My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2015-08-03_REVISION - P2009025 (4)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Prospect
>
P2009025
>
2015-08-03_REVISION - P2009025 (4)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 11:33:55 AM
Creation date
8/4/2015 8:01:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
P2009025
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
8/3/2015
Doc Name
Appeal to Notice of Decision MD03
From
Kay M. Hawklee
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
MD3
Email Name
TC1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
enough to understand the specifics of EPA's requirement for injection and <br />recirculation downhole of uranium -laden produced water. <br />o How is the produced water to be "decanted"? <br />• Promises — not proof — havebeen offered to obtain a water well permit from Division of <br />Water Resources (DWR). This permit must be proffered to DRMS before this activity is <br />condoned, per rule 3.1.6 (a) compliance with applicable Colorado water laws and <br />regulations governing injury to existing water rights. Black Range states that the "the <br />flow of the water to the surface will be greater than the flow of water from the jet <br />cutting tool." This statement validates the need for a water well permit from DWR, as <br />more water will be taken out than is injected in. <br />• Promise —not proof —of an application to DWR for anywhere from one to twenty four <br />promised Monitoring Holes. <br />o Dec. 16, 2014, BLR states: "Prior to bulk sample a groundwater monitoring well <br />will be installed directly down gradient from and within the same formation and <br />hydro -geologic horizon as the bulk sample zone." <br />o Dec. 22, 2014, BLR states: Where possible, installation of groundwater <br />monitoring wells will be in clusters. The clusters would typically range from 2-4 <br />but up to 6 wells per drill pad location. Within the clusters, wells could be located <br />within 15' to 20' of one another. <br />o This statement allows for anywhere from oneto twenty four monitoring holes. <br />Exactly how many holes will be used to monitor possible excursions and what is <br />the exact placement of those holes at the surface? <br />• Will highly -pressurized water force contaminated water up the approximately 1500, 35 - <br />year -old Cyprus prospecting holes and/or up monitoring holes? <br />• What is the test hole location in relation to the historic Cyprus holes? <br />o The USGS also says that there is a possibility that when the 2600 proposed <br />UBHM holes are drilled at the Hansen site those bore holes could encounter the <br />approximately 1500, 35 -year-old Cyprus holes resulting in groundwater and <br />process water excursions up the old Cyprus holes. <br />• Promise — not proof —that the water in the cavern will provide "nearly the same roof <br />support as if there were no cavity at all"; however, the cavity will be left open for 5 — 30 <br />days. <br />• Echo Park Formation water tested at 210 mg/L of Uranium. BLR claims that this is a low <br />amount of dissolved uranium; however, it is seven times higher than the limit for my <br />domestic water well within 1.5 miles. <br />• Why was there no promise or requirement to line the drilling pits? BLR states: "Middle <br />Tallahassee Creek and its [sic] run through center of the N01 area. 5-10% of the drill <br />holes could be within 200 feet of the creek." <br />61 Page <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.