Laserfiche WebLink
Ralston Creek may exist" and "the mine pool could be contributing 0.8 to 8% of the uranium <br />loading ") (emphasis added), 9 ( "other possible conduits ... ") (emphasis added), 12 (the <br />underground mine pool "might also be a contributing factor ") (emphasis added), 15 (Schwartz <br />Trend is one of several "possible conduits ") (emphasis added), 20 (citing AR:00902, the <br />Division testimony that the mine pool "may be seeping a little bit into the alluvium, but you can't <br />see it with the data. It's such a small amount "), 21 (referring to "if the mine pool begins seeping <br />into Ralston Creek and Ralston Reservoir ") (emphasis added), 40 ( "possible conduits," "could <br />provide potential conduits "), 41 ( "may be a minor source," "may be seeping "). Defendants refer <br />to statements in Cotter's proposed Environmental Protection Plan ( "EPP ") and Technical <br />Memorandum, Answer Brief at 27 -28, but not one of those references state that the mine pool is <br />leaking and contaminating Ralston Creek. Instead, such statements use phraseology such as <br />"may," "could," and "potential conduits." With respect to the reference to the statement in the <br />EPP that "because flow rates from the mine are extremely low, total mass loading from the <br />underground workings is small," the next sentence in the EPP refers to "potential interaction <br />with water in Ralston Creek" and "potential pathways in low - permeability bedrock." See <br />Answer Brief at 28, 113 (citing AR:00044) (emphasis added). <br />The Defendants ignore their primary witness at the Hearing in alleging that the Schwartz <br />Trend is one of several possible conduits for the mine pool to migrate to Ralston Creek. See <br />Answer Brief at 15, 47. The citation in the Answer Brief is to the Division witness, who stated <br />"it is unknown how long it would take for this mine pool to reach Ralston Creek, and it is <br />unknown what volume of water would migrate." AR:00885:23 -25; see also AR:00477 (The <br />Division did not dispute that "[t]he mine pool is not affecting Ralston Creek via the Schwartz <br />Trend. "). Cotter's Opening Brief discussed the water quality monitoring and gamma survey <br />13 <br />