The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDRC-2012-001400 - 0901a068802cc941Zlte Mountain Ute ^riSe Environmental Programs Department PO Box 448 Towaoc, Colorado 8 1334-0448 (970) 564-5430 April 23. 2012 Amanda Smith Executive Director State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality 195 North 1950 West Salt Lake City, UT84114 amandasmith(?7jutah.gov VIA U.S. MAIL AND EMAIL 03 '^•2012-001400 Re: Continued Communication—Ute Mountain Ute Tribe and Department of Environmental Quality. Dear Ms. Smith: Thank you for making time to have State of Utali representatives available to meet with Ute Mountain Ute Tribal staff and attorneys during our recent visit to Salt Lake City. We were encouraged to see the level of State of Utah and DEQ attendance at the meetings, and the staff-le\ el meeting afterwards was helpfid to identify further concerns regarding groundwater contamination. See Letter to Rusty Lundberg, April 23, 2012 At the March 15, 2012 meeting, you mentioned working on a MOU or other document between the DEQ and the Tribe to facilitate open communication and information sharing between die go\ emnients. We think that, gi\ en the Tribe's long-tcmi inteiest in proper eiivironrncnial regulation ofthe White Mesa Mill facility and the Tribe's distaste for addressing issues in the administrati\'e litigation fonim. this may be a good meclianism for setting up a stmcture for continued comtiuinications and infonnation sharing between our enviromnental regulatory departments We also want to reiterate that our Tribal Council, and in particular, our Chairman Gar) Hayes and our White Mesa Council representative Elayne Atcitty, will want to continue govemment-to-govemment consultation with the Governor's office regarding the public comments and the Tribe's concerns about the White Mesa Mill. We believe that staff for both governments should be prepared to assist the respective leaders in preparing for a meeting this summer. Please let me know if it would be helpful to schedule a conlerence call or in-person meeting to continue our communication about the White Mesa Mill. You can reach me at (970) 564-5642 or sclowa'/jutemountain.org. Sincerelv. Scott Clow Environmental Programs Director Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Cc: Gary FLayes, Chairman. Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Peter Ortego, General Counsel, Lite Mountain Ute Tribe Celene Hawkins, Associate General Counsel, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe H. Michael Keller, Special Counsel, Ute Mountain Lite Tribe Rusty Lundberg, Director, UT Division of Radiation Control Bryce Bird, Director, UT Division of Air Qualit\ Ute Mountain Ute ^riSe Envn-onmental Programs Department PO Box 448 Towaoc, Colorado 81334-0448 (970) 56-1-5430 April 23- 2012 Rusty Lundberg Director Utah Di\ ision of Radiation Control 195 N. 1950 W. Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 rlundberj^faaitah.uov k ^ 2012 VIA U.S. MAIL AND EMAIL Re: Follow Up on Groundwater Issues, Denison Mines (USA) Coip. Radioactive Materials License Renewal DRC-045 Dear Mr. Lundberg: Thank \ ou for making time to meet with Ute Mountain lite Tribal staff and attome\ s during our recent \ isit to Salt Lake Cir\ We were encouraged to see the level of State of LUah and DEQ attendance at the meetings, and we look forward to continued work and infonnation sharing between the Tribe and the DEQ di\ isions. See attached Letter to Amanda Smith. April 23, 2012. We thought it was important to write to you separateK to pro\ ide \ou the Tribe's continued concems with some ofthe groundwater contamination issues discussed at the staff-level meeting held after the main meeting on March 15, 2012 The Tribe anticipates these issues, as well as the other issues mentioned in the UMIIT Conunents (December 16. 201 1). will continue to cause the Tribe concem until the DRC requires appropriate and timely action from Denison Mines (USA) Corp. ("DflSA") to respond to the Tribe's concems. I. Deep Water Supplv Well WW-2 The Tribe has alread\ included written cominents to DRC regarding its concem with Deep Water Suppl\ Well WW-2 ser\ ing as a contamination pathway to the Tribe's drinking water aquifer (the Navajo aquifer) See UMUT Cominents (December 16. 2011). Section 111(A)(3). page 11. At the March 15. 2012 staff-level meeting. DRC staff mfonned the Tribe that the WW-2 work had recentl) been resoKed between DRC and DflSA. After that meeting, the Tribe reviewed DRC's Febmarv 13. 2012 letter to DUSA. The Tribe is \ ery concerned about DRC's Februar> 13. 2012 action to use enforcement discretion to remo\ e the requirements of Part l.H.3(a) of DUSA's groundwater pennit to in\ estigate the integrity ofthe well casing on WW-2. The Tribe has already Justitled its request for an implementation plan for periodic monitoring ofthe well casing b\ citing the well as a direct conduit to the Tribe's drinking water supply and to the communities of Bluff. Blanding. and Montezuma Creek. See, e g , Public Participation Suinmar\ Modification to Groundwater Quality Discharge Permit UGW370004, p. 13 (.lanuar> 20, 2010). DRC has already "detennined that because it is unktiown if an annular seal exists in well WW-2. that active pumping ofthe supply well has the potential to draw contaminants from the shallow aquifer into the deep supply well " Ui at 14. DRC addressed the Tribe's concems about WW-2 by adding Part l.H.3(a) to DUSA's groundwater pennit and by 'Snaking the new requirements enforceable." hi at 15 DRC has also Justitled its subsequent en\ ironmental analysis on groundwater issues at the White Mesa Mill by citing to the Part LH.3(a) pennit requirements. See. e g . Di\ ision of Radiation Control. Denison Mines (USA) Coip., Review of License Amendment Request and Env iromnental Report tbr Cell 4B. Satet>' Evaluation Report Under UAC R313-24 and UAC R317-6, p. 8-10 (April 6. 2010). The Tribe's concems about the mtegritN ofthe well casing on WW-2 (and the potential pathway to the Tribe's drinking water supply) have not changed since 2010 DRC has justitled its choice not to use its enforcement authority against DIISA for DUSA's admitted "v iolation of Part I.H 3(a) ofthe Pennit" because: (1) DRC alleges that WW-2 is upgradient ofthe tailings cells and the chloride and nitrate plume: (2) active well pumping will deliver contaminants back to the ground surface: and (3) WW-2 is regulated bv the Division of Drinking Water ("DDW"). The first two explanations for the DRC's reversal were noted in the Januarv 2010 Public Participation Summarv that recognized the Tribe's concem over the casing and the risk to the deep aquifer as substantiated and guaranteed the well casing analysis in response to the Tribe's comments. The third explanation—that DDW regulates the well—does not remove the Tribe's concern about the integrity ofthe well casing The Tribe asserts here that it is unlikelv' that DDW is evaluating the integntv ofthe well casing as a pathway to the Tribe's drinking water aquifer, and instead, DDW is likely only requiring an annual monitoring report for a limited list of water quality parameters that does not include manv parameters (chloride, uranium, manganese, gross alpha, etc.) that would indicate leakage from the tailings cells. Accordingly, it appears to the Tribe that DRC had no basis to effectively remove the I.H.3(a) well casing provisions from DUSA's groundwater pennit. and the Tribe asserts here that DRC should enforce DUSA's violation of Part I.H.3(a)' and that DRC must require DUSA to. at a minimum, inunediatelv perfonn the well casing investigation work on WW- ' The Tribe notes here that, by refusing to find DUSA in violation of its groundwater penmt for failing to complete the Part I H 3(a) work. DRC continues to limit the Environtnental Protection Agency's abilit> to make a sound business decision regardmg delivers of altemative feed matenals to the White Mesa Mill Facility Sec LIMLIT Comments (Dec 16, 201 I). Section 111(C)(3). p 22 2. MW-22 Fourth Quarter Results (Increasint^lv Elev ated Concentrations of Indicator Parameters) The Tribe already included w ritten comments regarding excessiv e lev els of indicator parameters in MW-22. UMUT Comments (Dec. 16, 2011), Section III(A)( 1 )(a)- page 6 and Exhibit C. These written conunents and our discussion on March 15, 2012 emphasize that the Tribe is concemed about elevated levels of indicator parameters in wells near the southem border ofthe WMM facility because these wells are downgradient ofthe tailings cells and because these wells are the closest monitoring wells to the Tribal communitv at White Mesa. See UMUT Conunents (Dec. 16. 2011). Exhibit C. In its conunents. the Tribe demanded that DRC conduct a source identification of MW-20 and MW-22 and that DRC designate MW-20 and MW-22 as point of compliance wells. UMIIT Conunents (Dec. 16, 2011). Section III(A)( 1 )(a). page 9. After our March 15. 2012 meeting, the Tribe received the fourth quarter results (sampled on October 11. 2011) for MW-22 These results show increasingly elevated concentrations of indicator parameters in the well, and the concentrations of beryllium, cadmium, manganese, molybdenum, and nickel all exceed the Utah ground water qualitv standards. This increases the Tribe's concem that contamination originating from the tailings cells is present in the groundwater at the southem boundary ofthe Mill's monitoring network Accordingly, the Tribe reiterates its comments regarding MW-22 and re-emphasizes the importance of designating MW-20 and MW-22 as point of compliance wells. The Tribe looks forward to continued conununication regarding groundwater and other issues associated with the White Mesa Mill's license renewal and the operation ofthe White Mesa Mill facilit>\ Sincerelv. Scott Clow Environmental Programs Director Lite Mountain LUe Tribe Cc: Gary Hayes. Chairman. lUe Mountain Ute Tribe Peter Ortego. General Counsel. Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Celene Hawkins, Associate General Counsel, Ute Mountain lite Tribe H. Michael Keller, Special Counsel, Ute Mountain Ute Tnbe Atnanda Smith, UT Departinent of Environmental Quality Bryce Bird, Director, UT Division of Air Quality