Laserfiche WebLink
Cheryl Linden, Esq. <br />June 21, 2010 <br />Page 7 <br />potential violation of ... Hardrock Rule[] ... 3.1.7.") (emphasis added). <br />Accordingly, DRMS has failed to make a necessary factual finding to support a <br />violation of section 3.1.7. <br />II. Response to Corrective Action #2 <br />A. A Technical Revision Is Not Appropriate. <br />Corrective Action #2, relating to mine dewatering and treatment to bring the <br />mine water table to a level at least 500 feet below the Steve Level, will cost <br />significantly more to install and operate than Corrective Action #1. The <br />Division regulations define a "Technical Revision" as a "change in the permit <br />or an application, which does not have more than a minor effect upon the <br />approved or proposed Reclamation or Environmental Protection Plan." 2 CCR <br />407-1 Rule 1.1(52). A corrective action of this magnitude does not meet the <br />"minor effect" requirement for a Technical Revision. <br />B. Corrective Action #2 Is Not Justified. <br />Consistent with discussions during a June 15, 2010 meeting among <br />representatives of Cotter, DRMS, and the Water Quality Control Division of <br />the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Cotter will be <br />submitting a written rationale by July 1, 2010 regarding why mine dewatering <br />and treatment should not be required. This rationale will be part of Cotter's <br />response to the DRMS June 15, 2010 letter to Randy Wicker, Cotter <br />Corporation, regarding TR-12 Adequacy Review. That rationale will also <br />constitute evidence for the Enforcement Ilearing before the Mined Land <br />Reclamation Board, which you advised is now scheduled for July 12, 2010. <br />That rationale will explain in why Corrective Action #1 is expected to address <br />the issues in Ralston Creek, without mine dewatering and treatment. It will <br />further describe the extensive technical investigations to support that <br />expectation. It will also describe the processes through which mine dewatering <br />could worsen water quality in the mine by increasing oxidation and <br />mobilization of contaminants in the mine pool. This could reverse the current <br />trend of declining uranium concentrations in the mine pool. The rationale will <br />. <br />01478373 0 den