2010-07-02_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300 (2)

Home Browse Search

pp. 7-3, 8-37, 8-41, 9-4, 9-5,15-2 and 15-10. Thus, Cotter does not take issue with the existence of a hydrologic connection between the mine pool and Ralston Creek but simply argues that the hydrologic connection is weak and that mine dewatering is unnecessary. Id. As described below, the Division believes that draw down of the mine pool is an appropriate corrective action. See infra at 9. In addition to the above evidence, evidence in the permit file and the evidence the Division will present at the hearing before the Board, set forth below are further responses to Cotter's assertions. 1. Cotter has failed to minimize disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic of the affected land and of the surrounding area and to minimize disturbances to the quality of water in the surface and ground water systems after the mining operations and during reclamation in violation of C.R.S. § 34-32-116(7)(8). Cotter is required to file an EPP because the Schwartzwalder mine is a designated mining operation. In July 2009, the Division informed Cotter that the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment ("CDPHE") had provided data to DRMS showing degraded water quality at the mine site. Cotter submitted its EPP in September 2009. In October 2009, the Division found the EPP to be inadequate and required Cotter to revise the plan. In April 2010, Cotter submitted the amended EPP and the April 16, 2010 Technical Memorandum providing an executive summary. On May 14, 2010 in response to the revised EPP, Denver Water informed the Division that it had seen a steady increase in uranium concentrations in Ralston Creek and entering into Ralston Reservoir. On May 18, 2010, the Division conducted an inspection of the site, and found water emerging from the mine site, flowing uncontrolled across and through the contaminated alluvium adjacent to Ralston Creek and then into Ralston Creek. See Photographs attached Inspection Report. The Division issued the RTB three days later on May 21St. Cotter now argues it has not violated any statute or regulations. However, even aside from the Division's evidence, Cotter's own documents show otherwise. The proposed EPP Cotter submitted notes that "Ralston Creek is essentially devoid of metals above the mine site, and picks up uranium and molybdenum as it flows past the mine and interacts with groundwater in the alluvium." Whetstone Report at p. 15-3. Cotter acknowledges that significant amounts of contaminated material are present in the alluvial fill. Whetstone Report at p. 15-10 ("[Cotter will excavate] up to 5,000 cubic yards of contaminated alluvial fill ... and dispose of it.")(cited in the June 21, 2010 submission at p. 4). Water in Ralston Creek has consistently shown elevated levels of uranium. See e.g., Whetstone Report at pp. 9-4, 9-26 to 9-29, 11-17 and 18, 1.1--54 and 55. 4