Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

White Mesa Mill
Excerpts from the lawsuit filed by Grand Canyon Trust against Energy Fuels – the same Canadian company that wants to mine uranium in the environs of the Grand Canyon and that just had a fire at its Texas uranium mine, which was spotted by US Border Guards.
“INTRODUCTION
1. Plaintiff Grand Canyon Trust (Trust) brings this lawsuit to enforce violations of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. § 7412, against Energy Fuels Resources Inc. (Energy Fuels) at its White Mesa Uranium Mill. The White Mesa Mill is releasing Radon-222, a cancer-causing gas emitted from the radioactive wastes generated from uranium milling. White Mesa Mill’s tailings impoundments, which store these milling wastes, are not conforming to mandatory CAA emissions limits and work practice standards. 40 C.F.R. §§ 62.251 et seq. (Subpart W). These limits and standards are designed to curtail releases of Radon-222, which is a CAA-designated hazardous air pollutant. Id. Section 112 of the CAA prohibits Energy Fuels from operating White Mesa Mill and emitting Radon-222 in violation of these limits and standards. 42 U.S.C. § 7412(f)(4), § 7412(i)(3)(A). Consequently, in accordance with the CAA citizen suit provision, 42 U.S.C. § 7604(a), the Trust seeks relief that enforces the CAA emissions standards and limits and assesses civil penalties against Energy Fuels for these violations of law. Energy Fuels’ CAA violations pose a serious and continuing threat to nearby communities, the region’s people, and the environment that can be remedied by the statutory relief sought in this complaint. See e.g. 42 U.S.C. §§7604 (a),(d-e),(g).”
Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW Filed 04/02/14, Grand Canyon Trust v. Energy Fuels Resources.

“26. Beginning in 1987, White Mesa Mill began accepting “alternate feed” for processing, supplementing the amount of uranium ore being milled. Whereas a conventional mill operator typically pays for uranium ore feedstock, a mill owner is paid to accept and dispose of uranium-bearing “alternate feeds.” Alternate feed is another name for radioactive wastes that contain small amounts of uranium-bearing materials. By processing these radioactive wastes as alternate feed, White Mesa Mill provides hazardous waste sites across the country a means to dispose these wastes without being subject to various federal and state laws (such as, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)), and without having to undertake removal and remediation actions. The Environmental Protection Agency has recognized that this practice has potential for abuse where lower disposal fees at economically marginal uranium mills can result in “sham processing” to convert CERCLA wastes into non-CERCLA mill tailings. Utah regulators have expressed concern that less stringent, cheaper, non-CERCLA disposal of radioactive wastes at uranium mills pose problems, particularly where the technical and economic viability of uranium recovery is doubtful.” Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW, Filed 04/02/14 pp. 11-12, Grand Canyon Trust v. Energy Fuels Resources

Note that Energy Fuels Resources (EFR) is processing only “Alternate Feed” right now.
EIA Energy Fuels Alternate Feed Rad Waste

The five executive officers of Energy Fuels Resources made total compensation of $2.4 million (USD), whereas the stock is currently worth only a little over $2 USD – yes that’s right, it’s worth around two dollars! In December of 2014 it was worth $6.19. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1385849/000106299316008497/def14a.htm
(Energy Fuels also goes by Energy Fuels, Inc., as well as the name of some subsidiaries.)

Lawsuit (complaint) excerpts continue:
“FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIMS

23. White Mesa Mill processes conventional uranium ore that is mined on the Colorado Plateau. Currently, the White Mesa Mill is the only conventional uranium mill operating in the United States. Most of the licensed uranium mills in the United States were closed in the early 1980s and decommissioned under provisions of Title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act amendments to the Atomic Energy Act. The White Mesa Mill is located in San Juan County, Utah, near the White Mesa community populated by members of the Ute Mountain Ute tribe and two of the larger cities in southeastern Utah, Blanding and Bluff.

24. Construction of the White Mesa Mill began in 1979, and operations commenced in May 1980. Between 1980 and 2008, White Mesa Mill operated at various levels of capacity, but processed 4.5 million tons of uranium ore. Since at least April 2008, the Mill has been fully operational. Since at least April 2008, the Mill has operated periodically, with significant idle periods. Energy Fuels plans to place the White Mesa Mill on standby in the second half of fiscal year of 2014 by discontinuing processing while continuing to receive and stockpile uranium ore
Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW Document 2 Filed 04/02/14 Page 10 of 17

and alternate feed. Energy Fuels plans to continue operations on a campaign basis, which means intermittent periods of active milling as well as periods of stockpiling feedstock with no active milling During standby, the tailings continue to emit Radon-222.

25. Ownership of White Mesa Mill has changed over time. The Mill was built by a company known as Energy Fuels Nuclear. In 1984, Energy Fuels Nuclear sold the White Mesa Mill to Umetco Minerals, an affiliate of Union Carbide. Umetco operated White Mesa Mill until 1994, when it was sold back to Energy Fuels Nuclear. Shortly thereafter, Energy Fuels Nuclear went bankrupt and ceased operating White Mesa Mill in 1995. In 1997, the Mill was purchased by International Uranium Corporation. In 2006, International Uranium Corporation changed its name to Denison Mines as a result of a corporate merger. In 2012, Energy Fuels acquired Denison Mines’ U.S. assets, including White Mesa Mill.

26. Beginning in 1987, White Mesa Mill began accepting “alternate feed” for processing, supplementing the amount of uranium ore being milled. Whereas a conventional mill operator typically pays for uranium ore feedstock, a mill owner is paid to accept and dispose of uranium-bearing “alternate feeds.” Alternate feed is another name for radioactive wastes that contain small amounts of uranium-bearing materials. By processing these radioactive wastes as alternate feed, White Mesa Mill provides hazardous waste sites across the country a means to dispose these wastes without being subject to various federal and state laws (such as, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)), and without having to undertake removal and remediation actions. The Environmental Protection Agency has recognized that this practice has potential for abuse where lower disposal fees at economically marginal uranium mills can result in “sham processing” to convert CERCLA wastes into non-CERCLA mill tailings. Utah regulators have expressed concern that less
Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW Document 2 Filed 04/02/14 Page 11 of 17
stringent, cheaper, non-CERCLA disposal of radioactive wastes at uranium mills pose problems, particularly where the technical and economic viability of uranium recovery is doubtful.

27. In 1995, EPA delegated authority to the State of Utah to regulate uranium mills’ emissions of radon and implement 40 C.F.R § 61.250 et seq. On March 2, 2011, the State of Utah issued Denison a modified “minor source” air quality permit for White Mesa Mill. The Mill does not require a Title V operating permit. The Mill’s permit incorporates the regulatory requirements set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 61.250 et seq.

28. Energy Fuels possesses two other permits issued by agencies with the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (“DEQ”) pursuant to Utah statutes and regulations – a Groundwater Discharge Permit (“GWDP”) and a Radioactive Materials License. Neither permit governs radon emissions from the Mill’s tailings impoundments. Neither permit exempts Energy Fuels from compliance with federal law. During 2011, 2012, and 2013, the White Mesa Mill reported consecutive exceedances of groundwater compliance limits under the White Mesa Mill’s GWDP for several constituents in several wells. Instead of issuing fines or requiring compliance, Utah DEQ has agreed to change the groundwater standards. Utah DEQ is aware of repeated and ongoing Subpart W violations, but has not taken action to enforce the standards.

Neither Utah DEQ nor the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have levied civil penalties to deter future violations of Subpart W.

29. There are six tailings impoundments at White Mesa Mill, which Energy Fuels refers to as Cell 1, Cell 2, Cell 3, Cell 4A, Cell 4B and Roberts Pond. Energy Fuels operates each of these tailings impoundments on a “phased disposal” basis. Construction of Cell 1 was completed in June 1981. Construction of Cell 2 was completed in May 1980. Construction of Cell 3 was completed in September 1982. Cells 4A and Cell 4B were constructed after 1989.
Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW Document 2 Filed 04/02/14 Page 12 of 17

4A was constructed in 2008. Cell 4B was constructed in 2011. Cell 4 was divided into 4A and 4B to avoid the regulatory restriction on the size of a tailings impoundment. Cell 4A exceeds the 40-acre limit on the size of a tailings impoundment. Cell 4B exceeds the 40-acre limit on the size of a tailings impoundment. Cell 1 receives uranium byproduct materials. Cell 2 receives uranium byproduct materials. Cell 3 receives uranium byproduct materials. Cell 4A receives uranium byproduct materials. Cell 4B receives uranium byproduct materials. Roberts Pond receives uranium byproduct materials.

30. Energy Fuels measures Radon-222 emissions from Cell 2 and Cell 3 based on Method 115. Energy Fuels employs Large Area Activated Charcoal Cannisters, which are passive gas absorption sampling devises that determine the flux rate of Radon-222 gas from the surface of tailings impoundments.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Violation of the Clean Air Act and implementing regulations, Radon-222 Emission Limit, 40 C.F.R. § 61.252(a))

31. Each and every allegation set forth in this Complaint is incorporated herein by reference.

32. Radon-222 emissions from a uranium mill’s tailings impoundment “shall not exceed 20 pCi/m2-sec.” 40 C.F.R. § 61.252(a). Compliance with this emission limit is determined annually. Id. § 61.253.

33. Since 1992, Energy Fuels has been measuring and monitoring Radon-222 emissions from Cell 2 once-a-year, every June. Method 115 permits once-a-year monitoring.

34. In 2012, Energy Fuels’ operations at White Mesa Mill violated the Radon-222 emission limit. Energy Fuels’ June 2012 monitoring revealed violations of the 20 pCi/m2-sec emissions limit. Energy Fuels reported that Radon-222 emissions from Cell 2 in June 2012 were
Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW Document 2 Filed 04/02/14 Page 13 of 17

23.10 pCi/m2-sec. Based on this report, Energy Fuels violated the emissions limit in 2012.

35. This 2012 violation was reaffirmed by additional monitoring. After the June 2012 violation, Energy Fuels increased the frequency of Radon-222 measurements at Cell 2. When the monitoring frequency is more than once-per-year, each monitoring event is averaged over the course of the year. Energy Fuels monitored emissions from Cell 2 in September, October and November of 2012, in addition to June 2012. Emissions from Cell 2 in September 2012 were 26.60 pCi/m2-sec. Emissions from Cell 2 in October 2012 were 27.70 pCi/m2-sec. Emissions from Cell 2 in November 2012 were 26.10 pCi/m2-sec. Energy Fuels calculated the Mill’s 2012 annual emission rate of 25.90 pCi/m2-sec by averaging the readings from the four 2012 monitoring events. In March 2013, Energy Fuels reported that it violated the emissions limit for Radon-222 in 2012 at White Mesa Mill.

36. In 2013, Energy Fuels’ operations at White Mesa Mill violated the Radon-222 emission limit. Monthly monitoring of Radon-222 emissions at Cell 2 began in April 2013 after the 2012 violation was reported in March 2013. Nine monthly reports were filed in 2013. The arithmetic mean of the nine 2013 monitoring events from April to December of 2013 from Cell 2 is 20.42 pCi/m2-sec.

37. At the White Mesa Mill, Energy Fuels has violated and is violating its air permit and the CAA’s emission limit for Radon-222. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 61.252(a), 61.253. Energy Fuels’ violations of the CAA — 42 U.S.C. § 7412(f)(4) and § 7412(i)(3)(A) — are enforceable under the CAA citizen suit provision.
Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW Document 2 Filed 04/02/14 Page 14 of 17

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Violation of the Clean Air Act and implementing regulations, Number of Tailings Impoundments, 40 C.F.R. § 61.252(b)(1))

38. Each and every allegation set forth in this Complaint is incorporated herein by reference.

39. After December 15, 1989, a uranium mill utilizing phased disposal is prohibited from either constructing or operating more than two tailings impoundments. 40 C.F.R. § 61.252(b)(1). This work practice standard is an emission standard, limitation, or regulation under the CAA.

40. At White Mesa Mill, Cell 4A was constructed in 2008 and Cell 4B was constructed in 2011. At the time these two tailings impoundments were constructed, White Mesa Mill had more than two tailings impoundments in operation. Cell 4A and 4B were constructed while Cell 1 was operating. Cell 4A and 4B were constructed while Cell 2 was operating. Cell 4A and 4B were constructed while Cell 3 was operating. Cell 4A and 4B were constructed while Roberts Pond was operating. Cell 4B was constructed while Cell 4A was operating.

41. Cell 4A and 4B are operating tailings impoundments. There continue to be more than two tailings impoundments in operation at White Mesa Mill. Cell 1 is in operation at White Mesa Mill. Cell 2 is in operation at White Mesa Mill. Cell 3 is in operation at White Mesa Mill. Cell 4A is in operation at White Mesa Mill. Cell 4B is in operation at White Mesa Mill. Roberts Pond is in operation at White Mesa Mill. Initial closure and reclamation measures, such as dewatering the tailings and placing interim radon barriers, have begun at Cell 2. No other cells are undergoing reclamation or interim closure. No tailings impoundment at White Mesa Mill has begun final closure. No tailings impoundment at White Mesa Mill has been covered in a manner shown to effectively control radon for at least two hundred years. Energy Fuels has not placed a
Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW Document 2 Filed 04/02/14 Page 15 of 17
final radon barrier on Cell 1, Cell 2, Cell 3, Cell 4A, Cell 4B, or Roberts Pond. The State of Utah Division of Radiation Control has not incorporated a written tailings closure plan for any cell or Roberts Pond into the Radioactive Materials License for the White Mesa Mill. Subpart T of the CAA regulations governing hazardous air pollutants does not apply to any tailings impoundment at the White Mesa Mill.

42. By exceeding the regulatory limit on the number of tailings impoundment, Energy Fuels has violated and continues to violate the CAA’s work practice standard. See 40 C.F.R. § 61.252(b)(1); 42 U.S.C. § 7412(f)(4) and § 7412(i)(3)(A). Energy Fuels’ violations of the CAA – – 42 U.S.C. § 7412(f)(4) and § 7412(i)(3)(A) — are enforceable under the CAA citizen suit provision.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment against Defendant and provide the following relief:

1. Declare that Energy Fuels has violated and is violating the Clean Air Act and issue such orders as are necessary to enforce the Clean Air Act emissions standards and limits;

2. Enjoin, through an injunction, Energy Fuels from conducting operations at White Mesa Mill until it complies with the Clean Air Act;

3. Enjoin, through an injunction, Energy Fuels from emitting Radon-222 in violation of the CAA standard;

4. Order, through an injunction, Energy Fuels to comply with the Clean Air Act’s work practice standards applicable to uranium mills;

5. Order, through an injunction, Energy Fuels to take actions that remediate the adverse effects to public health and the environment from its Clean Air Act violations;
Case 2:14-cv-00243-CW-BCW Document 2 Filed 04/02/14 Page 16 of 17
Emphasis our own. Read the entire case and its status here: https://www.unitedstatescourts.org/federal/utd/92513/ Or, alternatively at plainsite.org
White Mesa Exposure Pathways EPA -USGS
The Navajo Aquifer is under the Morrison formation, as explained in the documentary below.

Learn more by watching this excellent 12 minute documentary.

Half Life: America's Last Uranium Mill from Grand Canyon Trust on Vimeo.

And, by reading here: http://www.grandcanyontrust.org/white-mesa-uranium-mill