Laserfiche WebLink
and operational measures to ensure that CDH surface water standards will not be violated. (The <br />Division is currently in consultation with representatives of the Colorado Department of Health <br />& the Environment to clarify suggested monitoring parameters and action levels. The Division <br />will forward this information to the applicant as soon as it becomes available.) <br />27. Original Ouestion: The applicant has proposed to monitor particulate and dissolved <br />uranium in all waters concentrated on the site at a point of discharge for compliance with the <br />radioactivity standard of 40pCi/L or natural background, whichever is higher. This criteria <br />precludes measurement of other radioactive materials. It maybe more effective for the <br />applicanUoperator to evaluate blast hole cuttings for radioactivity, and have a mitigation plan <br />should high levels appear. The Division has consulted with the CDH on this matter and will <br />forward their recommendations to the applicant as soon as they become available. <br />Disposition: DMG is chazged with protection of groundwater resources and <br />believes that monitoring of radioactivity and its possible effects on groundwater quality lies <br />within its jurisdiction. The general standazd of monitoring radioactivity is possibly acceptable, <br />however, please be informed that we are discussing this with CDH and will let you know the <br />outcome of those discussions as soon as possible. With this in mind, question 27 has been <br />modified to read as follows: <br />27. The applicant has proposed to monitor particulate and dissolved uranium in all waters <br />concentrated on the site at a point of discharge for compliance with the radioactivity standazd <br />of 40pCi/L or natural background, whichever is higher. Since this is a standard that includes all <br />radioactive minerals, the Division is reviewing this criterion. It maybe more effective for the <br />applicanUoperator to evaluate blast hole cuttings for radioactivity, and have a mitigation plan <br />should high levels be encountered. The DMG is discussing this with CDH and will let you <br />know the outcome of those discussions as soon as possible. <br />28. Original Ouestion: The applicant has discussed a variety of mitigation measures <br />including pre-moistening of rock and other dust suppression techniques. Please verify if the <br />operator will be storing toxic and/or hazardous materials on site that will be used as a <br />mitigation measure. If so, please explain the storage and control methods to be used. <br />Disnosition: No change. The question stands. <br />29. Ori 'nal Ouestion: The applicant has noted that there aze no "ambient air quality <br />standazds that would provide a measurable benchmazk for uranium dust safety at the MMRR <br />Quarry." Based on our discussions with CDH representatives, there are health advisories for <br />radioactivity. The applicant should be prepared to monitor and intervene at some level of <br />radioactivity. Please respond. <br />Disnosition: This question is stricken from consideration and no response to DMG <br />is required. The CDH may have concerns with regards to this. <br />30. Original Question: The applicant has stated that a "preliminary geologic assessment <br />prior to operations will provide [no] useful answers regarding the potential effect of mining on <br />any mineralized uranium. It appears that it may be necessary for the applicanUoperator to <br />