Laserfiche WebLink
Disposition: No change. The question stands. <br />24. Original Question: The applicant has proposed to monitor for "airborne and waterborne <br />uranium." The Division acknowledges this may seem advisable; however, monitoring cuttings <br />(or.drill holes) prior to blasting and having a blast mitigation plan in place to handle <br />anomalously radioactive blast dust maybe the most effective method to control offsite <br />contamination. As a result, the Division has requested the CDH to provide a recommendation <br />for measuring radioactive levels at the quarry and determining what level(s) require blast <br />intervention. The Division will forwazd the CDH recommendations to the applicant as soon as <br />they become available. <br />Disposition: The DMG has no jurisdiction over airborne radioactive dust. <br />Therefore, the question is modified as follows: <br />24. The DMG has no jurisdiction over airborne radioactive dust. As a result, the Division has <br />requested the CDH provide recommendations for measuring radioactive levels at the quarry <br />and what level(s) require blast intervention. The Division will forward the CDH <br />recommendations to the applicant as soon as they become available. Based on the CDH <br />recommendations, we request the applicant provide a sampling protocol and propose <br />operafional measures to ensure that CDH standards or health advisories will not be violated. <br />25. Original Ouestion: The applicant has indicated that the operator will contact the Division <br />immediately if any monitoring result or field observation indicates that uranium ore is present <br />on the site as a substantial resource. This is not an acceptable monitoring practice. The <br />Division's concern is mobilization of dust bearing radioactive minerals in concentrations that <br />might adversely affect receptors offsite. Monitoring must consider toxicity rather than uranium <br />grade or ore determinations. Please respond. <br />Disnosition: This question is stricken from consideration and no response to DMG <br />is required. The CDH may have concerns with regazds to this. <br />26. Original Question: The applicant has committed to monitor for the presence of uranium <br />in runoff from the site. The Division is currently in the midst of consultation with <br />representatives of the Colorado Department of Health & the Environment to clarify suggested <br />monitoring pazameters and action levels. The Division will forward this information to the <br />applicant as soon as it becomes available. <br />Disposition: The DMG believes that it maybe more appropriate to monitor for <br />radioactivity in sediment ponds or other on-site water holding stmctures because these could <br />act as rechazge structures to groundwater. Therefore, question 26 is modified to read as <br />follows: <br />26. The applicant has committed to monitor for the presence of uranium in runoff from the site. <br />The Division believes that it may be more appropriate to monitor for radioactivity in sediment <br />ponds or other on-site water holding stmctures because these could act as rechazge structures to <br />groundwater. Please respond to this concern. In addition, please provide a sampling protocol <br />