laboratories during the fourth quarter of 2012." Rising trends for cadmium and thallium were noted in
2009 and continue today. pH continues to decline, and fluoride levels continue to rise. The laboratory
change is irrelevant to the discussion of source identification of pollutants in MW-24.. Isotopic
investigation would yield informative data to the discussion.
On August 9, 2016 Scott Clow and Colin Larrick from the Tribe's Environmental Programs Department
met with you and your staff to discuss groundwater conditions at the White Mesa Uranium Mill facility.
At that meeting your staff informed us that additional isotopic characterization work, similar to the
University of Utah Study completed over eight years ago, would be a valuable and important project
which would help immensely in defining current conditions and potential impacts. The Tribe was told to
find a graduate student and program that could do the work.
Since that time, we have connected with Duke University Nicholas School of the Environment's PhD
Candidate, Nancy Lauer who is working with Dr. Avner Vengosh, Senior Lecturer of Geochemistry and
Isotope Hydrology, http://sites.nicholas.duke.edu/avnervengosh/
They have offered to sample/analyze and interpret results in a report at no cost to EFRI, UDWMRC or
the Tribe using cutting-edge pattern recognition techniques for a comprehensive suite of isotopes,
metals and ions.
Nancy Lauer planned a sampling trip in November, 2016 and coordinated with the Tribe to collect nine
samples from our two monitoring wells, a community supply well in the community of White Mesa, four
springs around White Mesa and Recapture Reservoir which is the source of part of the process water
EFRI uses. Nancy Lauer also attempted to coordinate with EFRI for access to the facility in order to
sample on site wells however permission was denied and we understand that EFRI would not allow
access unless they were compelled by UDWMRC.
We request that prior to any official approval of compliance limit increases at MW-24 that Duke
University be allowed to proceed with sampling this well along with the other facility wells included in
the University of Utah Study and selected wells in the nitrate and chloroform plume areas. Detailed
isotopic, metals and ions analysis would be able to ascertain the source of the metals of concern in MW-
24 while providing extremely valuable baseline data which would be informative and help to provide
answers to all parties.
We also request that UDWMRC compel EFRI to allow the Duke University study to proceed at list of
wells minimally including the fifteen wells sampled in the University of Utah Study, TW4-24, TWN-2, and
WW-2. The original GWCLs for MW-24 should be retained and the DWMRC review and approval of the
modified GWCLs should be re-visited in a sound scientific manner prior to the proposal of a new
groundwater discharge permit for the facility.
Ute Mountain Ute Tribe
cc:
Treasure Bailley
Geologist / Physical Scientist
Aquifer and Aquatic Resources Protection Unit
USEPA REGION 8
1 595 Wynkoop St.
Mail Code: 8WP-AAP
Denver, CO 80202-1 129