Activists contest EPA actions on proposed mine

Wallace "I'm not doing this for the money" Mays, Chairman of the Board, Chief Operating Officer, and largest individual shareholder - Powertech Uranium Corp.

Mining project needs more objective review

John S. Dixon

Fort Collins Coloradoan

October 4, 2009

This is in response to Wallace M. Mays' Soapbox article on Thursday regarding proposed uranium mining in nearby Weld County by Powertech (USA) Inc. Mays is chairman of the board at Powertech.

Before Powertech begins mining and rolls the dice with our health and safety, our home values and our local economy, we must have a more objective appraisal of the proposed mining project. We need the appraisals of scientists who have doctorate degrees in the appropriate disciplines and who are independent of Powertech.

Mays writes about the unintended movement of production fluids outside the mining zone and says "... excursions do happen ..." In other words, the methods Powertech intends to use to mine uranium cannot be relied upon to restrict the water used in the mining process to the mine site and cannot ensure that tainted extraction fluids will not contaminate nearby water supplies.

Mays refers to a recent report published by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. We need to read this report. We also need to read a recent U.S. Geological Survey report (Open-File Report 2009-1143), which concludes that no in situ leach mine in the United States has ever been able to return post-mining groundwater to its original, baseline condition.

On July 8, at a town of Nunn public meeting, Mays said "... I don't do it (uranium mining) for the money ..." Considering Mays is a major stockholder in Powertech, this comment adds greatly to his credibility.

RELATED DOCUMENTS:

 

"Powertech works to protect health, safety" - Wallace M. Mays - Fort Collins Coloradoan - October 1, 2009

 

DATA ON GROUNDWATER IMPACTS AT THE EXISTING ISR FACILITIES - (no author given) - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - (no date given)  Note: This document was prepared by an unidentified NRC staff member(s) upon the request of the Commission.  It is undated, authorship is unknown, and no sources are cited.  It does mention that in the three mines reviewed (Irigary/Christensen Ranch in Wyoming, Smith Ranch/Highland in Wyoming, and Crow Butte in Nebraska), restoration efforts could only return 50-70 percent of constituents to baseline values.  In particular, restoration of uranium, radium-226, arsenic, and selenium to baseline is often not attainable.  The report also confirms that excursions of leaching fluids out of the mining zone have persisted for several years, and that leakage of well casings and fittings is not uncommon.  The report concludes that "Potential environmental impacts to groundwater at an ISR facility can result from inadequate restoration of the production aquifer following completion of the ISR operations, leakage from a failure of the subsurface well materials, or an excursion of the leaching fluids to the aquifers surrounding the production or exempted aquifer."  The report goes on to say that excursions and well failures "in most cases" do not pose a threat to the surrounding aquifers.  (Apparently, in some cases they do.)  Despite the numerous risks from ISL mining delineated in the report, the unnamed author repeatedly asserts that the NRC's regulation of these three mines has been successful at protecting "human health and the environment".  This claim is made eleven times in the nine-page report, but there is no explanation of how these determinations were made, who made them, or the scientific criteria used to assess the various risks. 

 

"Groundwater Restoration at Uranium In-Situ Recovery Mines, South Texas Coastal Plain" - Susan Hall -  Open-File Report 2009–1143, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Central Energy Resources Science Center - 2009  (PDF 3,236 KB)

 

Report on Findings Related to the Restoration of In-Situ Uranium Mines in South Texas - Bruce K. Darling, Ph.D., P.G. - SOUTHWEST GROUNDWATER CONSULTING, LLC - September 29, 2008 (PDF 982 KB) 

 

Report by hydrogeologist finds Texas in-situ uranium mines have been unable to restore ground water aquifers to premining water quality - State regulators routinely approve leaving higher uranium levels in ground water; author questions mine operators' scientific understanding of aquifers - Posted October 24, 2008, Updated March 30, 2009

 

After in-situ uranium leaching, ground water cannot be returned to the way it was - Nuclear Regulatory Commission official and uranium mining executive acknowledge restoration of aquifer to baseline is unachievable - Posted September 3, 2008

 

See story on Wallace Mays' deal to sell uranium to the government of India

---

U.S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION:

In-situ leach uranium mining affects groundwater quality when leaching solutions travel beyond well field boundaries

Recent NRC document describes horizontal and vertical excursions at ISL mines in Wyoming and Nebraska, some lasting for as long as 8 years

Posted September 13, 2009

---

WHISTLEBLOWER:  Former Texas ISL wellfield operator speaks out

Did Powertech CEO Richard Clement's former employer violate environmental laws and endanger groundwater users?

Watch the six minute video on YouTube.  Read the story.

---

NUNN TOWN BOARD VOTES TO OPPOSE CENTENNIAL PROJECT

Posted September 3, 2009, Updated September 4, 2009

 

On Thursday, September 3, the Town Board of Nunn, Colorado passed a resolution opposing Powertech Uranium Corp.'s proposed Centennial Uranium Project.  The vote was four in favor, two opposed (including Mayor Jeff Pigue) and one abstention.  Trustees Jenny Johnson, Karen Burd, Joyce Taylor, and Brian Jex supported the resolution. 

 

Weld County residents Ken Tarbett and MIke Williams presented the resolution to the Town Board.  Tarbett and his family get their water from a domestic well that is the closest well to the area Powertech seeks to mine first.  The Tarbetts have yet to be contacted by Powertech.

 

The Mayor said he didn't understand the technical issues addressed by the resolution, and he raised the specter of angry mineral rights holders filing lawsuits against the town if the resolution were to pass.  Town Trustee Joyce Taylor responded by asking why the cities and towns of Fort Collins, Greeley, Wellington, Ault, and Timnath had not been sued for  the resolutions they had already passed against the project.

 

The Town of Nunn has no permitting authority with respect to the Centennial Project.  However, it is the closest municipality to the proposed mine -- a portion of the proposed mining area is located within the town's 3-mile growth management area.  The opposition to the project by the Town of Nunn and other municipalities will be an important consideration when the various permitting agencies weigh the environmental and socioeconomic impacts from the proposed project.

 

JW

 

 

Nunn digs in against uranium mine - Colin Lindenmayer, Greeley Tribune - September 4, 2009

 

Board opposes uranium mine - Bobby Magill, Fort Collins Coloradoan - September 4, 2009

 

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF NUNN
EXPRESSING THE BOARD’S OPPOSITION TO THE MINING OF URANIUM NEAR
THE TOWN
 

WHEREAS, Powertech (USA) Inc. (“Powertech”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Canadian company Powertech Uranium Corp., has proposed a uranium mining
operation on nearly 10,000 acres of land located west of the Town of Nunn (the
“Town”), known as the Centennial Project (the “Project”); and
 

WHEREAS, Powertech proposes to extract the uranium using in-situ leach mining,
which involves the drilling of wells into an aquifer, the injection of chemically-altered
water under pressure to dissolve uranium and other heavy metals, and the pumping of
the resulting solution to the surface for further processing; and
 

WHEREAS, leaching solutions contaminated with heavy metals and radionuclides
would be repeatedly re-injected and re-circulated through the aquifer; and
 

WHEREAS, Powertech proposes to conduct in-situ leach mining in the Laramie-Fox
Hills aquifer in which numerous domestic and agricultural wells are completed in close
proximity to the proposed mining area; and
 

WHEREAS, in-situ leach mining holds inherent risks, including but not limited to the
possible contamination of groundwater, and the release of contaminants to surface
areas through spills and leaks as documented in Nuclear Regulatory Commission
records; and
 

WHEREAS, Powertech proposes to prevent horizontal excursions of leaching solutions
from the mining area into adjacent drinking water supplies by the use of water pressure;
and
 

WHEREAS, Powertech claims that impermeable layers of rock will prevent vertical
excursions of leaching solutions into overlying or underlying drinking water aquifers; and
 

WHEREAS, the proposed mining area includes thousands of exploration drill holes from
the 1970s and 1980s, many of which were not plugged properly to prevent water from
migrating vertically between aquifers; and
 

WHEREAS, both vertical and horizontal excursions of leaching solutions from the
mining area of historical and current in-situ leach uranium projects are numerous and
well-documented; and
 

WHEREAS, a lack of long-term monitoring of aquifers at historical in-situ leach uranium
mines has resulted in insufficient data to determine long-term impacts on drinking water
supplies; and

WHEREAS, Powertech proposes to dispose of mine wastewater with elevated levels of
radionuclides and heavy metals by land application with pivot irrigation and by storage
in open holding ponds for later injection into deep wells; and
 

WHEREAS, land application of mine wastewater could result in dispersal of
contaminants by windblown dust and by surface water runoff; and
 

WHEREAS, wastewater holding ponds are subject to leaks and failures as documented
in Nuclear Regulatory Commission records; and
 

WHEREAS, following the cessation of in-situ leach uranium mining, Powertech would
be required to restore the aquifer to pre-mining baseline water quality or to Colorado
radioactive materials standards and the most stringent ground water quality criteria; and
 

WHEREAS, aquifer restoration involves flushing the aquifer with large quantities of
water from outside the mining area, and may also include filtering, injection of
hazardous reducing chemicals, and injection of substances to promote growth of
microbial agents; and
 

WHEREAS, historical attempts to restore aquifers to pre-mining baseline water quality
following in-situ uranium leaching have all been unsuccessful, and regulatory agencies
have had to relax water quality restoration standards to allow closure of these mines;
and
 

WHEREAS, the closest area to be mined would be on Section 35, bounded by the Nunn
Road (WCR 100), WCR 23, WCR 98, and WCR 21, and is located within the 3-mile
growth management area of the Town; and
 

WHEREAS, the uranium deposits in the area closest to the Town are shallow and
located above the water table and thus are not amenable to typical in-situ leaching; and
 

WHEREAS, shallow unsaturated uranium deposits are typically extracted using open pit
mining; and
 

WHEREAS, open pit mining holds inherent risks, including but not limited to the
possible contamination of groundwater, and the potential hazard of windborne
contaminated dust and particulate matter; and
 

WHEREAS, Powertech originally notified state mining regulators that it intended to
extract the uranium deposits south of the Nunn Road by the use of open pit mining, but
has since indicated it is investigating alternative methods; and
 

WHEREAS, Powertech has not reasonably or fully explained how it intends to mine
these shallow deposits; and

WHEREAS, the Project would occur in an area near the Town that is experiencing
steady population growth and is in close proximity to many homes and agricultural
operations; and
 

WHEREAS, mineral estate owners have a right to extract minerals when that extraction
will not be injurious to surface right owners, neighboring property owners, and
groundwater users; and
 

WHEREAS, Powertech has been unable to convincingly demonstrate that its proposed
mining activities would not injure surface right owners, neighboring property owners,
and groundwater users; and
 

WHEREAS, economic development is a high priority for the Town; and
 

WHEREAS, uranium mining close to the Town might provide employment for a few
local residents but could negatively impact long-term efforts to attract new residents,
businesses, and investment; and
 

WHEREAS, protection of health, safety, and economic well-being is a primary
responsibility of the Board of Trustees; and
 

WHEREAS, for all these reasons the Nunn Board of Trustees is strongly opposed to the
Project and hereby conveys that opposition to the federal, state, and county agencies
that will review this project.
 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
TOWN OF NUNN:
 

Section 1. The Nunn Board of Trustees hereby strongly opposes the proposal for
mining uranium at the proposed Centennial project and urges all county, state, and
federal agencies involved in the permitting process to recognize that locating such
projects along the North Front Range in close proximity to cities and towns is
inappropriate because such mining may be injurious to the health, safety, welfare, and
property rights of the residents and do irreparable harm to the economic well being of
the Town.
 

Section 2. For all the foregoing reasons the Nunn Board of Trustees further urges all
involved government agencies to deny any and all permit applications for the Project.

 

---

 

Mining opponents pack Nunn meeting

 

August 12, 2009

By Steven Olson

The Wellington (Wellington, Colorado's Community Newspaper)

 

They had to get extra chairs. Mayor Jeffrey Pigue, officers of the Nunn police department and others brought in 17 chairs to add to the 42 already in the room to seat the crowd that showed up for the Aug. 6 Nunn Town Board of Trustees meeting.

 

Facing a packed room, Pigue suggested that the more mundane items the board usually handles at the beginning of the meeting be moved to the end.

 

Interest was high because Powertech Uranium Corp., the Canadian-based firm that wants to mine uranium in Weld County between Nunn and Wellington (Colorado), had asked for an item of new business regarding its Centennial Project.

 

Area residents who monitor town board meetings were surprised to find Powertech on the agenda posted the day before the meeting, and details of the company’s request were not made available to the public. Town Clerk Tori McMechan would not provide an advance copy of the proposed resolution to The Wellington, saying that she might be in violation of attorney-client privilege if she did so.

 

Read aloud at the town board meeting, the resolution stated Powertech wanted to work with Nunn to iron out any problems connected with the Centennial Project and to establish a cooperative relationship with the town.

 

The audience, which consisted of a mixed group including members of Coloradoans Against Resource Destruction, citizens of Nunn and people who live nearby, wasted no time in expressing an opinion on accepting the letter. It was a unified and very loud “No.”

 

Trustee Brian Jex got a loud burst of applause when he observed, “If we adopt this, we’re showing we’re pro-Powertech, which I’m against to be honest with you.”

 

The board agreed to table the matter. While most in the audience applauded, some, like longtime Nunn resident Alvarita Thomas, wanted to know what that meant. Pigue responded, “It’s a dead issue now.”

 

Many were filing out of the board meeting room when Thomas persisted, “I’m concerned that when you say it’s a dead issue, it might rise from the grave.”

 

“It’s dead as far as this meeting is concerned,” Pigue said. “…Until someone brings it up again, it’s dead. If someone brings it up later, we have no choice but to hear it.”

 

Though Pigue said the issue was dead, there were some in the audience and some milling about outside the small community center who were still suspicious. Dog breeder Gerrit Voshel, a CARD member who lives on Weld County Road 17 near one of the proposed mining sites, said the entire situation “sounded like a lot of smoke and mirrors.”

 

“They tried to slip something past us at the last minute,” said Voshel, “but thanks to e-mail and the Internet we can get a crowd together pretty quickly.”

 

The Wellington story