Laserfiche WebLink
Corrective Action <br />With respect to paragraph 9.a. of Amendment Number Three, Cotter proposed and initiated a <br />temporary diversion structure to the Water Quality Control Division ( "Division ") in early 2011. <br />It submitted a summary of the design concept for a temporary diversion pipeline to the Division <br />on March 15, 2011, has had several meetings and conferences with the Division regarding the <br />diversion pipeline, and has been designing and permitting the diversion pipeline for several <br />months before Amendment Number Three was issued. Cotter does not oppose the terms of <br />paragraph 9.a. of Amendment Number Three. <br />With respect to paragraph 9.b. of Amendment Number Three, Cotter is in the process of <br />assessing all areas of pollutant source material at the Facility. Paragraph 9.b., seventh line, needs <br />to be revised to add a "to" before "eliminate." In addition, it will be impossible to comply both <br />with the terms of paragraph 9.b and the orders issued by the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation <br />Board on August 11, 2010 . and December 8, 2010. <br />With respect to paragraph 9.c. of Amendment Number Three, which requires Cotter to "perform <br />a detailed evaluation of the alluvial groundwater capture and treatment system at the Facility to <br />identify possible enhancements that could result in more efficient and/or complete capture and <br />treatment of contaminated groundwater at the Facility," Cotter has been initiating and <br />implementing enhancements since it installed the groundwater capture and treatment system <br />required in the June 1, 2010 Order. Had Cotter implemented only paragraph 28.a. of the Order, <br />requiring Cotter to "[r]einitiate a water treatment system to treat all water that reports to Sump <br />Number One as soon as possible, but no later than July 31, 2010," it would have removed less <br />than one -sixth of the uranium than has actually been removed as a result of Cotter - initiated <br />enhancements by the additions of Sumps 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10 and MW9 to the system. Cotter <br />therefore does not object to conducting the evaluation required by paragraph 9.c. <br />WHEREFORE, Cotter respectfully requests that no violation be found. <br />DATED this 27th day of October, 2011. <br />Re • ectfully submitted, <br />44 j <br />Henry W. Ipsen <br />Charlotte L. Neitzel <br />HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP <br />1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 4100 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />e -mail: hank.ipsen @hro.com <br />charlotte.neitzel @hro.com <br />(303) 861-7000 (phone) <br />(303) 866 -0200 (fax) <br />Attorneys for <br />Cotter Corporation (N.S.L.) <br />3 <br />