Laserfiche WebLink
support that rocks have a very low permeability (Id. at 15-16); future contributions from the <br />Schwartz Trend are not inevitable Ind,. at 16); many of the Division's examples of mine flooding <br />that it claims are not effective are irrelevant or lacking information of the effectiveness of mine <br />flooding as remedial strategy (Id. at 16-17); and the Division's prediction that it would take <br />seventeen years (rather than nine years) for uranium concentrations in the mine pool to reach <br />0.03 mg/L is incorrect. Moreover, Cotter is now presenting new information regarding the <br />primary location of groundwater impacts to Ralston Creek based on analytical results of <br />sampling received in July 2010, August 2010, and September 2010. <br />IV. Ordering Mine Dewatering and Treatment Does Not Qualify as a "Technical <br />Revision." <br />The Division argues that "[b]y adopting the Division's corrective actions, the Board <br />adopted the requirement of a [Technical Revision ("TR")]." Division Response at 7. Neither the <br />testimony at the hearing nor the language in the Order supports the Division's argument. The <br />Order does not refer to a Technical Revision and the transcript does not reflect any consideration <br />by the Board of whether the definition of a Technical Revision would cover such a significant <br />corrective action as mine dewatering and treatment involving considerable time and resources to <br />implement, and feasibility, safety, and access issues. See Cotter Petition at 19-20. The <br />Division's argument that mine dewatering and treatment does not "change the final reclamation <br />plan" has no basis whatsoever. The current reclamation plan does not require mine dewatering <br />and treatment. Moreover, the Division's argument that the corrective action "simply directs <br />Cotter to re-initiate an action it conducted during active mining" ignores Cotter's explanation for <br />why dewatering and treatment now has substantial feasibility and safety and access issues not <br />present during actual mining. See Division Response at 7. As stated in the Cotter Rationale at <br />page 10: <br />9 <br />111493118 A den