Laserfiche WebLink
January 27, 2018 /3 <br />oo <br />TO: <Email Delivery> .50—(31 <br />Jennifer Opila, CDPHE Mark Aguilar, USEPA <br />Warren Smith, CDPHE Vera Moritz, USEPA <br />Michael Cunningham, DRMS Jennifer Chergo, USEPA <br />FROM: Mike Stiehl, Cotter/Lincoln Park CAG member <br />RE: Dissenting Opinion: Succession of Operators — Schwartzwalder Mine and Cotter Uranium Mill <br />I am a founding member of the Cotter/Lincoln Park Community Advisory Group, a two -term Fremont <br />County Commissioner, Lincoln Park resident, and Biologist. I have been involved in Clean Water issues in <br />Colorado since the 70's. <br />I disagree with portions of the majority opinion of the CAG, sent to CDPHE on January 26, 2017. My <br />primary disagreement: The CAG letter encourages the CDPHE to deny the transfer of ownership to <br />Colorado Legacy Land (CLL), restating Denver and Arvada Water Departments' previous letters to DRMS. <br />My opinion is to encourage CDPHE and DRMS to approve said transfer because it does serve and <br />advance a Public purpose: the cleanup of two toxic sites. My support is not unconditional — l have <br />additional concerns and comments, below. <br />While I share Denver and Arvada Waters' concerns, addressing their stated concerns are part of <br />standard Application Approval procedures. It can be valuable to restate them, but I am confident that <br />the two State Agencies will fully vet the application and apply appropriate restrictions and conditions, <br />with special attention to the concerns voiced by Denver and Arvada — and our CAG. <br />Contrary to the above referenced letters, CLL's predecessor entities have established a successful record <br />of positive cleanup efforts. The charts provided by Denver Water show this trend, as well as results at <br />the Gold King site, Moab and Globeville. While some may disagree with the cleanup standards attained, <br />it was the Agencies that determined those standards to be protective of Public Health, not the Operator. <br />Regarding cleanup standards (and the Remedial Investigation (RI) at the Cotter Mill): The RI and <br />Feasibility Study (RI/FS) must be analyzed and accepted by the Agencies, with appropriate input from <br />Stakeholders. If future discoveries/complications, or changes to Maximum Contaminant Levels require <br />reevaluation, the results should not be affected by "who is operating." <br />Therefore it is imperative that Agencies set Site-specific— not Operator -specific standards. Cleanup <br />standards should be the same, no matter who is the owner at the time. I am confident that the Agencies <br />are operating with this same intent. <br />I prefer to have Colorado Legacy Land perform the RI/FS. It appears that they have more experience in <br />this area than the current owner. I would like this activity to begin as soon as possible. The EPA and <br />CDPHE have worked diligently to provide a framework for these investigations to proceed, and the <br />Community deserves to have progress continue. <br />Page 1 of 2 <br />