Laserfiche WebLink
from the slurry itself, or of its dewatering on site, is not described at all in the application. This <br />failure to identify a disposal method presents quite a range of potential scenarios, and final <br />disposal of contaminated waste streams is critical to determining how best to protect the <br />environment. Of the options presented, evaporation is the most likely scenario to actually occur, <br />due to the high cost of offsite waste disposal. Evaporation would not only require the submittal <br />of engineered designs of an appropriate holding pond to evaporate the water, it would also <br />require approval from the Colorado Division of Water Resources. Rule 3.1.6(1)(a) requires the <br />operator to adhere to all Colorado water laws and regulations. Rule 3.1.5(5) requires that all acid - <br />or toxic -forming materials — which include uranium -bearing slurry — be handled and disposed of <br />in a manner that is protective of the environment. Naturally, this can only be achieved when a <br />full management plan of these materials is subject to scrutiny from the Division and the public. <br />These facts demonstrate that treatment of this proposal under the Designated Mining Operation <br />rules is warranted, as discussed below. <br />5. The amendment proposal exceeds the scope of activities that may be authorized under a <br />Notice of Intent and requires a mining permit rather than a prospecting permit. The <br />UBHM procedures described in the NOI amendment is, in reality, a pilot -scale field test of a <br />developing technology and new kind of mining. Black Range Minerals publicly stated its intent <br />to undertake "trial underground borehole mining" in a Nov. 28, 2014, investment presentation. A <br />scoping study demonstrating the feasibility of mining at the Hansen site was released in March <br />2012, indicating the company's intent to proceed with mining, not prospecting. The law at <br />C.R.S. 34-32-103(8) defines mining as "the development or extraction of a mineral from its <br />natural occurrences on affected land." The law further specifies what "development" is by <br />defining it as "the work performed in relation to a deposit, following the prospecting required to <br />prove minerals are in existence in commercial quantities but prior to production activities, aimed <br />at, but not limited to, preparing the site for mining, defining further the ore deposit by drilling or <br />other means, conducting pilot plant operations, constructing roads or ancillary features, and <br />other related activities." (Emphasis added.) [C.R.S. 34-32-103(4).] <br />6. The amendment proposal meets the definition of a Designated Mining Operation and <br />Black Range Minerals should be required to submit a 110-d or 112-d mining application. <br />The Mined Land Reclamation Act defines a Designated Mining Operation as one where "acid or <br />toxic -forming materials will be exposed or disturbed as a result of operations" or "uranium is <br />developed or extracted, either by in situ leach mining or by conventional underground or open <br />mining techniques." [C.R.S. 34-32-103(3.5)(a).] For operators extracting uranium that believe <br />they are not a DMO, an exemption from the requirement must be sought; however, Black Range <br />Minerals has not applied for an exemption. Because UBHM is not currently specified as a type <br />of uranium mining in the statute, the rules for in-situ leach extraction should be required, <br />including the submittal of a complete Environmental Protection Plan and a baseline ground water <br />characterization study. <br />7. Approval of an experimental mining technique, even at a pilot -scale level, is not <br />appropriate as at the level of a Notice of Intent, where the public has limited opportunity to <br />participate and comment in reviews. Allowing such a truncated process for approving what is <br />potentially a groundbreaking and precedent -setting project does the public only a scant service. <br />0 <br />