ENFORCE28203 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

As demonstrated herein, and based on the mine file and other publicly available documents, the SM-18 uranium mine will use, store, or disturb toxic or acidic chemicals in quantities sufficient to cause an adverse impact to people, property, or the environment. Further, the present appeal may be efficiently resolved by the Division's or the Board's entry of a legal determination that the SM-18 uranium mine must classified and regulated as a Designated Mining Operation pursuant to the Mined Land Reclamation Act. C.R.S. § 34-32-103(3.5)(a). Thus, Appellants respectfully request that the Boazd reinstate the Division's initial, correct determination that the SM-18 uranium mine is a DMO and require Cotter and the Division to take all necessary steps to comply with the MLRA. Appellants farther request that the 112 permit for the SM-18 be suspended and the SM-18 uranium mine remain inactive until such time that Cotter prepares and the Boazd approves, an Environmental Protection Plan ("EPP") that articulates steps that will be taken to protect human health and the environment at the SM-18 uranium mine. see: HRMMR 6.4.20 (setting forth requirements for a Designated Mining Operation Environmental Protection Plan). A license suspension pending compliance with the MLRA's EPP requirement can result in no harm to Cotter since the term of the 1996 federal lease issued for the SM-18 uranium mine has expired and based on information and belief, no valid lease currently exists that would provide Cotter a right of entry to conduct miniirg operations at the SM-] 8 uranium mine. See Exh. 3 (DOE Lease Extension). The DOE offers federal leases based on a competitive bidding process after asite-specific analysis of the actual lease tract under the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"). See 10 CFR §760.1 (Domestic Uranium Program regulations). Further, once leases are issued, mining cannot take place until the required mining plans receive public scrutiny and analysis in asite-specific NEPA process. See Pennaco Enerey; Inc. v. United States Dent. of Interior, 377 F.3d 1147, 1151-1152 (10th Cir. 2004)(explaining the three NEPA "tiers" used to allow public involvement in the development of federal mineral leases: 1) program Ievel; 2) lease issuance level; 3) site development level). As demonstrated below in detail, a DMO determination and an order that preparation of an EPP precede any further mining activity is consistent with the state/federal statutory scheme that applies to the SM-18 uranium mine. II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The final DRMS determination of non-DMO status for SM-18 was noticed as a "Final Decision" in the April 12, 2006 Mined Land Reclamation Board ("Boazd") agenda. No previous public notice was provided. The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act ("MLRA"), Hazdrock/Metal Mining ("HRMM") Rules, and the general authority under the Administrative Procedures Act requires that agency decisions not be arbitrary or capricious, be supported by the record, and not be contrary to law. The present appeal of the final Division determination was timely filed pursuant to HRMM Rule 7.2.7.