HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application)
Department Of Energy
Albuquerque Operations Office
)
P. 0 . Box 5400
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-5400
Mr. Mark Bean
Director
Garfield County Planning
109 8th Street
Suite 306
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
JA N 0 $ .\995
As discussed with you on January 5, 1995 , the Department of Energy (DOE)
requests a modification to Item 7 of Resolution Number 90-017, Conditional Use
Permit for a landfill located in Garfield County. The landfill, known as the Estes
Gulch disposal cell, is used for the disposal of residual radioactive material located
in Rifle , Colorado, as mandated under Title I of Public Law 95-604, Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA). Item 7 of the Resolution s tates, "the
disposal area will only be used for disposal of material from property in the
inunediate Rifle vicinity." The DOE requests permission to dispose uranium
tailings and contam.inated laboratory equipment, not associated with prope rty in
the Rifle vicinity, in the Estes Gulch disposal cell.
The uranium ta ilings mate1ial 01iginated from the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial
Action (UMTRA) site in Salt Lake City, Utah, and were used to perform radon
diffusion s tudies in support of disposal cell cover designs for the UMTRA Project.
The laboratory equipment became contaminated as a result of perfonn.ing these
studies. Following is a description of the material to be di sposed of:
Bairnl 1: One 55 gallon drum containing uranium in.ill tailings with a total
radium-226 activity of 277 microcuries and a weight of 250 kilograms. The 55
gallon drum i s packaged insid e an 85 ga llon overpack drum for sh ipping
purposes.
Banel 2: One 30 gallon drum containing uranium mill tailings with a total
radium-226 activity of 146 1n.icrocuries and a weight of 150 kilograms. The 30
gallon drum i s packaged inside a 55 gallon overpack drum for s hipping purposes.
BatTel 3: One 30 gallon drum containing uranium in.ill tailings with a total
radium-226 activity of 140 microcuries and a weight of 136 kilograms. The 30
gallon drum is packaged inside a 55 gallon overpack drum for s hipping purposes.
@ Printed on recycled paper
Mark Bean 2
JAN 0 5 1995
Banel 4: One 55 gallon drum containing gate valves and related laboratory
fittings with a total lead-210 activity of 2 microcuries and a weight of 100
kilograms. The lead-210 is a radon daughter product.
Disposal of the above material in the UMTRA disposal cell a ssociated with the
Salt Lake City site in not an option since thi s site has been closed since 1989.
Your consideration of this request is appreciated. Should you have any
questions, please contact me at (505) 845-5668.
/
cc:
A. Mackley, Garfield County Commission
D. Hawker, Rifle City Manager
J. Deckle r , CDPHE
J. Hams , CDPHE-GJ
C. Smythe, UMTRA
R. Cornish, UMTRA
M. Thomson, MK-F
R. Withee, MK-F, Rifle
Sincerely ,
/ar~90r
Site Manager
Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial
Action Project Office
contract t 900521 -C.A. I.
Hap ID I ~2 . . Date Activate ti/1~/90
··~
Amended 5/26/92 to 16.405 a/f
Amended//3/9oz. to CJ ,t, ""'sa/P
APPLICATION TO AMEND CONTRACT
For o!fi<o uso only ~~ ;.z__;
LEASING WATER FROM
THE WEST DIVIDE WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
cx:NTRACT # 900521 -C.A. I. AMENDED FRCM I if. LJ () .b A/F to rea&;{ 6' L//J 5 A/F
A. APPLICAN'r Name Centra I Aggregates, Inc.
Address P.O. Box 26 Rifle, CO 81650
Telephone Number 303 / 625-3598
~~~-----~---~. Authorized Agent or Representative Gilbert T. Lee -~~~~~~---------
B. WATER RIGHT OONED BY APPLICANT
Name of Right West Ri fie Pit
Type of Structure or· Right._,..=.Gr~a,..,.v~e,;;.l -'Pc..;i;.,;t~-_.p~o"°'n.=.d----~-----.,
Location of Point of Diversion NWY., SEY, of Section 17, T.6S. R.93W. of
the 6th P.M. at a point 1,790 feet north of the south line and
2,440 feet west of the east line of said Section 17.
water Court case No.90CW150 (prev. Well Permit No.
81CW111) -------
c. INTENDED USE OF LEASED WATER
Location of .. Area of Use Estes Gulch -10 acre feet
Dascription of use UMIRA proJeCt -pond f1!! for Department of Energy
· ·· construction proJect and· ·m1 II tall ings removal
Number of dwelling units NA Total Acreage'---------
Rro~sed Potable Water System NII
Rroposed Waste-Water Treatment System'---------------
Projected Monthly Volume of Leased Water Needed in Gallons:
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July ___ _
--Aug.--Sept. __ . Oct. Nov. __ Dec·--
Annual Total Gallons Acre Feet 10 June-July 1992 (ONLY)
Maximwn Instantaneous Damand qpn.
July 2, 1992
r:ete
°"''"'" West Divide Water Conservancy District
Preoidmt (ml 625-1235
Cerl H. llerriWu
POST OFFICE BOX 1478
RIFLE, COLORADO 81650·1478 7fllJ C. R, 'm
Rifle, Colorado 816!0 July 24, 1992 -Gregoey l>Jn>tt
926 B1el<a A"""
Glerwx:d Spgs. I Co 81001 1~11-:JCSJ?~J?~ ~' ,~:~~~t~~~;\\U Sec./rtees.,....... --J<JthllerriWu \t ----:· 7fllJ C, R. 'm
wi., Qilorado 81~ t~;i\_:,---~--:-r cOUI~ rY
Attam>7
~Geo ...
r-.o,F\1--it:.L.lJ
\;M
s....< & Geo,.. P. C,
Poat Office Box 9J7
Rifle, Colorado 816!0
Mr. Randy C. Van Slyke, Project M3nager
Green International, Inc.
Post Offict Pox 346
Rifle, Coloradp 81650
Dear Mr. Van Slyke:
Enclosed please find your canpleted contract #920717-GII and receipt for
paynwt of S8llE #2284, Receipt #2282 WIB mailed previously, Copies of your
contract have been sulmitted to W.D.W.C.D. Attorney and Engineer for their approval
and copies of the canpleted Contract are being subnitted to the following entities
per our agrearent with them:
The State Division of Water Resources
Division #5 Water Resources
Garfield County Tupart:rrent of Planning
Colorado River Water Conservation District
We appreciate. your business and I am enclosing l:\o.o copies of our amendnEnt
form, should you need apply for m:ire "8ter as you discussed with Carl Bernklau.
If that need arises please just canplete the fonns and subnit them to us for
canpletion with the minor amendnEnt fee as listed, Thank you.
Sincerely, __
. ,/':) /'~=-< ~~! ,,f/<!.LL-~/fV~ '---./
Nora Ruth Bernklau
Water M3nager, W.D.W.C.D.
Fnc/
Board cil Dlrt0tort
Carl H, Bemklau
7fllJ C, R. 'm
Rifle, Colorado 81650
Gregory furrett
926 Blake Avenue
Gl""'°"" SPS'., Ch SIWI
Joe 1-hutz, Jr.
6107 lligti..ey 133
Carb::r.dale, Colo. 81623
Kelly 0>£y
'745 C, R, 315
Silt, Colorado 81652
laVerne Starbu:k
1859 C. R, 344
Silt, Colorado 61652
APPLICATION AND DATA FORM For office ""' ooly
TO LEASE WATER FROM .
WEST DIVIDE WATER CONSERVANCi DISTRICT
A. APPLICANT
Name GREEN INTERNATIONAi,, INC.
Address p ,0' BOX 346 RIFLE co 81650
Telephone Number 303 / 625 -..Qll.LL
Authorized Agent or Representative
RANDY C. VAN SLYKE PROJECT MANAGER ----------
B. WATER RIGHT OWNED Bi APPLICANT
Name Of Right N/A Type of struct:-:u".':r":'.'e-:-or'.':"""'R::-i,-g~h;-t,,..---,N,,../,.,,A-----------
Location Of Point of Diversion NW!,; SE!,; OF SECTION 17 T' 6 s'
R93W OF THE 6TH P.M. AT A POINT 1790 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE
AND 2440 FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 17.
CON-SY, INC. PIT AT WEST RIFLE
Water Court Case No. ~-N~/·A~--
Well Permit No,
C, INTENDED USE OF LEASED WATER
Location of Area of Use _ESTES GULCH DISPOSAL CELL
Description of Use INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES -CONSTRUCTION WATER
FOR DUST CONTROL AND FIT.I. CONSTRUCTION
Number of Dwelling units N/A
Total Acreage ------
Proposed Potable Water System _N_/~A-----------
Proposed Waste-water Treatment system .N ...... A.__ _____ ~
Projected Monthly Volume of Leased Water Needed in
Gallons1
Jan. Feb._,,..._ Mar. Apr. May __ _
June July 3 Aug.___,8,--Sept.-'--Oct. __
Nov. Dec,
Annual Total G...,al::-:l:-o-ns 3, s 7 s, ooo Acre Feet_1""1 ___ _
Maximum Instantaneous Demand 4 ooo gpm
0, OTHER REMAlU<S THIS IS A DAYLIGHT OPERATION, OPERATING 5 DAYS
PER WEEK, 10 HOURS PER DAY. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THE PURCHASE
OF THIS WATER IS FOR TEMPORARY USE, OUR ACTUAL REQUIREMENTS MAY
FLUCTUATE WITH OUR DEMANDS.
7;/'1/fz..-• DATE
contract t 9jo~/~-G-I I Hap ID f ~ ~
Date Activate~::'·'-
WEST DIVIDE WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
Water Allotment Contract
Name of Applicant• GREEN INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Quantity of water in acre feet 11
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Applicant, hereby applies to the West Divide water Conservancy District, a political subdivision of the state of
Colorado, organized pursuant to and existing by virtue of C.R.S.
1973, 37-45-101, et seg., (hereinafter referred to as the ~ •
"District") for an allotment contract to beneficially ......a-~ \'11"
pa1pa-wall) use water or water rights owned, leased, or hereafter ~1 1
acquired by the District, By execution of this application, and
subsequent delivery and use of water, Applicant hereby agrees to
the following terms and conditions1
1. Water Rights1 Applicant shall own water rights at
the point of diversion herein lawfully entitling Applicant to
divert water, which will be supplemented by water leased herein,
If Applicant intends to divert through a well, it must be
understood by Applicant that no right to divert exists until a
valid well permit is obtained from the State Engineer,
2. ~uantit~1 Water applied for by the Applicant in
the amount setorth a ove shall be diverted at Applicant's point
of diversion from the District's direct flow water rights, and
when water is unavailable for diversion pursuant to administration
by the Colorado State Engineer during periods when said direct
flow water right is not in priority, the District shall release
for the use of Applicant up to said quantity in acre-feet per year
of storage water owned or controlled by the District, It is
understood that any quantity allotted from direct flow, storage or
otherwise, to the Applicant by the District will be limited by the
priority of the District's decrees and by the physical and legal
availability of water from District's sources. Any quantity
allotted will only ,be provided so long as water is available and
the Applicant fully complies with all of the terms and conditions
of this contract. The District and the Applicant recognize that
some of the District's decrees may be in the name of the Colorado
River Water Conservation District, and the ability of the District
to allot direct flow rights to the Applicant may be dependent on
the consent of the Colorado River Water Conservation District. If
at any time the Applicant determines it requires less water than
the amount herein provided, it may so notify the District in
writing, and the amount of water allotted under this contract
shall be reduced permanently in accordance with such notice.
Rates shall b0> adjusted accordingly in following water years only.
J, Beneficial Use and Location of Beneficial Use: Any
and all water allotted Applicant by the District shall be used for
the following beneficial use or uses1 Municipal, domestic and
related uses, or irrigation and commercial (except to the extent
that Ruedi water may not be available for irrigation and
commercial as those terms are defined on page 5 of Contract No.
2-07-70-W0547 between the United States and the West Divide Water
Conservancy District), 'Applicant's beneficial use of any and all
water allotted shall be within or'through facilities or upon land
owned, leased, operated,, pr under Applicant •s control.
' ' 4, Decrees and Delivery1 Exchange releases made by
the Di1trict out of atorage from Ruedi Reservoir, or other works
or facilities ot the District, or from other sources available to
the District, shall be delivered to the Applioant at the outlet
works ot said storage facilities or at the decreed point of
-1-
diversion for said other sources, and release or delivery of water
at such outlets or points shall constitute performance of the
District's total obligation, Delivery of water by the District
from Ruedi Reservoir shall be subject to the District's lease
contract with the United States Bureau of Reclamation. Releases
from other facilities available to District shall be subject to
the contracts, laws, rules, and re9ulations governing releases
therefrom. Furthermore, the District hereby expressly reserves
the right to store water and to make exchange releases from
structures that may be built or controlled by the District in the
future, so long as the water service to the Applicant pursuant to
this agreement is not impaired by said action. Any quantity of
the Applicant's allocation not delivered to or used by Applicant
by the end of each water year (December· 31), shall revert to the
water supplies of the District. ~uch reversion shall not entitle
Applicant to any refund of payment made for such water.
Water service provided by the District shall be limited
to the amount of water available in priority at the original point
of diversion of the District's applicable water right, and n~ither
the District, nor those entitled t,o utilize the District's
decrees, may call on any greater amount at new or alternate points
of diversion. The District shall request the Colorado State
Engineer to estimate any conveyance losses between the original
point and any alternate point, and such estimate shall be deducted
from this amount in each case. The District, or anyone using the
District's decrees, may call on any additional sources of supply
that may be available at an alternate point of diversion, (though
not at the original point of diversion) only as against water
rights which are junior to th~ date of application for the
alternate point of diversion.
5, Alternate Point of Diversion and Plan of
Au9mentation1 Decrees for alternate points of diversion of the
District's water rights or storage water may be required in order
for Applicant to use the water service contemplated hereunder.
Obtaining such decree is the exclusive responsibility of
Applicant. The district reserves the exclusive right to review
and approve any conditions which may be attached to judicial
approval of said alternate point of diversion as contemplated or
necessary to serve Applicant's facilities or lands, Applicant
acknowledges and agrees that it shall be solely responsible for
the procedures and legal and engineering costs necessary for any
changes in water rights contemplated herein and further agrees to
indemnify the District frbm any coats or losses related thereto.
Applicant is solely responsible for providing works and facilities
necessary to obtain/divert the waters at said alternate point of
diversion and deliver them to Applicant'• intended beneficial use.
Irrespective of the amoun~ of water actually transferred to the
Applicant's point of diversion, the Applicant shall make annual
payments to the District based upon the amount of water allotted
under this agreement.
ln the event the Applicant intends to apply for an
41 tcrnate point or diversion and to dove lop an augmentation plan
and institute legal proceedings for the approval of such
augmentation plan to allow the Applicant to utilize the water
allotted to Applicant hereunder, the Applicant shall give the
District written notice of such intent, ln the event the
Applicant develops and adjudicates its own augmentation plan· to
utilize the water allotted hereunder, Applicant shall not be
obligated to pay any amount under paragraph 18 below. In any
event, the District shall have the right to approve or disapprove
the Applicant's augmentation plan and the Applicant shall provide
the District copies of such plan and of all pleadings and other
papers filed with the water court in the adjudication thereof,
6. Annual Payment r Annual payment tor the water
service described herein shall be determined by the Board of
Director• of the District at a per acre-foot rate. The initial
annual payment shall be made, in full, within thirty (30) days
after the date of notice to the Applicant that the initial payment
-2-
Annual payment for the water service described herein
shall be determined by the Board of Directors of the District at a
per acre-foot rate, The initial annual payment shall be made in
full, within thirty (30) days alter the date of notice to'the
Applicant that the initial payment is due, Said notice will
advise the Applicant, among other things, of the wao.r delivery
year to which the initial payment •hall apply and the price which
is applicable to that year, Annual payments for each year
thereafter shall be due and payable by the Applicant on or before
each January l, If an annual payment is not made by the due date,
written notice thereof will be sent by the District to the
Applicant at such address as may be designated by the Applicant in
writing, (If no address has been so designated in writing, then
said notice shall be sent to Applicant's address set forth herein,
Water use for any part of a water year shall require payment for
the entire water year. Nothing herein shall be construed so as to
prevent the Dietrict from adjusting the annual rate in its sole
discretion for future years only.
If payment is not made within tsn (10) days after the
date of said written notice, Applicant shall at District's sole
option have no futther right, title or inter:est under this
conti:act withouc turthec noi:icq and deliver:y may be immediately
curtailed1 and the allotment o! water 1 as herein made, may be
transferred, leased, or otherwise disposed of at the discretion of
the Board of Directors of the District,
7, Securitf As security to the District, the
foregoing covenant o annual payments in advance of water
delivery, will be fully met by annual budget and appropriation of
funds from such sources of revenues as may be legally available to
the Applicant, As additional secudty to the District, the
Applicant will hold harmless the District and any person,
corporation, quasi-goveinmontal entity, or othor governrnenoal
entity, for discontinuance in se'Vice duo to the failure ot the
Applicant to maintain the payments herein contemplated on a
current baa ia,
Applicant agrees to defray any out-of-pocket expenses
incurred by the District in connection with the allotmont of water
rights hereunder, includin9, but not limited to, reimbursement of
legal and engineering costs incurred in connection with any water
rights and adjudication necessary to allow Applicant's use of such
allotted water rights,
8, l\ss!qnment: This agreement Shall inure to the
benefit of the heirs, aucc~ssora or assigns of the parties hereto,
except that no asaignment shall be permitted in the event the
water right allotted hereunder la to be used for the benefit of
land which will be subdivided or otherwiae held or owned in
separate ownership intereats by two (2) or more uaers of the water
right allotted hereunder, In no evont shall the owner of a
portion, but leas than all, of the Applicant's property to be
served undor thi• controct, have any rights hereunder, Any
assignment of the Applicant's rights under this contract ahall be
subject to, and must comply with, such requirements as the
District may hereafter adopt regarding aaaignment of contract
rights and the assumption of contract obligations by assignees ond
successors, Nothing herein shall prevent successors to a portion
of Applicant's property from applying to the District for
individual and separate allotment contracts.
9, Other: Rules1 Applicant shall be bound by the
provisions of the Water Conservancy, Act of Colorado1 by the rules
and regulations of the Board of Directors of the District1 and all
amendments thereof and supplements thereto and by all other
applicable law,
10. Operat·ion and Maintenance >.greementt Applicant
ahall enter into an •Opa,&tlon and HalnEananca A9cee~ent 1 with the
Di1t•ict undH tum• and oondition• detHmined by th• Booed of
Di•ectors of the District, i! and when, th• Board o! said Di•trict
-3-
detecmines in its sole discC"etion that such an agC"eement !a
cequired, Said agreement may contain, but shall not be limited
to, provisions for additional annual monetary consideration for
extension of District delivery services and for additional
administC"ation, opecation, and maintenance costs1 or for other
costs to the District which may ariso through services mada
available to the Applicant.
11. Chanae of use: The DistC"ict C"eaerves the exclusive
C"iqht to review, reapprove or disapptove any proposed change in
use of the water allotted hereunder, Any use other than that set
forth herein or any lease or sale ot the water or water rights
allotted hereunder without the prior written approval of the
District shall be deemed to be a material breach of this contract,
12. Use and Place of Use: Applicant agrees to use the
water In the manner and on the property described In the documents
submitted to the District at the time this agreement is executed
(said documents are incorporated herein by this reference
thereto), or in any operation and maintenance agreement provided
by Applicant. Any use other than as set forth thereon or any
lease oc sale of the water or wator riqhts herein, other than as
porr.:l.tted in pareg,aph 8 above, shall be deemed to bo a material
breach of thia agi:eemont.
13. Title1 It is undei:stood and a9reed that nothing
herein shall be interpreted to give the Applicant any equitable or
legal fee title Interest in or to any water or water <ights
referred to herein,
14, Conservation: Applicant shall USQ commonly
accepted conservatlon pcactices with i:espect to th'l water and
water rights herein,. and hereby agrses to be bound by any
conservation plan adopted hersafter by the District for use of
District owned oc controlled watei: oc water rights,
l5. Restrictions• Applicant shall restrict uses as
follows (unless specitic walvers are appended to this agreement),
Violation of these restrictions shall bo doemod to bo a matsr!al
broach of thld A~1um&11~1 ·,'.'·'·
.!lli
Household
Domestic (includes lawn)
Livestock (cattle)
Irrigation
Annual Haxlmum Diversion
l/J aero (oot
l - J acre feet
l acre (oot/100 head
2 -J aero (oet/acre
16. Nell Permlt1 If Applicant intends to. divert
through a well, then Applicant must provide to District a copy of
Applicant's ·valid well permit before District Is obligated to
deliver any water hersundsr.
17. R~resontatlona1 By executing this agreement,
Applicant agrees that 110 la r.ot re.tying on any legal or
engineering advice that he may believe ho has received from tho
District. Applicant further acknowledgss that he has obtained all
necessary legal and engineering advice from his own sources other
than the District, Applicant further acknowledges that the
District raakes no guarantees, warranties, or assurances whatsoever
about the quantity or quality of water available pursuant to this
ac;Jreement. ~hould the Distdct be unable tQ provide the ·water
contracted for hereln~ no damages may be assessed against the
Oiatrict, nor may Applicant obtain ~ refund from the District.
18, Costs of Nater Court riling: Should the District,
in its own discteeton, choose to tncluoe Applicant's contract
herein in a water court filing for alternate point of diversion
or plan of augmentation, then Applicant hereby agrees to pay to
the District;, when assessed, an additional fee representing the
Oia:t:.ciot's actual and reaaonable coats and !eea tor Applicanc'a
ahare of the proceeding.
-·-
19, Binding Agreement1 This Agreement shall not be
complete nor binding upon the District unless attached hereto is
the form entitled "Application for Purchase of Waters from the
West Divide Water Conservancy District" fully completed by
Applicant and approved by the District's engineer. Said
attachments shall by this reference thereto be incorporated into
the terms of this agreement.
20. Warning: IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
APPLICANT TO OBTAIN A VALID WELL PERMIT OR OTHER WATER RIGHT IN
ORDER TO DIVERT WATER, INCLUDING THE WATER ACQUIRED UNDER THIS
CONTRACT, IT IS THE CON'rINUING DUTY OF THE APPLICANT TO MAINTAIN
THE VALIDITY OF THE WELL PERMIT OR WATER RIGHT INCLUDING FILING
FOR EXTENSIONS OF PERMITS, FILING WELL COMPLETION REPORTS, FILING
STATEMENTS OF BENEFICIAL USE, OR OTHERWISE LAWFULLY APPLYING THE
WATER TO BENEFICIAL USE ON A REGULAR BASIS WITHOUT WAS'fE,
:~PLICANT: d~-APP~SS1
STATE OF COLORADO
SS,
COUNTY OF GARFIELD
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on
this 17th day of JULY , 19,2._2, by RANDY C, VAN SLYKE
Witness my hand and official seal,
Hy commission expiros1 JUNE 22~ 1996 d~-iA)J,
ORDER
After a hearing by the Board of Directors of the west
Divide water Conservancy District on the above application, it is
hereby ORDERED that said application be granted and this contract
shall be and is accepted by the District,
A'rTEST1
~~~
Sscretary
WEST DIVIDE WATER
CONSE~fANCY DISTRICT ;?_d'
Dy ~c;vfk .. ~ Pres en >
This contract includes and is subject to the terms. and
conditions of the following documents which must accompany this
contracts
1, Hap showing location
provided.) :
of point of diversion (use map
2. Application
signed
and Data Form fully completed and
3. Other
-s-
T5S
:EA A
)'-:
I
(/ \l .. / "(' .· .. CU .. ,,~··...-···· .......... ~'°"" ~"..... .. . .,, ···<\ ··... .
----"-~-L--~··· ----;---~ I I .. I
I I ·.... 1 1
l&' : : : ·... :
I ---~~ ARE;A At·~.--:--
~'-I I "\;:~
t ) I \
RiO~r
,_
' ,.
·I
i1 I ,
I I
I ,_ . I .... _ ~;,_-"'1 _____ _
I \"·"
0. '
···..i ,.
_:1
' . ~ Qrl
.·.· •. ~ .
. ·-· -~-
V'
(~f.·· ·•···· ... ,z; ?--0..
~ i~
c • '-~-SH No/MP/Side: 6/92.49/R
COLORADO DEPARTNrENT OF HIGHWAYS Local Jurisdiction: Garfield county
STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMiTi1fitq~2\W~J1li~~s;::;i~1:~t:roi: ;~i~~s ---,flf; ~),, :Perm1tFee: Exempt
THE PERMITTEE;
Colorado Department of
4210 East 11th Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
j~ MAY 31 1q91 ;!' 'pateo!Transmittal: 5-15-91
c.:it..__ c _Jl
GARt ii..~"· Ap];J_l~c;:'lnt
Health 11k-Ferguson Company
2309 Renard Place, S.E. //300
Albuquerque, NM 87119
is hereby granted permission to construct and use an access to the state highway at the location noted below.
The access shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit,
including the State Highway Access Code and listed attachments. This permit may be revoked by the issuing
authority if at any time the permitted access and its use violate any of the terms and conditions of this permit. The use
of advance warning and construction signs, flashers, barricades and flaggers are required at all times during access
construction within State right-of-way in conformance with the MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL
DEVICES, Part VI. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed agents and employees shall be held
harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of the permit.
LOCATION:
On the south side of State Highway 6, a distance of 2600 feet east
from Mile Post 92.
ACCESS TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO:
Old Rifle Mill Site for mill tailings removal.
OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
See Attached Sheet.
PERMIT NO. 391038
1. This access and permit is TEMPORARY and valid until removal
project is completed.
2. Access shall be constructed as designed on
DE-AC04-83AL18796 EXHIBIT A NO REVISIONS.
constructed along the wide area beside the
prevent any parking.
plan
A fence shall
approach to
be
STATE OF COLORl\00
' . 1 i
CO LORA Ot>El'A:RTMENFGF+tEAL'I' . -
DedicJ/cd to pm'1Eciidi; ~1iid.fi!Jl{9f!,/'.Eif(.rqTiyalth .111d
environ1nent of /he people of ColoradO
Denver, Colorado 80222-1530 4210 E. 11 lh Avenue
4'H)0 Cherry Creek Dr. S. I labor,1tory Building
Phone: (303) 692-2000 Denver, Colorado 80220-3716
1303) 691-4700
April 20, 1993
R. E. Lawrence, UMTRA Proj. Dir.
Morrison Knudsen Corp., MK Ferguson Group
P.O. Box 9136
Albuquerque, NM 87119
505/845-5868
RE: Final Permit, Colorado Discharge Permit System -Stormwater
Certification No.: COR-030266
OLD RIFLE PROCESSING SITE
Garfield County
Local Contact: Randy Withee, Site Mgr.
303/625-4618
Anticipated Activity: 10/01192 through 09129195
on 22 acres ( 22 acres disturbed)
Dear Sir or Madam:
Roy f.:crnwr
Covl'f!UJr
l',11rici,1 1\. Nol,1n, ;'\11), MJ'l l
[Xl'<utivl' [}irl'clor
Enclosed please find a copy of the permit certification which was issued to you
under the Colorado Water Quality Control Act.
Your certification under the permit requires that specific action be performed at
designated times. You are legally obligated to comply with all terms and
conditions of your certification. We have enclosed copies of the "Notice of
Transfer" and "Inactivation Notice" forms for your use when appropriate.
Please read the permit and certification. If you have any questions, contact
this office at 692-3590.
Sincerely,
:::::1~hi~
Permits and Enforcement Section
WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION
xc: Regional Council of Governments
Local County Health Department
District Engineer, Field Support Section, WQCD
@ Primed 011 Recycfed Pa11er
Permit No. COR-030000
Facility No. COR-030266
Page I of 17
CERTIFICATION
CDPS GENERAL PERMIT
STORMWATER DISCHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH
CONSTRUCTION
Construction Activity: Remediation of uranium mill tailings and removal to remote
site. Stormwater in contaminated areas is retained on site
and managed under CPDS permit C0-0042552.
This permit specifically authorizes MORRISON KNUDSEN CORP.
MK FERGUSON GROUP
to discharge stormwater from the facility identified as:
which is located at
part of
in
OLD RIFLE PROCESSING SITE
24230 Highways 6 & 24
Rifle, CO 81650
NE Section 16 T06S R093W
Garfield County
to tributary to Colorado River
effective October 11, 1992.
Annual Fee: $ 175.00 (DO NOT PAY NOW. You will receive a prorated bill.)
r:--,1-·'"'(~-·j(-~::· ... -.. :; (_'~~'. l!~~~,:2 ;,~itE OF COLOMDO
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEAfrk'l;';' i .• c:·::c lif! ·{
Dedicated lo protcctinR and in1provinR the health and
environ111enl of the people ol Colorado
Denver, Colorado i\0222-1530 4210 E. 11th Avenue
4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S. I Labora!ory Building
Phone: (303) (/J2-2000 Denver, Colorado 80220-371 (>
(303) 691-4700
April 20, 1993
R. E. Lawrence, UMTRA Proj. Dir.
Morrison Knudsen Corp., MK Ferguson Group
P.O. Box 9136
Albuquerque, NM 87119
505/845-5868
RE: Final Permit, Colorado Discharge Permit System -Stonnwater
Certification No.: COR-030267
NEW RIFLE PROCESSING SITE
Garfield County
Local Contact: Randy Withee, Site Mgr.
303/625-4618
Anticipated Activity: 10/01/92 through 09129195
on 142 acres ( 142 acres disturbed)
Dear Sir or Madam:
R.ov Ron1er
c;overnor
1'.i1rici,1 1\. Nol.rn, ,V\0, lvll'! l
[\ecu1ive Director
Enclosed please find a copy of the permit certification which was issued to you
under the Colorado Water Quality Control Act.
Your certification under the permit requires that specific action be performed at
designated times. You are legally obligated to comply with all terms and
conditions of your certification. We have enclosed copies of the "Notice of
Transfer" and "Inactivation Notice" forms for your use when appropriate.
Please read the permit and certification. If you have any questions, contact
this office at 692-3590.
Sincerely,
4Jc~
Robert J. Shukle, Chief
Permits and Enforcement Section
WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION
xc: Regional Council of Governments
Local County Health Department
District Engineer, Field Support Section, WQCD
@ Printed 011 Recycled
Permit No. COR-030000
Facility No. COR-030267
Page l of 17
CERTIFICATION
COPS GENERAL PERMIT
STORMW ATER DISCHARGES ASSOC IA TED WITH
CONSTRUCTION
Construction Activity: Removal of uranium mill tailings to remote disposal site.
All stormwater in contaminated areas will be collected in
retention basins and discharged if necessary in accordance
with COPS Permit C0-0042552. Stormwater runoff from
uncontaminated areas of the project site will be diverted
from the wastewater retention basins.
This permit specifically authorizes MORRISON KNUDSEN CORP.
MK FERGUSON GROUP
to discharge stormwater from the facility identified as:
NEW RIFLE PROCESSING SITE
which is located at 24230 Highways 6 & 24
Rifle, CO 81650
part of SE Section 18 T06S R093W
in Garfield County
to tributary to Colorado River
effective October 11, 1992.
Annual Fee: $ 175.00 (DO NOT PAY NOW. You will receive a prorated bill.)
TO:
FROM1
Mark Bean in~~
David Gallagher (JJ{///
GARFIELD COUNTY
WEED AND PEST
109 8th Street, Suite 307 Bus: (303) 945-7437
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601-3303 (303) 625-6571
SUBJECT: Document No. 3885-RFL-S-01-00747-03, Section 02935
DATE1 February 3, 1991
Practicality and good management practices should be the goals for
this project,
Reference to1
2.1 SEED MIX
A. Processing Sites1 Seed mix satisfactory
B, Wet Meadow/Shrub Wetlands1 Seed mix not satisfactory
The recommended Sal tgrass (Distichlis spicata), is
commonly known as Seashore Saltgrass and not adapted to
this area, Desert Saltgrass, Distichlis stricta, is adapted
to this area and a good recommendation (see attachment),
Foxtail Barley (Hordeum jubatum) is not recommended, It is
considered one of Colorado's 21 most troublesome weeds!
(See attachment,) --
Alkalai Sacaton is a good choice,
Revised Seed Recommendation:
Desert Saltgrass (Distichlis stricta) -16 lbs,/acre
Tufted Hairgrass (Deschampsia congestiformis) -16 lbs,/acre
Alkalai Sacaton (Sporobolus airoides) -16 lbs,/acre
C, Wetlands Bliffer-Zone1 Seed mix satisfactory
D. Disposal Site: Seed mix satisfactory
2.3 FERTILIZER
Fertilizer will be re~uired, Phosphorus and potash may or
may not be necessary, depending on soil analysis, However,
the contractor should consider 20 lbs, of available nitrogen
per acre, Special Note: 20 lbs, of nitrogen should also be
applied for two (2) years following stand establishment,
WEED & PEST MANAGEMENT= AESTHETICS· SAFETY· WEED CONTROL•ECONOMICS
Page 2 February J, 1991
2.4 MULCH
The contractor cannot guarantee freedom of weed seed short
of steam killing the seed,
2.5 WATER
The contractor needs to spell-out when and how heavily newly
seeded areas will be irrigated. At this progression point
in the project, water will be the determining factor,
Dr. Gene Siemer, Mountain Meadow Research Center, provided valuable
input in this report,
I hope the information provided will be of value to you,
--------------
'.PUBLICATION 200, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE
~I~~ "'· "' ··/ . ~-\_1-~~-·-·_· •fl:~_-""~_J_, ~\11·· . ,,,• \."'i::s\',: ·:.-·.· \' "''"-"•" .... .. . "-."\: .... , -... >A ~0§ > 1~,~ -~-:: ,.1·1, ~:---·.,v, ~,_,\'::~, ~~/
398.-Desrh<tmpsia c.<moeUiformis. Spikelet
and fioret, X 10. (Type.)
)eschampsia congestif6rmis
" (Fig. 398.) Culms in small
slender, 45 to 70 cm. tall,
-ulous above; sheaths scaber-
to""il"d the summit; ligule 1.5
ill ong; blades flat or folded,
ms on both surfaces, 2 to 3
\vide, the basal 10 to 30 cm.
those of the culm 3 to 8 cm.
those of the innovations sub-
:n; panicle long~xserted, 6.5 to
l. long, narro"·, condensed, the
branches erect, the axis and
Des slender, hirtellous; spikelets
pediceled, appressed, 7 to 10
·Jng; glum es about 7 mm. long,
1us, especiall.Y on the midnerve;
1s 7 to 8 mm. long, a\\·ned from
he base, toothed or lacerate at
Jex, sometimes splitting down
iack at maturity, the a·•m
.:!. and geniculate, exceeding
ikelets 3 to 4 Illlil., the callus
ibout 0.5 to 1 mm. long, those
rachilla 1 to 2 mm. long. '21
--Only known from Gallatin Valley,
Bozeman, Gallatin County, and from
Cooke, Park County, Mont.
4. Deschampsia atropurpiirea
(Wahl.) Scheele. MOUNTAIN HAIR-
GRASS. (Fig. 399.) Culms loosely
tufted, erect, purplish at base; 40
to 80 cm. tall; blades flat, rather
soft, ascending or appressed, 5 to 10
cm. long, 4 to 6 mm. "ride, acute or
abruptly acuminate; panicle loose,
open, 5 to 10 cm. long, the few
capillary drooping branches naked
belo"w; spikelets mostly purplish,
broad; glumes about 5 mm. long,
broad, the second 3-nerved, exceed-
ing the fl.orets; lemmas scabrous,
about 2.5 mm. long, the callus hairs
one-third to half as long, the av{n
of the first straight, included, of the
second, geniculate, exserted. Qt.
Woods and ·~:et meado\vs, Ne\'.iound·
FJOtmE 399.-Duchampaia (i.lropurpurca. Pani<;_le.
X 1; glumes and floret, X 10. (Leiberg 2p .... 2.
Idaho.)
----------
MANUAL OF THE GRASSES OF THE UNITED STATES 295
~-~ ·.
Jand and Labrador to Alaska, south
to tbe White Mountains of New
f!ampshire; Colorado and California;
northern Eurasia.
5. Deschampsia flexn6sa (L.) Trin.
CRINKLED HAIRGRASS. (Fig. 400.)
Culms densely tufted, erect, slender,
30 to 80 cm. tall; leaves mostly in
o basal tuft, numerous, the sheaths
f:cabrous, the blades involute, slender
or setaceous, fie}..'UOUS; panicle loose,
open, nodding, 5 to 12 cm. long, the
capillary branches naked below, the
branchlets spikelet-bearing toward the
ends; spikelets 4 to 5 mm. long,
purplish or bronze, the florets approxi-
nlate; glumes 1-nen~ed, acute, shorter
t hun the florets; lemmas scabrous,
the callus hairs about 1 mm. long,
t lio a''"n attached near the base,
~eniculate, t"isted, 5 to 7 mm. long.
'2l -Dry or rocky woods, slopes,
n11<l open ground, Greenland to
Alaska, south to Georgia, Michigan,
n11<l Wisconsin; Arkansas and Okla-
ho1na (Le Flore County); Mexico;
Eurasia. A form "ith yellow-striped
foliage (called by gardeners Aira
foliis variegatis) is occasionally grown
for ornament.
6. Deschampsia caespit6sa (L.)
Bcauv. TmnEn HAIRGRASS. (Fig.
401.) Culms in dense tufts, leafy at
Lose, erect, 60 to 120 cm. tall; sheaths
smooth; blades 1.5 to 4 mm. wide,
often elongate, rather firm, flat or
foldc<l 1 scabrous above; panicle loose,
open, nodding, 10 to 25 cm. long,
tl.c capillary §Cabr0us_ br!!!!9.l!es and
Lronchlets spikelet-bearing toward
the ends; spikelets 4 to 5 mm. long,
Pale or purple-tinged, the florets dis-
tant, the rachilla internode half the
length of the lower floret; glumes 1-
nerved or the second obscurely 3-
~trved, acute, about as long as the
h orets; lemmas smooth, the callus r~lr~ sl).9_rt; av.·n from near the b"aSe, ~otn straight and includea m the f "umes to weakly geniculate and
•cc as long as the spikelet. '21 -~ and wet places, Greenland_ to
·ka, south to New Jersey, TI est
FtGtral: 400.-Dc3eh.ompaitt fie:ruoso.. Panide, X 1;
1:;lumes and floret, X 10. (Hitchcock 16059, N. H.)
Virginia, North Carolina, Illinois,
North Dakota, New Meidco, and
California; Arctic and temperate re-
gions of the Old World. Variable in
size, in width and texture of blades,
in shape of the panicle, and in length
of awn. The forms which have been
segregated as species and varieties are
inconstant, and the characters used to
distinguish them are not correlated.
Rarely with proliferous spikelets.
Large plants from Oregon and Cali-
fornia have been described under
Deschampsia caespitosa subsp. ber-
inge:nsis (Hulten) Lawr., but are not
D. beringensis Hulten, of the Aleu-
tians. Tall plants, with long flat
blades, elongate panicles, -and spike-
lets, 3 to 4 mm. long, found in Con-
necticut, have been referred to D.
CAESPITOSA var. PARVJFL6RA (Thuill.)
Coss. s.nd Germ. They agree with
l : .,
"·· " "i
'3 'I
i
··~ O,.! .,
~ l •
l
It
-~-
·i ., .,
.,
1
'
j
l
i
1
1,. I I
11!
" :•
ii:·
·1· I I
~ ~
'lj I
i
~1 'II
H !-< " •
~IISC. PUBLICATIOX 2()11, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE
'•
~
J
,
1 ;
:
x
• t
i
1
1
" '· s
• • ,
! -
l>IANUAL OF THE GRASSES OF THE U:S-!TED STATES '--T'ii
• ;ca. Occasional plants produce strong herves, the intermediate nerves ~ers above ground as 'vell as obscure, acute, the margins bron.d, -~,... Such specimens have been hyaline; palea of pistillate spikelets J~gated as D. spicata var. stolonif-shorter than the lemma, strongly
:; ,,a Beetle. D1sTICHLIS SPICATA var. bowed out below, closely convolute
i·J.Cl'A Beetle. Culrns slender from around the pistil, the keels with
f der rhizomes; blades l to 8 cm. narrow erose or toothed wings; lem-
i ::. 8ub~volute, slen~er; pani~les of mas ~f. staminate spikelets more
·
2
to 5 sp1kelets, the sp1kelets shghtly spreading, about 6 mm. long, 3-
. a:.rr?wer than in the species; . ~eels nerved; palea about as long as the
. ol the palea densely short-c1hate.
· '.! -Alkaline boggy or sandy
,.,U Stanislaus and Kern Counties, ou\r. lnsufficiently known ..
2. Distichlis stricta (Torr.) Rydb.
DESERT SALTGRASS. (Fig. 239.) Re-
~Inbling D. spicata; panicles less con-
ge;tcd, the individual spikelets easily
Ji...;tinguished; staminate panicles stra-
rnincous, the spikelets 8-to 15-
ftowered; pistillate spikelets greenish
JC!l<len, mostly 7-or 9-flowered,
broader; lemmas firm, the pa.lea a
little shorter, much. broader below,
the keels \vith \vide serrula.te erose
or lacerate wings. '21 (D. dentata
Rydb., the pistillate plant.) -Al-
lmline soil of the interior, Saskat-
che'"·a.n to ea.stern \Va.shington, south
to Texas and California; lvlexico .
This and D. spicata appear to be
distinct for the most part, but the
staminate plants are sometimes diffi-
cult to distinguish.10
,, 3. Distichlis texana (Vasey) Scribn.
f,(Fig. 240.) Culrns erect from a de-
il;cumbent base, 30 to 60 cm. tall, -~:cproducing extensively creeping rhi-~:·: somes and long stout .stolons; blades
'"t,_flat, firm, glabrous beneath, scabrous
.~~ the upper surface, mostly 20 to ·~ cm. long, 2 to 6 mm. ,vi de;
:i::;cle narrow, pale, 10 to 25 cm.
'. 11g, somewhat interrupted, the
f, branches appressed; spikelets some-~',..,what compressed, 4-to 8-flowered,
·I to 1.5 cm. long; glumes 5 and 7
,.;:i ~-long, acute; le=as of pistillate
1;;' 8Ptkelets closely imbricate and ap-
,_;Pres.."ed, about 8 =· long with 3
~-i''l'~l:C)n_ J. R. 8TATU8 OP' DISTtCB"Lll! DENT.A.TA.. f:. Y Bot. Club Bul. 70: 53-57. 1943.
FIG"O"RE 238.-Di.stkhlia 3pi.t:tJta. Plant, X l; Boret.
X 5. (Hitchcock 2826, Oreg.)
le=a, not bowed out, not con-
volute, the keels minutely scabrous,
not winged; anthers 3 mm. long. '2l
-Sand flats, Presidio and Brewst<>r
Counties, Tex., and northern Mexico.
.,·rr~·:-~·
.. pUBLICATION 200, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE
'" fl
/ v. }
. FloUBc 236.-Red}Uldia ft=:u.oaa. Pl.ant, X H; epi.kelet .and Boret, X 5. (Over 2429, S. (}&k.l
~-·.It
::., -·.·;
-Y.-'.•!t
MANUAL OF THE GRASSES OF THE UNITED STATES 175
.. l\10NAL'<TH6CHLO~ Engelrn.
fl'lants dioecious; spikelets 3-to
0 wered, the uppermost florets
iJnentary, the rachilla. disarticu-
!ialing tardil:y in pistillate spikelets;
~'".iwnes wanting; lemmas rounded on
~ .. i):ae back, convolute, narrowed above,
~.everal-nerved, those of the pistillate
'"-'opikelets like the blades in texture;
~ p.iea narrow, 2-nerved, in the pis-
''~ iilJate spikelets ?onvolute around the
'2 pistil, the rudimentary uppermost
Boret enclosed between the keels of
lbe floret next below. Creeping wiry
perennial, with clustered short sub-
ulate blades, the spikelets incon-
•picuous at the ends of the short
•
branches, only a little exceeding the
leaves. Type species, M onanthochwii
littoralis. Name from Greek monos,
single, anthos, flower, and chloe, grass,
alluding to the unisexual flowers.
1. Monanthochloe littorfilis Eng-
elm. (Fig. 237.) Culrns tufted, ex-
tensively creeping, the short branches
erect; blades falcate, mostly less than
1 cm. long, conspicuously distichous
in distant to approximate clusters;
spikelets 1 to few, nearly concealed
in the leaves. '21 -Muddy sea-
shores and tidal fiats, southern Flori-
da, especially on the keys; Texas
(Galveston and southward); southern
California (Santa Barbara and south-
ward); Mexico, Cuba .
21. DISTICHLIS Raf. SALTGRASS.
Plants dioecious; spikelets several to many-flowered, the rachilla of the
pistillate spikelets disarticulating above the glumes and bet,veen the florets;
glumes unequal, broad, acute1 keeled, 3-to 7-nerved, the lateral nerves
sometimes faint; lemmas closely imbricate, firm, the pistillate coriaceous,
acute or subacute, with 9 to 11 mostly faint nerves (nerves fewer in D. texana);
palea as long as the lemma or shorter, the margins bowed out near the base,
the pistillate coriaceous, enclosing the grain. Low perennials, with exten-
lively creeping scaly rhizomes, sometimes stolons, erect, rather rigid culms,
and dense, rather few-flowered panicles. Type species, Distichlis spicata.
, ·.Name from Greek distichos, 2-ranked, alluding to the distichous leaves. f '; The species of Distichlis in general have little value for forage, but in the
~ mterior basins, such as the vicinity of Great Salt Lake, D. stricta is grazed
· c1;1l'hen better grasses are not available.
:~~
1&nt.s mostly more ths.n 30 cm. tall; blades not conspicuously distichous, mostly
~ 20 to 40 cm. long; p&nicle more tb.&n 10 cm. long; stolons present, long
f.~~~o~~~;\e~ i-h~ll30Cm.t3.u;--bl~des c;~piCUOWtlY_ili_StiChOUS,-mostiY Y~ lf>h=~~z!: l-long; panicle rarely more than 5 cm. long. -~ Pa.nicles condensed, the spikelets imbric&te, mostly 5-to 9-fiowered; keels of pistillate
~~ paleas with narrow entire wings·-------------------------·--··------1. D. SPICATA. ~· Panicles looser, the spikelets less imbrica.te, the individual spikelets plainly visible; keels
of pistillate palea.s with broader serrate-erose wings ___________ 2. D. STlUCTA..
>'' 1. Distichlis spicata (L.) Greene.
it'081'AsaoRE SALTGRASS. (Fig. 238.) if'~ 10 to 40 cm. tall, sometimes
~":i.'.'.e~; leaves nw;nerous, the shea~hs
~y overlapping, the spreading ':'t:"1es conspicuously distichous, flat
~; involute, sharp-pointed, mostly
, __ than 10 cm. long; panicle usually
_ Ile.le or greenish, 1 to 6 cm. long,
;;. ~ely longer; spikelets mostly 5-to ~ flowered, mostly 6 to 10 mm. long,
compressed; lemmas 3 to 6 mm. long,
the pistillate more coriaceous and
more closely imbricate than the
staminate; palea rather soft, narrow,
the keels narrowly winged, entire;
anthers about 2 mm. long. '21 -
Seashores, Jorming dense colonies,
Nova Scotia to Florida and Texas;
British Columbia to California, Mexi-
co, and Cuba; Pacific slope of South
J---
·::i·
!'·
.,:: :-
'
INLAND SALTGRASS is a
native, warm-season, perennial,
sod-forn1ing shortgrass with vig-
orous, creeping, scaly under-
ground stems. This grass begins
growth in April and seed stalks
6 to 12 inches high appear from
July to September. The rather
stiff leaf blades are sharp, folded,
or inrolled for part of their
length. There are both female
and male plants. The 1nale plant
is illustrnted. Male spikelets, (see
inset) 8 to 15 flowered, .are from
% to 1 inch long. The female
spikelets mostly 7 or 9 Bowered
are from ~ to % inch long. This
stra\v-colored short grass grows
on the margins of salty or alkaline
areas in all states west of the
Mississippi River, from Saskatch-
e\van, Canada, to 'fexas, Dense
pure stands of inland saltgrass
are found on shallow-watcrtable
areas, but most often it ·grows
with other salt tolerant grasses
such as alkali sacaton and switch-
grass. Inland saltgrass is rather
harsh and tough for good pastur-
age but is grazed during early
growth stages when it is more
palatable to livestock, Growing
as it does, on subirrigated alkali
Hats or near seeps and springs,
inland saltgrass can generally be
used to best advantage durJng the
spring and fall drouth periods
when 1nost upland grasses are
dry. On good sites this grass is
cut for hay and yields from Ji to
l ton per acre are common. This
short sodgrass protects itself from
overuse by growing close to the
ground and increases fast as t11e
better grasses are damaged by
close grazing. In many areas,
pure stands of inland saltgrass
now exist . where a 1nixture of
alkali sacaton, switchgrass, prairie
cordgrass and inland saltgrass
once flourished. Inland saltgrass
has been successfully established
from sod chunks.
Other co1nmon names for this
grass are desert saltgrass and
alkali grass.
INLAND SALTGRASS
(Distfchfis strfcta)
33
£5<· F
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
222 So. 61h Sl, Room 232
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
January 31, 1991
Marion Smith, Chairman
Garfield County Commissioners
109 Eighth Street
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Telefall:
(JOJ) 122-9076 {Main Bullding/Dcnverj
(lOJ) 121)-1529 (PlarmiRan Place/Denver)
IJOJ) 248-7196 (Grand Juncllon Reglonal Olflcet
Roy Romer
Covernor
Thomas M. Vernon, M.O.
Executive Dlreclor
RE: Application for a Certlficate of Designation Concerning the Disposal Cell
to Contain Uranium Mill Tailings from the UMTRA Program in Rifle,
Colorado, Site Location Estes Gulch, Township 5 South, Range 93 West,
Section 14, Garfield County, File No. RFL-XI-C.l,
Dear Commissioner Smith:
Our Staff hao completed the review of supplementary information, dated
December 20, 1990, as offered by the MK-Ferguson Company for the Certificate
of Designation,
It is the Division's assessment that the application, plus the supplementary
f.nformation, fulfills the requirements, standards and regulations of the Solid
Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, THle 30, Art.tcle 20, Part 1 and as
contained in the Colorado Code of Regulation, 6 CCR 1007-2 (the regulations),
The Division, therefore, recommends that Garfield County approve the
Application for Certificate of Designation.
If you have any questions regarding the Division's recommendations for
approval, please contact Jim Hams at 248-7170 in Grand Junction.
Sincerely, f iVJ ./JrM .f /or
Patricia C. Martinek
Acting UMTRA Technical Manager
JH/bts
cc: Mark Bean, Garfield Planner
Jim Oldham, MK-F
Sharon Arp, DOE
Austin Buckingham, CDH
)
STATE OF COLOMDO
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Te le fa x: 421 0 Eas t 11th Ave nue
D e nver, Col o rado 802 20-37 16
Ph one (3 0 3) 320-8333
(3 03) 322-9076 (Main Building/Denver)
(303) 320-1529 (P tarmiga n Pl ace/De n ve r )
(303) 248-7198 (G\~n d J,unction Regional Office) .-~
/
"'',: ,·, <) • t '9 0 •::i i September 18, 1990
Mark L. Bean, Director
Regulatory Off ice and Personnel
Garfield County Planning Department
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
1:' • •I f , 'J I ' 1
L :. _ __,-;-•k
l .; I ... j <.U (,JUN f 'd ..
Roy Rom er
Governor
Thomas M . Vernon, M.D.
Exe cutiv e D irector
Re: Rifle UMTRA Project Certificate of Designation (RFL X.I)
Dear Mark:
I am writing to
County's review
Designation.
request
of the
the following schedule for Garfield
Rifle UMTRA Project Certificate of
The application is currently undergoing technical review by
Hazardous Materials and Waste Management staff. We have agreed to
s ubmit our comments to you by November 7, 1990. It is our
understanding that the application would then be scheduled for
review by the Planning Commission on November 14, and by the county
Commissioners on December 3. We will have appropriate staff at
both of those meetings.
Please let me know of any changes to the above schedule. Jim Ham s ,
2 4 8 -7170, continues as our primary contact on this matter.
Sincerely,
-\~~~
Howard Roitman, Chief
Remedial Programs Section
Hazardous Materials and
Waste Management Division
HR/cf
c c : Jim Hams
J. Oldham, MK
C. Smythe, DOE
August 24,1990
Howard Roitman
GARFIELD COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Section Chief, Remedial Programs
Colorado Department of Health
4210 East 11th Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
RE: Rifle UMTRA Project
Dear Mr. Roitman:
Please consider this letter to be formal referral of the
UMTRAP, Rifle, Colorado, Application of Certificate of Designation
for Establishment and Operation of a Solid Waste Disposal Site.
C.R.S. 30-20-103 requires that this application be referred to the
department for review and recommendation as to approval or
disapproval, based on criteria established by the State Board of
Health, Water Quality Control Commission and Air Quality Control
Commission.
Tentatively, the Garfield County Planning Commission will be
reviewing this application on September 12, 1990 and the Board of
County Commissioners for public hearing on October 8, 1990. The
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners will be the
statutorily required hearing. Your response prior to the Planning
Commission meeting would be appreciated as well as having a
representative for the Department of Energy at the respective
meetings.
If you have any questions about this referral letter, feel
free to call or write to this office at your convenience.
~'Mh~
Mark L. Bean, Director
Regulatory Offices and Personnel
MLB/bc
109 8TH STREET, SUITE 303 945-8212 I 625-5571 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
222 So. 6th St, Room 232
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
October 4, 1990
Mark Bean
Rifle UMTRAP Advisory Committee
Garfield Co. Planning
109 8th St., Suite 306
Glenwood Spgs. CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
STATE OF COLORADO
Telefax:
(303) 322-9076 (Main Building/Denver)
(303) 320-1529 (Ptarmigan Place/Denver)
(303) 248-7198 (Grand Junction Regional Office)
Roy Romer
Governor
,-7;-,,, 1 Thomas M. Vernon, M.D. rt-1 i ,, ·:-'-·-&xec ive Director
/; _; : r'. -~--~// r1
I: •"} "'\ "'-'i ,,
f '-'t_; ( [) 'II l~ ''•. 1991) . /if.'/
I , '·1 . ,, J
t.7,.'f · i LLD (;Q Ui\iiy
The following are developments and latest schedule targets for the Rifle
Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program.
The Record of Decision (ROD) is being sent to Washington D. C. from
Albuquerque, New Mexico this week. Allowing 6 to 8 weeks for processing, the
ROD should be published by the end of November, 1990.
The publishing of the ROD will trigger the review of Highway 13 construction
plans by the Colorado Department of Highways (CDOH) and submitting to BLM the
right of way amendment. BLM would then complete their review allowing work to
proceed.
The ROD will also trigger BLM to complete reviews for the transfer of the
Estes Gulch disposal site from BLM to DOE control. According to Phil Neal the
BLM specialist assigned to the Rifle project reviews will be essentially
finished by the ROD publishing date, to speed up the process.
The Highway 13 construction funding is under negotiation. Due to the DOE rule
to not build permanent structures CDH is pursuing the possibility of paying
for the construction with the State funds and then be given credit for 90% of
this amount on some other aspect of the project. The funding arrangement for
UMTRAP is 90% Federal and 10% State funds. No counter proposals have been
received to this date from DOE.
The Highway 13 overlay issue remains to be negotiated. The DOE legal
viewpoint is that no overlay can be paid for by DOE funding. To allow the
project to proceed and answer this issue the DOE must find some middle
ground. The DOE has thus far given the go ahead for the dynaflex test on
Highway 13 which will assess the existing condition. This will begin October
8, 1990.
The JQS road intersection with Highway 13 has been investigated by MK-F and
CDH. MK-F talks with Garfield County officials will lead to coordination of
Highway 13 improvements with county improvements to the intersection. The
intent of DOE and Mk-F is to cooperate with local officials and give
assistance to the county project as long as it will not impact the schedule or
costs of the UMTRAP project.
Advisory Committee Members
UMTRAP Schedule
Page 2
The CDH met with Howard Earnest of the Rifle Creek Estates Homeowners
Association to investigate an intersection access to those properties. Mr.
Earnest is interested in closing or reconstructing the intersection to
discourage entry. CDH recommended Mr. Earnest contact MK-F about his concerns
and CDH will also relay these concerns to MK-F and DOE.
The Certificate of Designation is under review by CDH. Novermber 7th CDH will
give written recommendations to Garfield County. The public hearing will be
December 3, 1990. The Rifle schedule is to put the project out for bid in
January, '91 to allow construction start-up in April 1991.
If you have any questions, please call me in Grand Junction, Colorado at
248-7170.
Sincerely,
~~
Jim Hams
Hazardous Materials and
Waste Management Division
cc: Pat Martinek CDH
Randy Withee MK-F
Clint Smythe DOE
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
222 So. 6th St, Room 232
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
November 5, 1990
Mark Bean, Director
Garfield County Planning Department
109 Eighth St. Suite 303
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
STATE OF COLORADO
Telefax:
(303) 322-9076 (Main Building/Denver)
(303) 320-1529 (Ptarmigan Place/Denver)
1303) 248-7198 (Grand Junction Regional Office)
illr, r~:~-.'r.?\7\?~;;;i~~-1 r-1 ' • ' ' • '\ ' N-~~-~1 1 r 1·~90_ I
.... ---
GARF I ELD COUNTY
Roy Romer
Governor
Thomas M. Vernon, M.D.
Executive Director
RE: Rifle UMTRA Project Certificate of Designation
Dear Mr. Bean:
As per our telephone conversation on November 2, 1990, I am requesting the
following changes in the schedule for the Garfield County review of the Rifle
UMTRA Project Certificate of Designation.
The application has undergone technical review by the Hazardous Materials and
Waste Management Staff and our comments should arrive in your office by
November 7, 1990.
The application would then be reviewed by the Planning Commission on December
12, 1990, and by the County Commissioners on either January 2, 1991 or January
8, 1991, to be affirmed by the County Commissioners according to their holiday
plans.
Copies of this letter are being sent to MK-Ferguson Company to coordinate
their efforts, If you have any questions, please contact me at 248-7170 in
Grand Junctsion, Colorado.
Sincerely;
~~
Jim Hams
Hazardous Materials and
Waste Management Division
cc: Pat Martinek, CDH
Jim Oldham, MK-F
Clint Smythe, DOE
JH:bts
October 17, 1990
GARFIELD COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
J.G. Oldham-Project Director
M.K. Ferguson Company
Remedial Actions
Contractor-UMTRA Project
P.O. Box 9136
Albuquerque, NM 87119
RE: Rifle, Colorado UMTRA Project
Dear Mr. Oldham:
Please consider this letter to be formal notice that Garfield
County does require a Conditional Use Permit for a sanitary
landfill in the Open Space (O/S) zone district. We have taken this
position because no federal agency has said that the County zoning
regulations are pre-empted by an UMTRA Project on federal land. We
are willing to consider a legal opinion to that effect.
Enclosed for your review is a copy of a conditional use permit
application, the O/S zone district text, and the appropriate
supplementary regulations from Section 5.3 of the Garfield County
Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended. It will only be necessary
to supplement the information in solid waste disposal site CD
application or EIS that address the appropriate issues, with a
short document dealing with issues such as the number of truck
trips/day, number of employees, hours of hauling, etc. If you have
any questions about these documents, feel free to call or write to
this office.
Sincerely, , ;'
_,J,-, ). I // ·-/ )/ tJ/r,#·iJc/,/'-
Mark L. Bean, Director
Regulatory Of fices and Personnel
MLB/rlb
encl.
109 8TH STREET, SUITE 303 945-8212 / 625-5571 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
TIM OTHY E. WIRTH
COLORADO
~"";;)g r::Jt-,J'l~~ fl'.:11__-JJ ?)![_ ~ '\)/~ COMMlnEES: ~Ir .. J . L _u ~-m :zN~~~~I CES
[If J~N 10 19 I BUDGET tlnittd ~tatts ~enat ~ .. _ . . . . 91 JJ~~;~~~t~~RCES
WASHINGTON , DC 20510-4702 Atfr ll.L O COLJNJ-y .
-,
December 12, 1990 .DEC l 7. 1990
Garfield County Commissioners
109 8th Street, Suite 300
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Commissioners Smith, Arbaney and Mackl ey:
I very much appreciate your taking tim e to m"eet with Doug Young and me
on Monday. We learned alot and will be following up on the subjec ts
discussed.
For yo ur information, please find attached a copy of a l etter Senator
l~i rth sen t to Mr. Leo Duffy, Di rector, Office Of En vi ronmenta 1 Res tora-
ti on and Waste Management, U.S . Department of Energy , regarding funding
decisions on the Gunnison and Rifle Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Act ion
projects. Senator Wirth wanted you to have a copy of this letter .
If you have any question s about the letter, please feel free to ca ll
me.
Again, thank you for the time you spent with us and a l so for the usage
of Room 305 for our office hours. Regina wa s very helpful.
Very truly~,·
f!::!:ty. u
Sta ff Assistant
Western Slope Office
/ab
Enclosure
1 129 PENNSYLVAN IA STREET
DENVER. CO 8020 3
303/866-1900
1003 MAIN STREET
GRANO JUNCTION. CO 81 501
303/24 5-8044
830 N . TEJON ST.
SUITE 105
CO LORADO SPRI NGS, CO 80903
303/634-5523
U N ITED BANK BU ILDING
8 T H AND MAIN ST.
SUITE 410
PUEB LO, CO 8 1003
303/542-6987
TIMOTHY E'. WIRTH
COLORADO
Mr. Leo Duffy
Director
tinittd ~tatt.s ~matt
WASHINGTON, DC 20510
December 10, 1990
Office of Envirorunental Restoration
and Waste Management u.s. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue
Washington, o.c., 20585
Dear M.r. Duffy:
COMMITTlll:
ARMIP .$IRV1CIS
BANKING
IUOQl'T
1Nlft4Y ANO
NATUM.L fU!IOURCSi
I am writing to express my concern about the Department of
Energy's (DOE) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA)
program as it relates to two projects in Gunnison and Rifle,
Colorado. I understand that your office haa instructed DOE's
Albuquerque Office --which oversees the UMTRA program --to cut
funding and suspend certain remedial action activities at the
Gunnieon and Rifle sites in order to accommodate increased
funding for certain lower priority projects.
This change in the DQE'a priorities for UMTRA clean-ups will
seriously jeopardize the scheduled remediation of the Gunnison
and Rifle sites. Halting or even slowing the schedule at the
Gunnieon site will reduce the transportation/haul options for
uraniwn wastes at this site. A slow-down now could force a 24-
hour truck hauling schedule for final remediation, which will
increase the noise and environmental hazards at the Gunnison
project.
/
/
I am particularly concerned that the DOE's deci8ion represents a
shift in priorities for UMTRA sites without strong or compelling
justification based on technical or environmental evaluation. In
fact, a December 1981 DOE bulletin on the UMTRA program (see
attached) listed the Rifle and Gunnison Colorado sites as "high
priority" sites for DOE funding. Before your agency shifts
funds from high priority sites to low priority sites, I hope DOE
will clearly explain the basis for such a decision.
Finally, I am concerned about the impact that the DOE'S decision
will have on the availability and use of Colorado State matching
funds (required by UMTRA)· As you may know, Governor Romer and
authorities with the Colorado Department of Health worked very
hard in a difficult budget setting to put aside funds for the
clean-up of Colorado sites. Slowing down or halting operations
at these Colorado sites will compromise the State's matching
funds program.
1128 PlNNSYl,.'VANlA STR!tT
OEN'v!A, c:o eo:zo:i
303/l!GS-.1900
100~ MAIN SfAE£T
GRANO JUNCTION. CO $1501
30312•5-8044
t30 N. T!JQN $T
SUITE 105
COlQl'lA00 .';PRlN(iS, CO 80'i103'
J 19/6J4-562J
l)NIT!C llANK IUl!.OING
8TH AND MA.IN ST.
5U!Tli 410
PUEBLO. Coe 1003
71910-42-19'17
. l
Page Two
The UMTRA Office in Albuquerque has informed my staff that the
DOE will continue to supply bottled water to residents of
Gunnison whose water eupply may be tainted by mill tailings
wastes --and will proceed with hooking up residential city water
lines. The Albuquerque Office has also informed my office that
design work for the Rifle site will also proceed --although
actual remediation will be "put on the shelf" until funding is
available,
I am pleased that the residential water hook-up at Gunnison and
the design work at Rifle will continue, but these activities are
not substitutes for final clean-up. The State of Colorado is
ready to proceed with these clean-ups and the people of Rifle and
Gunnison are understandably concerned about any further delays.
The DOE's decision to reprioritiie these sites is a matter of
deep interest, and I hope you will be able to explain the
technical and envirorunental factors justifying this change in the
UMTRA program in Colorado.
In the absence of a clear and convincing ease for this shift in
priorities, I strongly urge that your Department reaffirm its
existing priorities for UMTRA sites, including designation of the
Rifle and Gunnison.sites as high priorities for remediation. The
case for immediate remediation of these sites is clear and
compelling.
I look forward to hearing from you, and wish to thank you in
advance for your attention and consideration.
With best wishes,
TEW/as
Enclosure
Sincerely yours,
~wW~
Timothy E. Wirth
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
ALBUQUERQUE OPERATIONS OFFICE
P.O. BOX 5400
A~BUQUERQUE, NM 87115
NEWS:
UMTRA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q. What is the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project?
A. The UMTRA Project was authorized by an Act of Congress, Public Law (PL)
95-604, titled the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978. The
purpose of UMTRA is to provide for the stabilization, disposal, and control of
uranium mill tailings and other residual radioactive material located at
designated inactive uranium mill sites in a safe and environmentally sound
manner. UMTRA also provides for the removal of tailings from vicinity
properties close to the mill site where these tailings were used as
construction or fill material.
Q. Who· is responsible for the project?
A. Under PL95-604, the Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for the project.
Within DOE, the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health has
designated the sites that require remedial action. The Assistant Secretary
for Nuclear-Energy selects and carries out the remedial action, and certifies
remedial action has been satisfactorily accomplished. PL95-604 requires that
·remedial action be accomplished with the full participation of the States and
Indian Tribes on whose land the tailings are located. The states are required
to pay 10 percent of the cost of remedial action. The Federal Government pays
the full cost on Indian lands. PL95-604 also required that the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) establish standards, and that the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) provide consultation in the designation of sites and
determination of site boundaries, and provide concurrence in the selection and
performance of the remedial action for each site. Upon completion of remedial
action, the NRC will issue a license for the maintenance of the disposal
sites.
Q. What are uranium mill tailings?
A. Uranium mi 11 tailings are the waste that results from the production of
uranium from uranium ore. The semi-liquid tailings dry into a sand-like
material and represent more than 98 percent of the ore that enters the mill.
Q. What is an inactive uranium mill tailings site?
A. This is a site where uranium mill tailings were accumulated in large piles
prior to 1971, and the uranium mills which produced uranium for the Manhattan
Project and the Atomic Energy Commission are no longer in operation.
Q. What is meant by the term, "vicinity properties"?
A. During the time the tailings piles were being formed, little was known about
the potential long-term radiological effects of the material. Consequently,
there was no restriction on the use of the tailings, and varying amounts of
the material were taken from many of the main sites by residents, builders and
others in the vicinity of the sites for use as fill material and as a base for
concrete foundations. Also, some adjacent land was contaminated by wind and
water erosion from the main sites.
Q. Why is there a concern about the tailings?
A. The tailings may present a potential long-term health hazard principally
because they emit small amounts of radon. Radon is colorless, inert,
radioactive gas formed by the radioactive decay of radium, an element found
with uranium in the ore. Radon, which has a half-life of four days, decays in
turn to form nongaseous daughter products that are also radioactive but far
less mobile than radon. The tailings also contain other radioactive and
nonradioactive contaminants.
In many rocks and minerals, radon and its daughter products are a source of
some natural radiation to which everyone is exposed. However, radon is more
readily released from tailings because they have been finely crushed and they
contain radium in higher concentration.
Levels of human exposure to radon and other radioactive substances in the
tailings piles are quite low. Nevertheless, there is concern that even low
levels of radiation may pose health hazards to those who might be exposed over
long periods of time, particularly in enclosed areas, or to animals ·in the
food chain that might eat vegetation growing in tailings. There is also
concern that future generations could misuse the tailings for construction or
other purposes.
Q. Why is remedial action necessary?
A. Remedial action is necessary in order to limit human exposure to radiation and
other contaminants associated with the tailings. The remedial actions will be
designed to reduce direct human exposure to gamma radiation and radon, prevent
radioactive and nonradioactive contamination of ground water, and assure that
the tailings are effectively isolated from the environment for hundreds of
years. Remedial action will also prevent the tailings from being removed from
the site and used as construction material.
Q. Why has it taken so long to do something about this problem?
A. Since not much was known years ago about the potential long-term health
hazards of the radioactive elements in the tailings, primarily radon gas and
its daughter products, 1 i ttl e was done to treat these piles to protect the
public or the environment. As a result, over 25 million tons of tailings were
left untreated and exposed to the environment at inactive mill sites.
The inactive tailings piles first received attention in the early 1970's. In
Grand Junction, Colorado, tailings had been used as construction material at
about 5,000 sites. Their occupants were exposed to low-level radiation and
elevated radon concentrations. In 1972, Congress authorized funding to assist
the State of Colorado to conduct a remedial action program in Grand Junction.
In 1978, after a determination that uranium mill tailings may pose a radiation
health hazard to the public, Congress passed PL95-604 directing that every
reasonable effort be made to provide for the stabilization, disposal, and
control of inactive tailings piles in a safe and environmentally sound manner.
Q. What do the terms "stabilization" and "disposal" and "control" mean in
relation to these tailings piles?
A. "Stabilization" refers to the placing of a combination of cover materials -
such as clay, other soils, an.d rock -over the contoured pi 1 es to a sufficient
depth to prevent the escape of radon to the atmosphere and to "control"
erosion by wind and water. There is also a need to "dispose" of some of the
piles by removing them from their present locations and relocating them to a
more suitable area, where they would be stabilized. For most sites,
stabilization in place will satisfy the design standards and is the preferred
alternative. No decision will be made on the type of remedial action to be
performed at any site until environmental documentation required by the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is completed.
Q. How many sites are there?
A. Twenty-four uranium processing sites have been designated by DOE for remedial
action. In addition, over 8,00U vicinity properties require investigation and
remedial action may be required at between 5,000 to 6,0UU of these properties.
Q. Where are the sites located?
A. The sites are located in ten ·states. Primarily due to their proximity to
populated areas or to flood plains and related health and environmental
concerns, the sites have been assigned high (H), medium (M), and low (L)
priority ratings as indicated in the listing below.
ARIZONA
' .. Monument Valley (L)
Tuba City (M)
COLORADO
Durango ( H)
Grand Junction (H)
Gunnison (H)
Maybell (L)
Naturita (Ml
Rifle (2) (H)
Slick Rock (2) (L)
Q. What will be done at a site?
IDAHO
Lowman (L)
NEW MEXICO
Ambrosi a Lak.e (Ml
Shi prock ( H).
NORTH DAKOTA
Belfield (L)
Bowman ( L)
OREGON
Lakeview (M)
PENNSYLVANIA
Canonsburg (H)
TEXAS
Falls Ci t.v ( M) -
UTAH
Green River ( L)
.-Mexican Hat'(~}
Sal t Lake City (H)
WYOMING
Converse County (L)
Riverton (H)
A. The basic activities for each site consist of a full characterization of the
physical properties and extent of contamination at each site, preparation of
.. '
environmental
accomplished,
construction,
documentation, selection of the specific remedial action to be
preparation of detailed engineering designs to govern the
and accomplishment of the remedial action.
The tailings will be stabilized and controlled to me~t standards established
by the EPA, taking into consideration the unique set of physical
characteristics of the site as well as the interests of the people who reside
in the area. Any action would come after a decision was reached by DOE and
the affected State or Indian Tribe and local communities. The piles will be
covered to meet the standards governing permitted levels of radiation
emissions. The stabilized piles will be protected from wind and rain erosion
and against flooding where necessary. Where processing is economically
feasible, residual uranium or other minerals may be extracted before the piles
are stabilized. While some pi 1 es wi 11 be moved, most can be stabilized in
pl ace to meet the standards and provide ful 1 environmental, heal th and safety
protection.
Q. Who will do the work?
A. ·The UMTRA Project Office has selected
the accomplishment of the project.
responsibility are:
two major contractors to assist DOE in
These contractors and their areas of
Jacobs Engineering Group, along with its prime subcontractor Roy F. Weston
Incorporated, is responsible for assisting the DOE in management and
technical aspects of the project including preparation of environmental
documentation and recommending the most appropriate action at each s·i te.
-Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc., is responsible for the engineering design,
construction management, and inspection services necessary to accomp 1 i sh
the remedial action at each site.
Both contractors will make extensive use of subcontractors in performing their
work.
Q. When will the work be completed?
A. PL95-604 requires that all remedial action be completed within seven years
after standards have been finalized by EPA. The EPA standards were finalized
in March of 1983. The first site remedial action began in October, 1983, at
the Canonsburg, Pennsylvania site; in October, 1984, at the Shiprock, New
Mexico site; and in March, 1985, at the Salt Lake City, Utah site. Due to
funding constraints and the level of difficulty at some of the sites, it is
now likely the UMTRA Project will be completed in 1992.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT:
· Ben E. McCarty
Office of Public Affairs
U.S. Department of Energy
PO Box 5400
Albuquerque, NM 87115
(505) 844-6938
December, 1987
BLMGRRNDJUNCTION
Mt. Rebert »=ore
Slate Ilirector
TLL No.327431] ....
Department of En-.rgy
AlbuqutrqUe (lpeunlont Olnco
P.O. Box llo400
Alb11querqve. Now Mtxloo 87111
l)ur Bi\U ot Land Maha\jel!$ll t
2e50 "iO'Jll\Tf!e1e1
talc~, 00 B02lS
Dear Mr, ~I
Jan 30,91 9:34 No.004 P.02
327·1312:# {JI 4
'{}j~~~, ~GAk~HlD COUNf'I
'J'n• u.s. oe~-t.uent of lill6!rqy CDOEI is approachirl;j the t.illl! ~l,;m.:.ut. \>Ai1;101·~
the ~l'IGlllt b:a.nafor of jurj r.diction for lMCI will be sublnittM to YoW
agwi:')' to su,wort the retll!ldial action pr09ram of OOE:iqnated inactive
ur.11nium m.Ul sitl\:S wjljer t.he provi&ions of l'l.lblic !Aw 95·604. S\ll:f1U.1sion
of the trru-.sfor requei;t 11CCOnliJl9 to the Aet can occur at'ter t.00
pUbHsnin<1 of the Re(;iord of t»u.l.eJ.(;111 (fli.V) and conoultatioo with tl'l&
C'..owrr.or of ~ St.ate. In k~1t1g wJ.th Uie policy ot federal 2and
tieq\l1•it1on to •~ra otJ.ly thooe lands r~uim for projeet plir}lO~s, u
·praNlgatlld by: the Departme¥it CJf Justice, the W.: 16 a~ beojlinnir19 to
experiMQ(! dUfic:ul t.i$S similar to tne O:-r dispos11l ar.ea i1l lirnidng
tJll! lillld i:cquit"E'IToEmt re;:zusst beoalls(! of Ul1knW!1 sl.lbaurftJC\!I Characttdstl.cs
"1hkh .at tll.1s tine .u-e lrrpacting tJ>$ fl.rial di11posii1l oall dosign crit:arb.
These W1C>&rtainUa1> ~ bgst be ascerl.:4..!.ned b'j r..ctual e.xcaviition of the
surfaae uea to irwestJ.gate tho actual eubs1.1,rf~O$ eht.l:llcteris:tics UpOn
lihi.c.:h the t1nal ~111~ cri tei:~.a w;tll oo depet>:len1:,
Tho IX'.lr; e.xperiel"'l:ed aimilar t:l.Ml de6i\jr. criteria <;"ha,ngoo tor tne Cheney
diapoi;al area as11ooi11too with the Uran:t ·Junc-tiol\ rcrtieaiu action pll.\ll. 111
M effort to provide betwr COl'\t:inuity for b:lt.h ageneisr; concerned al'l:.I in
k~.l.n9 with the t;>P.st interost for m;ini tm.tm !Md acquisition, me rx;ii;: J.s
i"6illeu.'ltil"'iJ cl"IMgeG in the ptesMt State policy r0!'<31ll'ding wi thdrawale Q;OO
· u.msfer of jUl"isMction for the five rem111ninq disPOl<al 11ite11 r~ ur.Jt,,·
;l.nv011tJ.9ation !ll1d C.'urre11tly to be l'QOE!tecl on J;l.lblic land under the
~.iniet.rat1on Of the llu.tea1.1 Of Land Mana.gerrent. '!base-five sites .i.nclUde
Rifle, Gunni1>on1 Naturi~, Slick Rocll w Maybell, Colorado.
'rn~ specific ctarui11es requesced a.ro1 1iJ grantir\i rorl!\!\l Withor.ai..'lll
pro"1;tion of. the prq;¢tifld seleK:t-ad dispoGal sit.a, for the tiflll! ~1·iu,1.
desiynat.00 in the application, ae provlde(\ unde"r ·tha Pt'Wi.sJom1 of S&ct1cm
204 cJf the Fe.:leral IAl'ld Policy ~ 11.snagem~mt Act of' l976, and
!21 ~lishing tJl.e ~1e:-it trAllGfe.r of jurisctiCti0.'1 for the land would
only be ttqU!rec3 prior to •ctual pl1c::e11'1111t <;f the W"Anl.U!ll mill tailings 1n
tl\1 di~posal cell a>:ea as pr~l9ated in tha teoie<;Ual action PlM. Under
thtl p:i:ovisiOll/il o! ch;,nge ore the !OE ~uld be grf.ll'lteO f\H l authoriz.ation
i
1
,.
!• ,.
I.
i' : ~ ,. ,._
'• l
(
' ·' ;,
I ~
~LMbKHNUJUNlllUN l c.L No. 3274312 Jan 30.~l 9:34 No.004 P.03
-2 -
to prooeed W:lf:h a 11 preliminart ~equirerrants to t~lfae the petrnwient.
transfer of la!)(l jur1S4lotioa. 1hls incl_ul'le& ~ inpl('ff(-nte.ti.on Of the
N>l.l>A i.-equ.ireirent:.11 llnd any invest19ative acdviti&il ll&&oc1ated with tha
fo);lltllat:.l.an of final <lasi9" crit.ui• !'or \!he disposal &Y.Ga. ineludl.n9
actual d.t,sposu cell COMt=tlon aetJvlties, Wider the provisions of
cl\an(_je two only thli! land acquisition for lon<J-tem &~ill~ and
m1int:enance activities on the actual diBpoo.al ti.tea WOl.:ld be trA.'"lSferr(Jd
undeJ: the prov1sj ona of section lOG, I'1.Wl1c !Aw 9~-604, as ll!l"E'nde.d.
This i1J1.plernentat:lon change woulc:t providP. a l()!l9er titre period and grSlit
!lexibilit:y for the POE and i ta prima oontr1.1otors to investigate. ('.><Lstir19
surfa~ Mld subsurtac:e charact.eriatic:e and CQl"dl.UOf\l!. as they a.re
enQOl.Ulwr~ up tli.rOU9h tllt actual constn>etion of the di"po"d c:e11.
DUrin<J thia tln~fr8Jl'e, the final dliiposal cell r<>quircroonts can be
. eval ua~ o.ccur&tely, thci;eby ioiu.11:1ng t.nat only !;hose laooi; required tor
pernlllnenl.:. p:i:oject put"(>OSe.S OJ;Eo t.ran&f~re<:I to the 001.: wider !.:tie e.x.lsling
authori.ty Of the Act., This change 'Will eliminate the POI) pul:>lication 'date
as being tho;) pivo~l point for the DOE t.o ~nit.iat<) the pw:trM\1!11\t tsansfci:
of. ;)udsdictioo !or U'.<t land ~ from e>!PE<riel"IC\l tM m.'!n1mum lw .
);"1lqllir~nt for t:M disposal ari:o11 c.mnot. pr&oieely bo defined with~t
furt.he1· exploratory efforts. ~s from the LOt: st..11rf wruta 4pprec-i11w
M opp:i.-tun1ty to rr>OOt Wltn your represem;ativss W¥j disl'.:U111< tile i!!>li\Jo;!6
associllted with this rl\'q\.IMt. Please cmtact Mr. i'i!tQ Montoya 11t
1505) ll45•5349 re9£U)jing any ol&.rititation of tho informitt.ion 1egarciing
thir. subject o:i possible date$ for neeting "'1th yoor representaUves in
Ocnve:-i Colorado.
om .
"· Walter. J!iC
P. Montaya, tfl'l4lJ
Sincerely,
c.·~~~
co1-vil lo;1 J, NO!ldva
01tef, Pt->Peny 1-So.naqetrt:nt Sx.-anoh
Pac1l1tie~ And Property
Hana9, .. rent Di_vLsfon
r.
:1 :i
'·I ; ,
il
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Dedica ted to protecting and improving the health and
enviro nment of the people of Colorado
G rand Junc tion Regional O ffi ce ""'
222 5. 6th Street , Rm. 23 2 ··.:r:.-...-.,.
G rand Jun c tion, CO 8 150 1 -2768
FA X: (303) 248 -7198
VA);, ~otl /J':
~May 4, 1993
1:
·,·,:~.h ... ~ ... -·-. . ...
Arnold Mackley
Garfield County Commissioner
109 8th Street, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, co 81601
MAY 5 1993
\.iAh~ltLU
COUNTY CO MMISSIONERS
Ro y Rome r
Governor
Pa tr icia A. Nola n , MD, MPH
Executive D irec to r
Re: Road Maintenance Agreement As Per Conditional Use Permit
Dear Mr. Mackley:
Enclosed is the Road Maintenance Agreement between the state and
the U.S. Department of Energy as will apply to the haul road in
Rifle, Colorado, for the UMTRA Program.
A copy has been provided to Mr. Rich Perske of the Colorado
Department of Transportation in his Grand Junction, Colorado,
office.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 248-7170 .
Sincerely,
~ /J ~
Jim Hams
Hazardous Materials and
Waste Management Division
JH:ae
Enclosure
cc: Sharon Arp, DOE, w/o enclosure
Randy Withee , MK-F, w/o enclosure
Mark Bean, Garfield Co., w/o enclosure
Dave Ling, Rifle, w/o enclosure
Mike Bestor, Rifle, w/o enclosure
File
@ Prime d 011 Recycled Pa per
COW RADO
DEPARTMENT
OF4HEALTH
Grand Junction Regional Office
222 S. 6th Street, Room 232
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2768
Telefax Number: (303) 248·7198
April 28, 1992
Mr. Mark Bean
Garfield County Planning
109 8th St., Suite 306
Rifle CO 81650
Re: UMTRAP Public Meeting, May 7, 1992
Dear Mr. Bean:
ROY ROMER
Governor
JOEL KOHN
Interim Executive Director
·!.
On April 3, 1992 Green International was awarded the contract for
Phase II of the Rifle uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action
Program (UMTRAP). Phase II, which includes construction of the
disposal cell at Estes Gulch, hauling of contaminated materials
from the two millsites to the cell, and ultimately, closure of
the disposal cell and reconstruction of the mill sites was begun
on April 20, 1992. Excavation of the disposal cell will be the
primary work in 1992. Transport of the contaminated material to
the cell will take place in 1993 and 1994.
To announce the upcoming schedule of events and introduce the
subcontractor Green International, a public meeting is planned
for May 7, 1992 at 7:00 p.m .. The location of the meeting will
be Rifle City Hall, 202 Railroad Avenue, Rifle Colorado.
The Baseline Risk Assessment for Groundwater and Surface Water
in the vicinity of the mill sites is being completed, The results
will be presented to the Task Force and City officials on May 7,
1992 at 1:00 p.m. at the Rifle City Hall and to the general
public immediately following the startup meeting on May 7, 1992
at Rifle City Hall. On May 8, 1992, project representatives will
be available in Rifle for private consultation with individual
well owners to explain results and risks.
@printed ori recycltdpaper
Mr. Mark Bean
April 28, 1992
Page 2
Enclosed is the May 7, 1992 meeting agenda.
questions, please contact me at 248-7170 in
Colorado.
Sincerely,
'
(_4 /] cl' I Jz VJM/)
Jim Hams
Rifle Site Manager
Hazardous Materials and
Waste Management Division
JH:zp
cc: Jeffrey Deckler, CDH, Denver
Howard Roitman, CDH, Denver
Sharon Arp, DOE
Cindy Foster, JEG
Randy Withee, MK-F
If I can answer any
Grand Junction,
UMTRAP
Rifle, Colorado Public Meeting Agenda
Rifle City Hall
May 7, 1992
7:00 p.m.
I. Introductions -CDH
Introduce Participants
Overview of Meeting Agenda
II. General Project Overview -DOE
Explain DOE Role
Explain Project Scope
Give Plans for Groundbreaking Ceremony
III. Construction Activities -MK-F
Activities Completed
Schedule for 1992
Safety Practices at the Sites
School Safety
Complaint Procedures
Introduction of Green International (Subcontractor Phase II)
IV. Job Service
Job Application
V. Questions/Answers
VI. 15 Minute Break
VII. Groundwater Assessment Update -Jacobs
•
) nr ~~~+,·;~
Q ARFIE LD COU NTY
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May7,1992
DOE AND STATE PROVIDE RESULTS OF RISK ASSESSMENT
TO RIFLE, COLORADO, RESIDENTS
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Colorado Department of Health (CDH) have
conducted a water quality risk assessment for wells and ponds located near two Uranium Mill
Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project sites outside of Rifle, Colorado. The assessment
shows a slightly elevated potential health risk to anyone drinking water from the wells over
a long period of time.
The DOE sampled water from the domestic wells and surface water ponds in May and
October 1991. The assessment measured concentration levels for 30 metals and five
radionuclides. Several of the wells had uranium levels elevated slightly above U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency standards. No other contaminants were found at elevated
levels in the domestic wells. Elevated levels of uranium, vanadium, molybdenum, and lead
were found in surface water adjacent to the sites.
The assessment was conducted to determine the potential risk from drinking the water over
a period of 30 years . It shows a slightly elevated potential health risk if domestic well water
is used as a drinking water source over a period of 30 years or if fish from the affected pond s
are regularly eaten over the same period of t ime. The assessment demonstrated no
immediate risks from continued use of the wells for non -drinking purposes. Additional
sampling of domestic wells and surface ponds has been ongoing since the assessment was
completed.
Based on the study, the DOE and CDH are recommending that res i dents do not use water
from the affected wells for drinking purposes or eat fish from the pond near the Old Rifle site.
The DOE and CDH are working with the affected well owners to investigate options for
providing an uncontaminated water source.
-MORE -
L'. S. Oepart111 e111 of E11er1:y • All1tff/lll'l'l/tll' 01wm1ions Ojjicl' • P. 0 . Box 5400 • Alb11r111err111e . NM f/711~ •
The area of domestic well contamination is adjacent to the New Rifle site, located outside the
Rifle city limits and north of the Colorado River. Only a small number of residents are affected
by the contamination. None of the domestic wells with elevated uranium readings is currently
used as a drinking water source.
In keeping with Secretary of Energy James D. Watkins' openness policy, the Department
schedules public meetings, hearings, workshops, and comment periods to promote public
awareness and review of cleanup efforts nationwide. Rifle residents were briefed at a public
meeting on May 7, 1992, by UMTRA Project personnel on the results of the water quality risk
assessment.
The UMTRA Project is part of the DOE's Environmental Restoration and Waste Management
Five-Year Plan, which identifies the Department's strategy to restore the environment at sites
and facilities nationwide. As part of the UMTRA Project, the DOE is cleaning up tailings at
the two sites in Rifle, along with 22 other abandoned sites located in nine states.
The DOE has established a toll-free telephone number for persons with questions or concerns
about the UMTRA Project. To reach the UMTRA Project Office, call 1-800-523-6495 (In New
Mexico, call 1-800-423-2539) and leave a message on an answering machine.
For further information, contact:
-DOE-
Dave Jackson (505) 845-5699
Jack Hoopes (505) 845-4015
···.-.
DOE ISSUES RECORD OF DECISION
ON RIFLE TAILINGS CLEANUP
.!.4iJ 3 1 1991
t~;..:.i 1~:1.u
COUtlTY CU1\H1llSSIOWJl~
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE} has issued a Record of Decision (ROD}
concerning cleanup of uranium mill tailings from the two former Union Carbide
Corporation uranium processing sites at Rifle,. Colorado. Issuance of the ·ROD
concludes compliance activities required under the National Environmental Policy
Act before cleanup may proceed.
The ROD documents the DOE's decision to relocate contaminated materials from the
Rifle sites and associated properties to a remote site at Estes Gulch for
permanent disposal. .The decision was based on an evaluation of costs and
environmental impacts from several alternatives.
The two inactive uranium processing sites lie in the Colorado River valley near
the city of Rifle. The site3 are about two mi1es apart and arc referred to a~
the Old Rifle and New Rifle sites. The tailings and other contaminated materials
will be transported by truck to the Estes Gulch site, approximately seven miles
north of the city, where they will be buried partly below ground and covered with
layers of earth and rock.
-MORE -
"" Pr n ... ···' .. -·r ,.r r "' "'
Activities in preparation for tailings relocation, including highway construction
and cleanup of off-site properties contaminated with tailings from the Rifle
sites, are scheduled to begin this spring.
In March 1990, the DOE released a final Environmental Impact Statement examining
en vi ronmenta 1 impacts from the Estes Gulch disposal option and three other
alternatives. Radiation exposure, transportation impacts, air quality effects,
land use impacts, and costs were among the issues evaluated in comparing the
alternatives.
To comply with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards for protecting
public health and safety, the tailings encapsulation cell includes design
features to inhibit infiltration of rain and snowmelt through the tailings and
into the ground, thus protecting groundwater from contamination. These and other
features will also reduce radon gas emissions to safe levels and withstand the
forces of erosion for at least two hundred years.
The Rifle sites are among nine inactive uranium processing sites on Colorado's
Western Slope being cleaned up by the DOE as part of the Uranium Mill Tailings
Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project. The UMTRA Project is a key component of the
DOE's 30 year plan for cleanup of nuclear-related sites across the country.
The Rifle ROD was published in the Federal Register on January 22, 1991
(56 FR 2166). Persons wishing a copy of the Federal Register
-MORE -
publication may request one by calling the DOE toll-free at 1-800-523-6495. (In
New Mexico, call 1-800-423-2539.) Please leave a message on the answering
machine and a project representative will return the call to confirm the request.
-DOE -
For further information, contact: Ben E. McCarty (505) 845-5596
Jack Hoopes (505) 845-4015
•
),_____
DOE TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING
)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
APRIL 30, 1992
ON RIFLE, COLORADO, TAILINGS CLEANUP
Representatives of the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial
Action (UMTRA) Project and the Colorado Department of Health will hold a public meeting at
7:00 p.m ., Thursday, May 7, 1992, at the Rifle City Hall in Rifle, Colorado. Project officials
will discuss the start of uranium tailings disposal and stabilization activities for the two Rifle
UMTRA sites . Results of a water quality risk assessment conducted on wells l oc ated near the
sites will also be presented at the meeting .
In keeping with Secretary of Energy James D. Watkins' Openness Policy, the Department
schedules public meetings, hearings, workshops and comment periods to promote public
awareness and review of cleanup efforts nationwide . The UMTRA Project is part of the DO E's
Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Five-Year Plan, which identifies the
Department's strategy to restore the environment at sites and facilities nationwide.
Anyone interested in additional information concerning the public meeting or the UMTRA
Project in general may call the UMTRA Project Office toll -free at 1-800-523-6495 (in New
Mexico, call 1-800-423-2539).
-DOE-
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT :
U.S . Department of E11 ergy • Albu querque Operations Office
Dave Ja c kson (505) 845-5699
Jack Hoopes (505) 845-4015
• P.O. Box 5400 • Alb11q11erque , N M 871 15 •
) )
Mr. Mark Bean
Director
Garfield County Planning
109 8th Street
Suite 306
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
Department Of Energy
Albuquerque Operations Office
P. 0. Box 5400
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-5400
On January 23, 1995, Garfield County, on behalf of the Department of Energy (DOE),
submitted an amendment to Resolution Number 90-017, Conditional Use Permit for a
landfill located in Garfield County. This amendment was to allow for the disposal of
uranium tailings material that originated from the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action
(UMTRA) site in Salt Lake City, Utah.
I understand from our conversation of July 25, 1995, that the County Commission has
approved the requested amendment. The DOE has not yet received a copy of the
amended resolution. I would appreciate if you could provide me with a copy at your
earliest convenience. However, it is my understanding that DOE may proceed with
disposal of the material as long as we comply with the following conditions:
1. All representations of the applicant, either contained in the application or stated
in the public meetings, shall be considered conditions of approval unless
otherwise stated.
2. That DOE submit a letter to Garfield County certifying that the barrels contained
only materials that qualify for disposal under Title I of UMTRCA.
3. That the approval given is only for the materials identified in the application from
the DOE.
The enclosed two letters are provided for compliance with the above stated conditions.
The material to be disposed of is as stated in the January 5, 1995, letter. No materials
other than those described in the January 5, 1995, letter will be disposed of in the
UMTRA disposal cell. The letter dated July 21, 1995, provides certification that these
materials qualify for disposal in an UMTRA disposal cell
@ Printed on recycled paper
.......... -."'""r.I ~~
.. ·:-.;. _;
Mark Bean 2 JUl l : I~
The DOE intends to dispose of the above described materials at the UMTRA disposal
cell within the next three weeks. Should you have any concerns related to this disposal
please call me immediately at (505) 845-5668.
Sincerely,
~on~.~ OJ~
2 Enclosures
cc w/enclosures:
A. Mackley, Garfield County Commission
D. Hawker, Rifle City Manager
J. Deckler, CDPHE
J. Hams, CDPHE-GJ
C. Smythe, UMTRA, AL
R. Comish, UMTRA, AL
M. Thomson, MK-F
R. Withee, MK-F, Rifle
Site Manager
Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial
Action Team
Environmental Restoration Division
"'
Mr. Mark Bean
Director
Garfield County Planning
109 8th Street
Suite 306
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
UMT21MISC/O 195-0\
SA: RFL-lLGS.DOC
JRI 0 5 1995 UMfRMMS.
ARP¥
As discussed with you on January 5, 1995, the Department of Energy (DOE)
requests a modification to Item 7 of Resolution Number 90-017, Conditional Use
p(',......,;t for a landfill located in Garfield County. The lanclt.11, known as the Estes
G~. , disposal cell, is used for the disposal of residual n... .ctive material located
in Rifle, Colorado, as mandated under Title I of Public Law 95-604, Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA). Item 7 of the Resolution states, "the
disposal area will only be used for disposal of material from property in the
immediate Rifle vicinity." The DOE requests pe"nnission to dispose uranium
tailings and contaminated laboratory equipment, not associated with property in
the Rifle vicinity, in the Estes Gulch disposal cell.
The uranium tailings material originated from the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial
Action (UMTRA) site in Salt Lake City, Utah, and were used to perform radon
diffusion studies in support of disposal cell cover designs for the UMTRA Project.
The laboratory equipment became contaminated as a result of perfonning these
studies. Following is a description of the material to be disposed of:
Barrel l: One 55 gallon drum containing uranium mill tailings with a total
radium-226 activity of 277 microcuries and a weight of 250 kilograms. The 55
gallon drum is packaged inside an 85 gallon overpack drum for shipping
purposes.
Barrel 2: One 30 gallon drum containing uranium :nill tailings with a total
radium-226 activity of 146 microcuries and a weight of 150 kilograms. The 30
gallon drum is packaged inside a 55 gallon overpack drum for shipping purposes.
Barrel 3: One 30 gallon drum containing uranium mill tailings with a total
radium-226 activity of 140 microcuries and a weight of 136 kilograms. The 30
gallon drum is packaged inside a 55 gallon overpack drum for shipping purposes.
ALF1'2.S.1
111"'7\
OFFICTAL FILE COPY
Mark Bean 2 -:!Alf 0 5 1995
Barrel 4: One 55 gallon drum containing gate valves and related laboratory
fittings with a total lead-210 activity of 2 microcuries and a weight of 100 · ~
kilograms. The lead-210 is a radon daughter product.
Disposal of the above material in the UMTRA disposal cell associated with the
Salt Lake City site in not an option since this site has been closed since 1989.
Your consideration of this request is appreciated. Should you have any
questions, please contact me at (505) 845-5668.
cc:
A. Mackley, Garfield County Commission
D. Hawker, Rifle City Manager
J. Deckler, CDPHE
J. Hams, CDPHE-GJ
C. Smythe, UMTRA
R. Comish, UMTRA
M. Thomson, MK-F
R. Withee, MK-F, Rifle
Sincerely,
Sharon J. Arp
Site Manager
•'Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial
· Action Project Office
OOE F 1325.a
United States Government Department of Energy
memorandum Albuquerque Operations Office
DATE: JUL 2 1 1995
REPLY TO
ATTN OF: ERD:BC
SUBJECT: ,
Matenals Used as a Laboratory Radon Source are RRM
TD:
Sharon Arp, Rifle Site Manager, ERD
The contents of four drums currently being stored at the UMTRA Project Technical
Assistance Contractor's Radiological Laboratory are "residual radioactive material" as
defined in the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978.
These drums contain uranium mill tailings from the Salt Lake City UMTRA Project
site, together with valves and related laboratory fittings. The materials were used to
perform radon diffusion studies in support of disposal cell cover designs for the
UMTRA Project.
These drums contain only materials that qualify for disposal under Title I of the
UMTRCA. You may certify to Garfield County, Colorado, that the conditions
established by the Garfield County Commission for the disposal of these drums at the
Rifle UMTRA site are satisfied.
If you have any questions, please call me at 505-845-5654.
cc:
M. Miller, TAC
~f-~
Robert E. Comish
Radiation Protection Manager
Environmental Restoration Division
@ Printed on recycled paper
Jim Hams
Department Of Energy
Albuquerque Operations Office
P. 0. Box 5400
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-5400
DEC t 9 /gg 4
Colorado Department of Public Health
and the Environment
222 South 6th Street
Room 232
Grand Junction, CO 81501
Dear Mr. Hams:
As discussed with you this morning, the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action
(UMTRA) Project Office is planning to ship uranium tailings material that originated
from the UMTRA site in Salt Lake City, I:,.,., 1. to the UMTRA New Rifle processing site
in Rifle, Colorado. The tailings will be sto, dd at the New Rifle processing site until a
disposal location is identified.
The tailings were used to perform radon diffusion studies in support of the UMTRA
Project design of disposal cell covers. These tailings are currently located at the
Rogers and Associates Engineering Corporation laboratory in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Due to changes in Utah state legislation, the laboratory is required to dispose of this
material as soon as possible. Following is an estimate of the total radium-226 activity
of the tailings and their quantity:
• Barrel 1:
• Barrel 2:
• Barrel 3:
250 kilograms of uranium tailings packed in a 55 gallon drum
with a total radium-226 activity of 277 microcuries. The 55 gallon
drum will be packaged inside an 85 gallon overpack drum for
shipping purposes. Additional weight in this barrel may include a
gate valve and related laboratory fittings.
150 kilograms of uranium tailings packed in a 30 gallon drum
with a total radiuni-226 activity of 146 microcuries. The 30 gallon
drum will be packaged inside a 55 gallon overpack drum for
shipping purposes. Additional weight in this barrel may include a
gate valve and related laboratory fittings.
136 kilograms of uranium tailings packed in a 30 gallon drum
with a total radium-226 activity of 140 microcuries. The 30 gallon
drum will be packaged inside a 55 gallon overpack drum for
shipping purposes. Additional weight in this barrel may include a
gate valve and related laboratory fittings.
@ Printed on recycled paper
. . . ) )
Jim Hams -2-
This issue has been discussed with Mr. Dave Hawker, Rifle City Manager, and Mr.
Mark Bean, Garfield County Planning Commission. Mr. Hawker did not foresee any
problems with storage of the tailings on the New Rifle processing site . Mr. Bean is
planning to discuss this issue with the Garfield County Attorney next week to
· determine whether they have any issues with this storage . Mr. Bean stated that he will
contact the UMTRA Project Office next week if they have any concerns. The UMTRA
Project Office will await clearance from Garfield County before initiating shipment. In
addition, the UMTRA Project Office plans to request from Garfield County a
modification to the Conditional Use Permit for disposal of this material in the Estes
Gulch cell. We would appreciate the Colorado Department of Public Health and the
Environment's support in this effort.
Should you have any questions, p!c~.:::;s cciltact me at (SGS) 845-5668.
cc:
Sincerely,
h-<-ffl' J/ ~
aron J. Arp \J-./ ~
Site Manager
Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action
Project Office
M. Bean, Garfield County Commission
A. Mackley, Garfield County Commission
D. Hawker, Rifle City Manager
J. Deckler, CDPHE
C. Smythe, UMTRA
R. Cornish, UMTRA
M. Thomson, MK-F
R. Withee, MK-F, Rifle
JUL. -26' 95 (WED) 12: 26 DOE '"'TRA OFF I CE TEL:5 SJS 4023
.... •.
P OOJ
DOE F I :J<~.s
United States Government De artment of Energy
memorandum Albuquerqu Operations Office
DATE: JUL 2 1 1995
REPLY TO
ATTN OF: ERD;BC
SUBJE~:
TO:
Materials Used as a Laboratory Radon Source are RRM
Sharon Arp, Rifle Site Manager, ERD
The contents of four drums currently being stored at the UMTRA Proj ct Technical
Assistance Contractor's Radiological Laboratory are "residual radioac ve material" as
defined in the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRC ) of 1978.
These drums contain uranium mill tailings from the Salt Lake City U Project
site, together with valves and related laborntory fittings. The material ere used to
perform radon diffusion studies in support of disposal cell cover desig for the
UMTRA Project.
111ese drums contain only materials that qualify for disposal under Ti
UMTRCA. You may cenify to Garfield County, Colorado, that the c
established by the Garfield County Commission for the disposal of the
Rifle UMTRA site are satisfied.
If you have any questions, please call me at 505-845-5654.
~f-~
Rohen E. Comish
I of the
ditions
· drums at the
Radiation Prot~tion Manager
Environmental Restoration Divi · n
cc:
M. Miller, TAC
JUL. -26' 951\l'EDJ i2:26 ooE u~1 ·-' OFFICE
Mr_ Mark Bean
Director
Garfield County Planning
l 09 8th Street
Suite 306
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
TEL:505 °15 4023 P. 002
On January 23, 1995, Garfield County, on behalf of the Department of nergy (DOE),
submitted an amendment to Resolution Number 90-017, Conditional U Permit for a
landfill located in Garfield County. This amendment was to allow for e disposal of
uranium tailings material that originated from the Uranium Mill Tailin Remedial Action
(UMTRA) site in Salt Lake City, Utah.
1ssion has
y of the
opy at your
ceed with
I understand from our conversation of July 25, 1995, that the County C
approved the requested amendment. The DOE has not yet received a c .
amended resolution. I would appreciate if you could provide me with a
earliest convenience. However, it is my understanding that DOE may
disposal of the material as long as we comply with the following condi ns:
1. All representations of the applicant, either contained in the appli tion or stated in
the public meetings, shall be considered conditions of approval . less otherwise
stated.
2_ That the Department of Energy submit a letter to Garfield Coun cenifying that
the barrels contained only materials that qualify for disposal und. Title I of
UMTRCA.
3. That the approval given is only for the materials identified in the pplication from
the Department of Energy.
The enclosed two letters are provided for compliance with the above sta
The material to be disposed of is a stated in the January 5, 1995, letter.
other than those described in the January 5, 1995, letter will be dispose
UMTRA disposal cell. The letter dated July 2 I, 1995, provides certific
materials qualify for disposal in a Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Acri
disposal cell
d conditions.
o materials
fin the
·on that these
(UMTRA)
The DOE intends to dispose of the above described materials at the UM RA disposal cell
within the next three weeks. Should you have any concerns related to i disposal please
call me immediately at (505) 845-5668.
JUL. -26' 951\\'EDI 12:26 DOE UMT" OFFICE
2 Enclosures
cc w/enclosures:
TEL:~05 •·; 4023 -T
Sincerely,
Sharon J. Arp
Site Manager
Uranium Mill Tailings Reine al Action Team
Environmental Restoration D · sion
A. Mackley, Garfield County Commission
D. Hawker, Rifle City Manager
J. Deckler, CDPHE
I. Hams, CDPHE-GJ
C. Smythe, UMTR.A
R. Cornish, UMTRA
M. Thomson, MK-F
R. Withee, MK-F, Rifle
P. 003
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and
environment of the people of Colorado
Grand Junction Regional Office
222 S. 6th Street, Rm. 232
Grand Junction, CO 81501-2768
FAX: (303) 248-7198
February 28, 1995
Mr. Lennard Eckhardt
Superintendent of Schools
Garfield School District RE-2
839 Whiteriver Avenue
Rifle, Colorado 81650
Dear Mr. Eckhardt:
STATE OF COLORADO
Roy Romer
Governor
Patricia A. Nolan, MD, MPH
Executive Director
The spring truck haul for the Rifle Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project
will start on March 6, 1995. The first week will be single shifts and on March
13, the project will return to double shifts for hauling from the New Rifle site
west of town on Highway 6.
During the winter haul shutdown, work continued with excavation and backfill on
the Old Rifle site east of town on Highway 6. That site is completely
decontaminated but backfilling will continue until about the end of March, 1995.
Excavation and backfilling will also take place along the Highway 6 right of ways
east of town and around the city pond located east of the Colorado River bridge.
The estimated end of excavation and hauling of contaminated materials from the
New Rifle site, private properties, and Highway 6 right of ways is July 31, 1995.
From then until winter shutdown at the end of November, backfilling will take
place on the New Rifle site. Rock cover for the Estes Gulch disposal cell will
come from the Con Sy pit located on Highway 6 opposite of the Highway 13 bypass.
Hauling of this material will begin in August, 1995 and will be moved up Highway
13 to Estes Gulch.
Although the end of the UMTRA Project is approaching for Rifle, this will be a
busy year with a few more trucks than last year on the roads. The MK-F office
will continue to coordinate with your transportation department and be aware of
school activities such as baseball games or football games. If you have any
questions please feel free to call Ms. Sharon Arp, the site manager for the U.S.
Department of Energy at (505) 845-5668; Randy Withee, the MK-F site manager at
625-4618; or me at (303) 248-7170.
Sincerely,
~~
Hazardous Materials and
Waste Management Division
cc: S. Arp U.S. DOE
R. Withee MK-F
A. Mackley
./ M. Bean
@ Primed 011 Recycfed Paper
·SEP. -07' 94 (WED) 11: 09 DOE !A OPPICE TEL:505 81 u23
Department of Energy
M>uquerqua operations Offioa
P. o. Box 5400
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-5400
SEP 0 7 1!194
Mesa County Commissioner Jim Spehar
Mesa County Board of Commissioners
P.O. Box 20,000-5010
Grand Junction, CO 81502-5010
Dear Commissioner:
P. 005
Recently, we have rried to re-think Ille issue of Post-UMTRA as comments were rec:dved
from our draft Post-UMTRA plan. I thought it would be beneficial for you to be aware of
some of the ideas we have been considering as a way to aid in the solution 1n the material
that will still remain in the community at the end of UMTRA, I came to Grand Junction,
but unfortunately, none of the commissioners were available and thus I could not provide
this information in person. However, I think the dialogue we have begun with CDHPE
and with the City of Grand Junction should be presenl.ed to you for your consideration.
As you know, the city has been very critical of our approach and we provided a verbal
proposition, although it was understood that this was a rough proposal. The city
responded and the UMTRA Project Office realizes that the concept hag =y details 1n
overcome and continued discussions with the city and the county will be very beneficial
in helping to resolve these important issues. The concept was recently introduced to
Senator Bishop and he was encoul'aged, but he also indicated the need for further
dialogue between the Project Office, the City of Grand Junction, and the county. His fear
Willi that conflict would exist between the city and the county which would make the
process ineffective and burdensome.
Details of the conceptual plan nre as follows:
1) A portion of the Cheney disposal cell would remain open beyond the current
authorization to allow for disposal of residual radioactive material (RRM) that is
discovered, encountered or newly identified during the course of new constntction and
changing land use in Grand Junction after the Department of Energy's (DOE)
authori:zalion to perform surface remedial action ends. This requires the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) to concur with certification at the Cheney disposal cell
and to allow the Post Cell Closure (PCC) hole to remain open for continued operation. It
also requires release of MK-Ferguson Company of their cWTCnt obligation to complete
the cover on the PCC hole in 1998 and approval that they have met their contractual
obligations regarding remedial action at the Cheney disposal cell. Because of the
NESHAPS compliance, EPA will probably have to be involved.
-SEP. -07' 94(WED) 11:10 DOE lA OPPIGE TEL:505 81 023 P. 006
Mesa County Commissioner Jim Spehar -2-SEP 0 l 1994
2) Congress will be notified and required to autho1ize the use of appropriated funds to
operate the cell beyond the expiration of the Secretary's authority to perform remedial
action, or to allow the DOE to use EM Long-Term Surveillance and Monitoring funding
to fund final closure after 10-20 years.
3) When the Secretary's authority to perform remedial action expires, operation of the
PCC holr:: and decontamination pad will be handled by the Grand Junction Projects
Office. They will be responsible for site control, accepting RRM, decontamination of
haul trucks, placement of the material, and placing the fmal cover. They would have the
n:sponsibillty of obtaining a fmnl license from the NRC. This assumes that the Grand
Junction Projects Office will be delegated responsibility from DOE/HQ to operate and
manage the PCC hole.
4) EJ£cavation, validation and transportation of RRM to the Cheney disposal cell will be
the responsibility of the City of Grand Junction (City) and Mesa County (County). The
local government will develop a management plan and agreement between DOE and the
community which defines the protocol and implementation requirements. Only material
exceeding EPA standards for RRM should be transported to the PCC hole if we are to
manage the quantity of material that can be acc:omodared by the remaining PPC. Mate.rial
not exceeding the standard should be replaced in the excavation or managed In an
appropriate manner. All efforts will be taken to minimize the amount of material to be
transported for disposal pursuant to an agreement between the City, County, and DOE.
5) The County will agree to accept RRM from other Colorado communities which are
associated with an UMfRA site. In addition, the County also agrees to accept roughly
lS,000 cubic yards of RRM from outside Colorado as long as the material is excavated
within the same criteria as utilized by the City (out of 5.2 Million Cubic Yards capacity
at Cheney, that equates to less than.03%).
6) This proposal does not change the def'mition or intent of supplemental standards. The
assumption being that the NRC will actively participate and concur on supplemental
standard applications which meet the criteria set forth in the EPA standards.
If this conceptual plan has merit in the eyes of the county, further discussion& can take
place with all organizations that are impacted by this plan to finalize and fo!lllulate an
implementation strategy. Please call me at (505) 845-6134 if you have any questions.
·SEP. -07' 94 (WED) 11: 10 DOE : A OPP I CE TBL:505 84 ,23 P. 007
Mesa County Commissioner Jim Spehar -3· SEP 0 7 1994
I again appologize for providing this to you in this fashion and would have preferred to
discuss this with you in person. I look forward to discussing this with you further.
cc~
Senator Bishop, Colorado Lesgislation
J. Shanks, Director of
Public Works & UtiHties
Gmnd Junction, CO
D. MathtlS, EM-451, HQ
K. Landolt, OCC, AL
C. Cannier, UMfRA
S. Hamp, UMTRA
J. Pape, UMTRA
Sincerely,
~~Y\
Project Manager
Uraniwn Mlll tailings Remedial Action
Project Office
)
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and
e n vironment of the people of Colorado
4300 Cherry Creek D r. S. Laboratory Building
D e nver, Colorado 80222-1530 4210 E. 11th Av e nue
Ph o n e (303) 692-2000 Denve r, Colorado 80220-3 7 1 6
(303) 691 -4700
May 24, 1993
R. E. Lawrence, Project Director .
M-K Ferguson Company
P.O. Box 9136
Albuquerque, NM 87119
RE: Inactivation of Permit to Discharge
M-K Ferguson Company
Permit No : COG-070206
Garfield County
Dear Mr. Lawrence:
Roy Romer
Govern or
Patricia A. Nolan, MD, MPH
Executive Director
This office has reviewed your request for terminating the above-
refe renced permit. It is our opinion that this system d pes not
require a discharge permit at this time. Your p ermit ha s bee n
g iven an inactive statu s on this date.
Please conta ct this office if you have ·any questions in regard to
this p e rmit.
S ince rely,
~<fd/Lt~
Robert J. Shukle
Chi e f
Permi ts a nd Enforceme nt Secti on
Water Quality Control Division
RJS/lg
cc : P erm its Section, Environmenta l Protection Agency
Local Health Depa~tment
Derald La ng, Fie ld Support S ection, WQCD
Dwain Watson, Fie ld Support Section, WQCD
Connie Moreno, Admi n istration Section , WQ CD
()~
·to µl!Ldu/(!/J~. ru 6/XJ/93
PERMIT INACTIVATION FORM
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date Serit:
Date In: f) /17/9..3
FOR CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING PERMITS
Facility: MK-Ferguson Company Legal Contact Person: R.E. Lawrence
Address: P.O. Box 9136 Legal Phone Number: (505) 766-3093
2309 Renard Place, S.E. #300
Albuquerque, NM 87119
Facility Contact: Randy Withee County: Garfield
Facility Contact Phone Number: Permit Number: COG-070206
(303)625-4618
Location: SW 114, Section 14, T5S, R93W
Direction: Approximately six miles north of Rifle. Colorado on U.S. Hiqhwav 13, then
northeast on Estes Gulch access road, then one mile to the Disposal Site.
Please answer the following questions and sign the certification. If you have any
questions regarding your facility and the information required, please contact your
District Engineer, Dwain Watson.
Purpose of Request Construction of Disposal Cell Complete.
Discharge was to an unnamed tributarv to Government Creek.
1.
2.
Is the construction complete?
A. If not, is there any plan to complete construction
in the future?
B. If so, is there an estimate of when?
Date for start-up ~N~IA~--
If the construction is complete, is any dewatering
still occurring? How much? _Q__gpd
A. If yes, is the water being treated?
8. What form of treatment is utilized? Discuss sizes
of unit processes and any chemical additions.
C. Is any of the process or any other wastewater or
water being discharged to waters of the state?
(This includes groundwater in cases like unlined
lagoons.)
1. If yes, identify discharge point(s).
YES
NIA
_NIA
NO
NIA
NIA
NO
NIA
D. Is the facility designed to be a non-discharging
(evaporative) system. YES
3. Will the permittee continue to have a discharge point,
such as pipe, conduit, unlined lagoon, etc? Yes, from lined waste water retention
basin or outflow from mobile waste water treatment plant as part of CPDS Permit
Number C0-0042757.
4. Under what conditions could a discharge occur: Storm flow,
change in operation, accidental spill, etc. Storm event larger than a 10 yr 24 hr
event or at the end of the,U,MTRA project.at Riff,e, Colorado if water remains in the
waste water retention basin immediately prior to its removal. This will only occur
under the terms and conditions of CPDS Permit Number C0-0042757.
NOTE:
THE FOLLOWING SHOULD BE KEPT IN MIND IF YOUR PERMIT IS INACTIVATED
1. The permittee will still be responsible and subject to any enforcement action for
any discharge or spills into state waters. Should you operate your facility after your
permit has been inactivated and a discharge could occur, you must apply for a new
permit no less that 180 days prior to the discharge. It is unlawful to discharge
pollutants from a point source to state waters without a permit. Section 25-8-608
of the Water Quality Control Act provides for assessing civil penalties of up to
$10,000 per day for unlawful discharges.
2. In general the continued existence of a discharge point will be the basis for not
inactivating a permit at the request of the permittee.
I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the
information submitted herein and based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately
responsible for obtaining the information. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment. See 18 U.S.C. 1001 and 33 U.S.C. 1319.
~~~0..:....::::-~'~\,~
Authorized Repres tative
ENGINEERS
AND
CONSTRUCTORS
~MK-FERGUSON COMPANY ~A MORRISON KNUDSEN COMPANY
HEADQUARTERS OFFICE
ONE ERIEVIEW PLAZA
CLEVElAND, OHIO U.S.A. 44114
PHONE: {216) 523·5600/TELEX: 985542
May 14, 1993
Mr. Don Holmer
Industrial Permits Engineer
Water Quality Control Division
Colorado Department of Health
4210 East 11th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220
RECEfVFO
NAY 17911
WQCD, PERMITS SECTION
AEPL Y TO: MK-FERGUSON COMPANY
REMEDIAL ACTIONS
CONTRACTOA-UMTRA PROJECT
P.O. BOX 9136
ALBUOUEROUE, NEW MEXICO U.S.A. 87119
SUBJECT: Construction Dewatering Permit No. COG-070206
Permit Inactivation Request Form
UMTRA Project -Rifle, Colorado
Dear Mr. Holmer:
MK-Ferguson Company, Remedial Action Contractor for the UMTRA
Project, is requesting the termination of Construction Dewatering
Permit Number COG-070206. Enclosed please find a completed Permit
Inactivation Request Form.
On April 13, 1990, an application for a CPDS permit was filed with
your office, however, the permit was not approved before work was
scheduled to begin at the Estes Gulch Disposal Site in early 1992.
To avoid costly construction delays a Construction Dewatering
permit was requested for the excavation of the disposal cell and
the stockpiling of these excavated materials. The Construction
Dewatering permit was received on February 21, 1992, and excavation
began. This permit did not cover the transportation and placement
of the uranium mill tailings from the New and Old Rifle Process
Sites. On April 23, 1992, the CPDS permit for the Estes Gulch
Disposal site was approved for the continuation of the project.
MK-Ferguson Company wishes to terminate the Construction Dewatering
permit for the following reasons: 1) The excavation work covered
under the Construction Dewatering permit has been completed. 2)
Tailing placement, covered under the CPDS Permit Number C0-0042757,
0859KZ
MK-FERGUSON COMPANY
A MOAAISON ~NU OSEN COMPANY
Mr. Don Holmer
May 14, 1993
Page 2
is scheduled for the week of May 17th. 3) All discharge points
approved for the referenced permit are covered by the CPDS permit.
4) All the construction activities currently performed at the Estes
Gulch Disposal Site are covered under the CPDS permit.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Charlie Spencer of my
staff at (505) 845-5868.
Sincerely,
MK j?RGUSON C;\'ANY Y~~-"-'--~ ? .. , L~·v---~~
\
R. E. Lawrence
Project Director
REL\CRS\spp
Enclosed: Permit Inactivation Form for Construction Dewatering
Permit
0859KZ
• tlMOTHr E. WIR7•,
C01.gft'iOC
t1.nittd ~cates i)enatc
WASHINGTON. DC 20110-0003 .,
March 28 1 l!l9 l
The Honorable Jamea D. Watkin&
Secretary
U.S. Department of Enerqy
wa1h!ngtQn, o.c. 20585
cear Admiral Watkin11
Cl'li¥¥•1"':'1U
.t\~~ltl llltVICl!I
1•NNINO
Sl/DOET
11\'liRGY ~Ng
N>TU•4' AltOV~Cli
This letter follo~s up on correepondence we sent you on February
27, outlining our plan to request a restoration of funds in the
FY91 Supplemental Appropriations bill for the Uranium Mill .
Tailings Remedial Action (tJMTRA) program. Our 1pecific interest
was in restoring $5.5 million for clean-upa in Qunniaon and Rifle,
Colorado.
Aa you know, Congress approved language in the Ft91 Supplemental
Appropriations bill which r•allocates existinq UMTRA program funds
in such a way that the Department of Energy (DOE) haa
authorization to spend more on the Gunnison and Rifle ~lean-upe.
We agreed with this language in order to preserve the DOE'S need
for flexibility in managing the UM~RA proqram. Our primary
intention, however, was to encourage the DOE to re-evaluate its
decision to postpon• clean-up work at Gunnison and Rifle for one
year. As we indicated in our previous correspondence, a delay in
r•medial action at Gunnison and !Ufle will almost certainly result
in higher project ~ompletion costs in the long ~n. We think it
makes 1ense to move forward with work at Gunnison and Rifle, not
only to make iOod on the promise of environmental restoration tor
th••• communitie1 1 but also becauae it is fiscally re1ponsible.
Th~ POD's Albuquerque Office (which oversees th• UM~RA proqram in
Colorado) has indicated that even if Congress had appropriated
$5.3 in nm£ money, the department i1 •till net ready to proceed
with clean-up• in Gunni1on end Rifle. 'l'his wcu certainly not the
message the DOE'• AlQuquerque Office detiverad to the people cf
Gunnison and Rifle last year,
We nope the languaqe in the FY91 Supplemental Appropriations bill
encouraqes the COE to re-evaluate UMTRA prioritie1 and ra1tore1
clean-up actiona at Gunnison and Rifle. We also hope that the DOE
will net use thi• lanquage a1 an excuse to cut fund1 from the
UM'l'RA cl••n-up currently underway in Grand Junction, Colorado.
There may be low-priority aitea in the UM~RA inventory which would
be good oand1datee :or postponed clean-up, but Grand Junction is
clearly not one of them,
14'011 MAIN ST"ll'I"
OlllANCI JUNCTION. ¢0 fl tO I
IOJt20•tOu
YNlflO l<lMN IUILOING
tTM -N~ !!AJN ar.
IUITI CtO
~··--! ....... _,___.
03-27-91 0 I: 22 AM
/
·ro '""' mfM WJ'T· v~1~ l ,. I.\
36
mates and additional hydroelectric and recreation facilities. With·
out the proposed language, work on the project, now 80 percent
com!)lete, would be su1pended and the project's 1993 completion
schedule delayed with resulting increased project cost.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
The Committee has been advised that the J)cmartment of Energy
has delayed ilnjllementation of the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedl·
al Action [UMTRA] Proil'.am at Gunniston and Rifle, CO. Budget-
ary constraint& are such that additional fund& are not available for
supplemental appropriations for this purpose. However, because of
the wiforeseen and unintended results caused by the delay& and
the detrimental con&equences that further delay Will have on these
cimim~u~niit!e~· ~s~, ~th~e~C~o~m~miit~te~e~di~re~c~ts~th~e~D~e~r~tm~f~~re~~~ s
Wit in t e the re ·
e ommittee requests that no funding be spent on upgrade& to
the B plant at Hanford that are de1igned eii:clusiv~ to support the
mieeion of pretreating Hanford's tank waste, and directs that the
money requested for this purpose instead be spent developing an
alternative pretreatment process.
ATOMIC ENERGY DliiFlliNSE AOTIVIT!KS
1991 approprlatlon to date.......................................................................... $8,984,346,000
1991 eupplomontGI ••timate ...................... ,................................................. 62S,000,000
Houa allowance........................................................................................... 609,000,000
Committee recotnmendat!on ....... ,, ......... , .................................... ,.,,,........... 628,000,000
The Committee recommendation provides the full request for
atomic enerp defense activities as requested.
Included m the recommended appropriation is $288,0001000 for
activities at Rocky Flats Plant, the full amount reque1te11 by the
President for weapons programs and production support: environ-
ment safety and healtli act!vitlea; safeguards and security; plant
engineering; utilities and maintenance; and ma~ment ana ad·
min!strative activities. The Rocky Flats Plant, which began oper-
atiorui in 1952, is an integra!Jlart of the DOE nuclear defense com·
plex and is 8Sllentlal in provi ing for the Nation's national security
requirements. Its production lri!saion helps ensure that the Na·
tion' s nuclear deterrent remains strong, reliable, and effective. The
Plant ie the only facility which can meet the product!on require·
ments of critical nuclear weapons components and is a key facility
on which the rest of the production complex depends.
A major part of these funds would be used to bring the facility
into compliance with Federal, State, and local laws liy addressing
critical ufety, security, health, and environmental problems in a
timely manner.
In addition, the Committee recommendation concurs with the
· House !n providing $840,000,000 for environmental restoration and
waste management activities. This is the same aa the supplemental
~ueet. The KOal of these activities is to insure that Department of
Energy facll!t1ea are operated in an environmentally slife manner.
The funding recommended will be used to initiate activities neces-
?Ol
ENG INEERS
AND
CONSTRUCTO RS
~MK-FERGUSON COMPANY ~A MORRISON KNUDS EN COMPAN Y
HEAOOUAnTER S OFFICE
ON E ERIEVIEW PL AZA
CLE VE L A ND. OH IO U S A 44 114
PHONE. (2 16) 523·5600/T EL EX. 9 8 5542.
CERTIFIED HAIL -RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
May 28, 1991
Mr. R. P. Mo sten
District Engineer
Colorado De p artment of Hi ghwa ys
PO Box 1207
Grand Junction , CO 8 1 502 -2107
ATTENTION : Mr. Charles Dunn
SUBJECT: Highwa y Access Pe rmit
UMTRA Project -Rifle, Colorado
REFERENCE : DOH Permi t No. 391038
Dear Mr. Masten:
I~~ JUN 3 1991 IJ
~-_ ........... ______ ,_ ..... ~ .. -·
GARFIELD COUNTY
REPLY 10. MK-rERGUSON COMPANY
REM EOIAL ACTIONS
COWRACTOR -UMTflA PROJECT
P.O . BOX 9 136
ALBUQUERQUE. NEW ME XICO U S A 87 1 19
Enclo s ed please find t h e exe cuted permit a s r e fere nce d above for t h e
second acce s s at the Ol d Rifle Mill site. The t e rm s and condition s
containe d t h erein h ave been fou nd acce ptable to t-11<-Ferguson Company.
I t is our und erstanding t h at upon your receipt, this permit will b e
executed by the Department of Highw ays and copie s will b e forwarded
to this office for our file .
Should you have any que stions about t hi s matter, please contact
Don Bradle y or Rob Cooney of my staff at 1-800-443-4379.
S incerely ,
JGO/REC/DPB/mno
cc: w/enclosures:
S. Arp -DOE/UMTRA
C. Watso n -TSC/UMTRA
M. Bean -Garfield County
P. Martinek -CD H
5 275K
PERMIT NO. 391038
1. This access and permit is TEMPORARY and valid until removal
project is completed.
2 . Access shall be constructed as designed on
DE-AC04-83AL18796 EXHIBIT A NO REVISIONS.
constructed along the wide area beside the
prevent any parking.
plan
A fence shall
approach to
be
GARFIEW COUNTY
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Ms. Kary Glass Gilbert
Dolan & Domenici
109 Blh Sir.et, Suih 300
Glenwood Springs, Co/,>rado 81601-3303
Tekplwne (303) 945-9150
Fax No. (303) 945-2379
Novtmiber 7 1 19 91
5801 Osuna NE, Suite 107
Albuquerque, NM 87109
Dear Ms. Gilbert:
We are in receipt of your October 24, 1991 correspondence
requesting information concerning regulation of ground water
emi.nating from uranium mill tailings sites. Currently, Garfield
County has no specific regulations directed to such contamination.
Under various statutory authorities, particularly the general
provisions of Section 30-28-101, ~t. ~' C.R.S., as amended, the
County probably has authority to enact some type of regulation in
its planning process. In a more specific sense, under the
provisions of Section 24-65.1-101, et. ~' C.R.S., as amended,
th£• County probably has authority to direct regulations at ground
water contamination. However, Garfield County has not adopted such
re9ulations. In both areas, concerns about Federal preemption
would arise. I am not aware of litigation in Colorado that has
reE1olved those issues.
If you have not already done so, it is my recommendation that you
contact Beth Whittier, County Attorney for El Paso County, in
Colorado Springs. Of all County Attorneys, she is probably the
mout knowledgable in your area of interest.
sr\'.:{:~:·1~ ~ K. D OR YP
Gai:field County Attorney
DKll:mls
cc1 Mark Bean, Director of Regulatory Offices
' j
Grand Junction Regional Office
222 8. 6th Street, Room 232
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2768
Telefax Number: (303) 248-7198
ROY ROMER
Governor
JOEL KOHN
COW RADO Interim Executive Director
DEPARTMENT
OF A HEALTH
June 21, 1991
Mark Bean
Garfield County Planning
109 8th St. Suite 306
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Dear Mr. Bean:
~~241991
GARFIELD COUNTY
MK-F Company has awarded the contract to perform the Highway 13 improvements
to allow safe hauling of the uranium mill tailings from former mill sites to a
disposal cell at Estes Gulch, north of Rifle.
The selected contractor is Con-Sy, Inc,, from Rifle, Colorado for the amount
of $529,955. Work will begin the first week of July, 1991. According to Mr.
Gil Lee, vice-president of CSI, about 12 employees will be needed for the
job. The estimated time to complete the majority of work will be about two
months.
MK-F Company will oversee the work and perform testing to insure
specifications are adhered to. If you have any questions, please call me in
Grand Junction, Colorado at 248-7170.
Sincerely,
~~
Jim A. Hams
Hazardous Materials and
Waste Management Division
JAH:bts
cc: J. Deckler CDH
R. Withee MK-F
S. Arp DOE
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT
THE PERMITTEE;
Colorado Department of Health
4210 East 11th Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
SH No/MP/Side: 6/92. 49/R
Local Jurisdiction: Garfield County
Dist/Section/Patrol: 30210
. DOH Permit~o.: :391038
Permit Fee: Exempt
Date of Transmittal: 5-15-91
(Applicant)
MK-Ferguson Company
2309 Renard Place, S.E. #300
Albuquerque, NM 87119
is hereby granted permission to construct and use an access to the state highway at the location noted below.
The access shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit,
including the State Highway Access Code and listed attachments. This permit may be revoked by the issuing
authority if at any time the permitted access and its use violate any of the terms and conditions of this permit. The use
of advance warning and construction signs, flashers, barricades and flaggjlrs are required at all times during access
construction within Staie right-of-way in conformance with the MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL
DEVICES, Part VI. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed agents and employees shall be held
harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of the permit.
LOCATION:
On the south side of State Highway 6, a distance of 2600 feet east
from Mile Post 92.
ACCESS TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO:
Old Rifle Mill Site for mill tailings removal.
OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
See Attached Sheet.
MUNICIPALITY OR COUNTY APPROVAL
Required only when the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority.
By (X) Not Required Date Title -.,,.
·Upon the signing of this permit the permittee agrees to the terms and conditions and referenced attachments contained
herein. All construction shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from
~
'.!
The following paragraphS are pertinent highlights of the State Highway Access Code. These are provided for your convenience but -: .. :
do not alleviate compliance with all sections of the Access Code. A copy of the State Highway Access Code la avallablefrom your '.'.
local Issuing authority (local government) or the State Department of Highways (Department). When this permit was Issued, the ~
Issuing authority made Its decision based In part on Information submitted by the applicant, on the access category which Is
assigned to the highway, wttat alternative access to other public roads and streets ls available, and safety and design standards.
Changes In use or design not approYed by the permit or the Issuing authority may cause the revocation or suspension of the permit.
Appeals
1. Should the permittee or applicant chose to object to any of the terins or conditions of the permit placed therein by the ·
Department, an appeal mus.t be filed with the Colorado Highway Commission within 60 days of transmittal of the permit for
permittee signature. The request for the hearing shall be filed in writing and submitted to the Colorado Highway
Commission, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80222. The request shall include reasons for the appeal and
may include recommendations by the permittee or applicant that would be acceptable to him.
2. The Department may consider any objections and requested revisions at the request of the applicant or permittee. If
agreement is reached, the Department, with the approval of the local iss·uing authority (if applicable), may revise the permit
accordingly, or issue a new permit, or require the applicant to submit a new application for reconsideration. Changes in the
original application, proposed design or acces~ use will normally require submittal of a ne~ application. ·
3. Regardless of any communications, meetings, or negotiations with the Department regarding revisions and objections to
the permit, if the permittee or applicant wishes to appeal the Department's decision to the Commission, the appeal.must be
brought to the Commission within 60 days of transmittal of the permit.
4. Any appeal by the applicant or permittee of action by the local issuing authority when it is the appropriate local authority
(under subsection 2.4), shall be filed with the local authority and be consistent with the appeal procedures of the local
authority. -'ii·:
··:"!
5. If the final action is not further appealed. the Department or local authority may record the decision with the County Clerk. -';
and Recorder. ~
II Construction standards and requirements ~
1. The access must be undf'r construction within one year of the permit date. However, under certain conditions a one year '
time extension may be grante~ if requested in writing prior to permit expiration.
2. The applicant shall notify the office specified on the permit at least 48 hours prior to construction. A copy of the permit shall
be available for review at the construction site. Inspections will be made during construction.
3. The access construction within highway right-of-way must be completed within 45 days.
4. It is the responsibility of the permittee to complete the construction of the access according to the terms and conditions of
the permit. If the permittee wishes to use the access prior to completion, arrangements must be approved by the issuing
authority and Department and included on the permit. The Department or issuing authority may order a halt to any
unauthorized use of the access. Reconstruction or improvements to the access may be required when the permittee has ,
failed to meet required specifications of design or materials. If any construction element fails within two years due to .,
improper construction or material specifications, the permittee is responsible for all repairs.
5. In the event it becomes necessary to remove any right-of-way fence, the posts on either side of the access shall be securely
braced with an approved end post before the fence is cut to prevent any slacking of the remaining fence. All posts and wire
removed are Department property and shall be turned over to a representative of the Department.
6. A copy of the permit shall be available for review at the construction site. If necessary, minor changes and additions shall be
ordered by the Department or local authority field inspector to meet unanticipated site conditions.
7. The access shall be constructed and maintained in a manner that shall not cause water to enter onto the roadway, and shall
not inte.rfere with the drainage system in the right-of-way.
8. Where necessary to remove, relocate, or repair a traffic control device or public or private utilities for the construction of a
permitted access, the work shall be accomplished by the permittee without cost to the Department or issuing authority, and
at the direction of the Department or utility company. Any damage to the state highway or other public right-of-way beyond
that which is allowed in the permit shall be repaired immediately.
9. Adequate advance warning is required at all times during access construction, in conformance with the Manµal on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways. This may include the use of signs, flashers, barricades and flaggers. This
is also required by section 42-4-501,C.R.S. as amended. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed
agents and employees shall be held harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by
reason of the exercise of the permit.
Ill Changes In use and violations
1. If there are changes in the use of the access, the access permit-issuing authority must be notified of the change. A change in
property use which makes the existing access design or use in non-conformance with the Access Code or the terms and
conditions of the permit, may require the reconstruction or relocation of the access. Examples of changes in access use are; ·~
an increase in vehicular volume by 20 percent, or an increase by 20 percent of a directional characteristic such as a left turn. -·
The issuing authority will review the original permit; it may decide it is adequate or request that you apply for a new permit.
2. All terf!lS and conditions of the permit are binding upon all assigns, successors-in-interest and heirs .
. . 3. When a permitted driveway is constructed or used in violation of the Access Code, the local government or Department may
obtain a court order to halt the violation. Such access permits may be revoked by the issuing authority.
~
T5S-
EA A ~
R95W
v •//11 /U u .~~······
tof.i.. ./ .,,/~······ · .... ···· !".')>._,
1: ...... ·· ··. ~L ··.~o ' \ __ ----L-1 --789 ----1---"'-'--n....:;
I ., I
I I ···.. t t
16 \.., 1 I : •·.• 1 Ji.)
\ ' ' ' -~AREA Ar\---~--c-~ I I~~ I
t, I~+·. I . .
'
- --1-- - -_:_ - -
' I
•
~
Qrl .·.
(/' .l
_ .. ·
,.
:' .. "
v
......... ;;;
-··-··-··-··-··-··-··
'/0"4:7.
ESTERN
eNCJNITRS, JNC.
~ ~
R93W
CONSUlTWG ENGINEERS / LAND SUR\IE:
21 0 HJll'/ I • 50, Cnmef Junction, CO (JOJ)2'2-
WEST DIVIDE
CONSERVANCY WATER
PLAN
DISTR
OF AUGMEN.TATlON
LOCATION MAP
DESIGNED E.J.C. DRAWN M.J.L. CHECKED
r\ATC-H/C'"l f'll~I(" i..11"1
~. \...... ----/ COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS Local Jurisdiction: Garfield County
SH No/MP/Side: 6/92.49/R
STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PER !)~ C;,~_L\.\.".L n OHPermitNo.: 391038 Mffl r-::; [9~~00~miist/Section/Patrol: 30210
~ r . I ; ! ermit Fee: Exempt j~ MAY 311g91 ~!' ·bateo!Transmittal: 5-15-91
THE PERMITTEE;
Colorado Department of
4210 East 11th Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
,•. GARt ii...~~ (Apl'.l~i;:'!nt)
Health Mk-Ferguson Company
2309 Renard Place, S.E.
Albuquerque, NM 87119
11300
is hereby granted permission to construct and use an access to the state highway at the location noted below.
The access shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit,
including the State Highway Access Code and listed attachments. This permit may be revok~d by the issuing
authority if at any time the permitted access and its use violate any of the terms and conditions of this permit. The use
of advance warning and construction signs, flashers, barricades and flaggers are required at all times during access
construction within Siate right-of-way in conformance with the MANUAL ON UN!FORM TRAFFIC CONTROL
DEVICES, Part VI. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed agents and employees shall be held
harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of the permit.
LOCATION:
On the south side of State Highway 6, a distance of 2600 feet east
from Mile Post 92.
ACCESS TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO:
Old Rifle Mill Site for mill tailings removal.
OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
See.Attached Sheet.
MUNICIPALITY OR COUNTY APPROVAL
Required only when the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority.
By {X) Not Required Date Title __
Upon the signing of this permit the permittee agrees to the terms and conditions and referenced attachments contained
herein. All construction shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from
initiation. The permitted access shall be completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit prior to
being used. The permittee shall notify ________ ...:J::.ciee· m,,_Y=.o=a.:::s.::t'-------------------
with the Colorado Department of Highways in at b15-2286
at least 48 hours prior to commencing construction within the State Highway right-of-way.
The person signiqg as the permittee must be the owner or legal representative of the property served by the permitted
access and hav~ full aut~!/f~~?nd al~ it's terms and conditions. _ _
Permittee(X) ~ Date#;?<!!?}
By {X) \... ) peg-..f;?' Date 5-30-91 Title Administrator,
· " {Date of issue) Access Committee
COPY DISTRIBUTION: Required;
1. District (0tiginal)
2. Applicant
::t !=>l.<1ff ROW
Make cn1 ,;l'S as necessary for;
Local A;;thority.........-fnspector
MTGE Patrol Traffic Engineer
Previous Editions are Obsolete and will not be used
DOH Form 101
9/85
,._ '-.......-~
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS Loca1 Jurisdiction: Garfield
SH No/MP/Side: 6/92.49/R
STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMffl21R~V,OOQ™ist/Sectio_n!Patrol: 30210 ~ e;,J "J~~i\ILL"'.l , 1 I OH Permit No.: 391038 ~ 1 · l 1 l : ermit Fee: Exempt J~ MAY 3 1 1q91 1!' 'bateofTransmittal: 5-15-91
THE PERMITTEE;
Colorado Department of
4210 East 11th Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
. \ ..
~G,_A_R. , (Applicant) • t i ~..__,_, ·-· •. -.• ' -, Health MK-Ferguson Company
2309 Renard Place, S.E.
Albuquerque, NM 87119
1/300
County
is hereby granted permission to construct and use an access to the state highway at the location noted below.
The access shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit,
including the State Highway Access Code and listed attachments. This permit may be revok~d by the issuing
authority if at any time the permitted access and its use violate any of the terms and conditions of this permit. The use
of advance warning and construction signs, flashers, barricades and flaggers are required at all times during access
construction within State right-of-way in conformance with the MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL
DEVICES, Part VI. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed agents and employees shall be held
harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of the permit.
LOCATION:
On the south side of State Highway 6, a distance of 2600 feet east
from Mile Post 92.
ACCESS TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO:
Old Rifle Mill Site for mill tailings removal.
OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
See Attached Sheet.
MUNICIPALITY OR COUNTY APPROVAL
Required only when the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority.
By (X) Not Required Date Title __
Upon the signing of this permit the permittee agrees to the terms and conditions and referenced attachments contained
herein. All construction shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from
initiation. The permitted access shall be completed in accordarce with the terms and conditions of the permit prior to
being used. The permittee shall notify _________ J=1m,,,__-"Y-"o"'a"'s'-'t'------------..,..,,--=-=-=--c----
with the Colorado Department of Highways in at b'.15-2286
at least 48 hours prior to commencing construction within the State Highway right-of-way.
The person signi1]9 as the permittee must be the owner or legal representative of the property served by the permitted
access and hav~ full aut~Am~nd al~ it's terms and conditions. _ _ }
Permittee(X) ~ Date& ;?8 ?_
By (X) \. :( !!--p: ~ Date 5-30-91 Title Administrator,
/ (Date of issue) Access Committee
COPY DISTAIBUTION: Requ11ed;
1. District (dtigina1)
2. Applicant
::I .C::t::1ff ROW
Make cn1 ,;es as necessary for;
Loe a! Authority ........-fnspector
MTGE Patrol Traffic Engineer
Previous Editions are Obsolete and will not be used
DOH Form 101
9185
...
The following paragraphs are pertinent high, ~·•ts of the State Highway Access Code. These )rovided for your convenience b\.~-!
do not alleviate compliance with all sections of the Access Code. A copy of the State Highway Access Code Is available from your
local Issuing authority (local government) or the State Department of Highways (Department). When this permit was Issued, the
issuing authority made Its decision based In part on information submitted by the applicant, on the accass category which Is
assigned to the highway, what alternative access to other public roads and streets is available, and safety and design standards.
Changes in use or design not approved by the permit or the Issuing authority may cause the revocation or suspension of the permit.
Appeals
1. Should the permittee or applicant chose to object to any of the terms or conditions of the permit placed therein by the
Department, an appeal must be filed with the Colorado Highway Commission within 60 days of transmittal of the permit for
permittee signature. The request for the hearing shall be filed in writing and submitted to the Colorado Highway
Commission. 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80222. The request shall include reasons for the appeal and
may include recommendations by the permittee or ~pplicant that would be acceptable to him.
2. The Department may consider any objections and requested revisions at the request of the applicant or permittee. If
agreement is reached, the Department, with the approval of the local issuing authority (if applicable), may revise the permit
accordingly. or issue a new permit, or require the applicant to submit a new application for reconsideration. Changes in the
original application, proposed design or access use will normally require submittal of a new application.
3. Regardless of any communications, meetings, or negotiations with the Department regarding revisions and objections to
the permit, if the permittee or applicant wishes to appeal the Department's decision to the Commission, the appeal must be
brought to the Commission within 60 days of transmittal of the permit.
4. Any appeal by the applicant or permittee of action by the local issuing authority when it is the appropriate iocal authority
(under subsection 2.4), shall be filed with the local authority and be consistent with the appeal procedures of the local
authority.
5. If the final action is not further appealed, the Department or local authority may record the decision with the County Clerk
and Recorder.
II Construction standards and requirements
1. The access must be under construction within one year of the permit date. However, under certain conditions a one year
time extension may be granted if requested in writing prior to permit expiration.
2. The applicant shall notify the office specified on the permit at least 48 hours prior to construction. A copy of the permit shall
be available for review at the construction site. Inspections will be made during construction.
3. The access construction within highway right-of-way must be completed within 45 days.
4. It is the responsibility of the permittee to complete the construction of the access according to the terms and conditions of
the permit. If the permittee wishes to use the access prior to completion, arrangements must be approved by the issuing
authority and Department and included on the permit. The Department or issuing authority may order a halt to any
unauthorized use of the access. Reconstruction or improvements to the access may be required when the permittee has
failed to meet required specifications of design or materials. If any construction element fails within two years due to
improper construction or material specifications, the permittee is responsible for all repairs.
5. In the event it becomes necessary to remove any right-of-way fence, the posts on either side of the access shall be securely
braced with an approved end post before the fence is cut to prevent any slacking of the remaining fence. All posts and wire
removed are Department property and shall be turned over to a representative of the Department.
6. A copy of the permit shall be available for review at the construction site. If necessary. minor changes and additions shall be
ordered by the Department or local authority field inspector to meet unanticipated site conditions.
7. The access shall be constructed and maintained in a mannerthat shall not cause water to enter onto the roadway, and shall
not interfere with the drainage system in the right-of-way.
8. Where necessary to remove, relocate, or repair a traffic control device or public or private utilities for the construction of a
permitted access, the work shall be accomplished by the permittee without cost to the Department or issuing authority, and
at the direction of the Department or utility company. Any damage to the state highway or other public right-of-way beyond
that which is allowed in the permit shall be repaired immediately.
9. Adequate advance warning is required at all times during access construction, in conformance with the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways. This may include the use of signs, flashers, barricades and flaggers. This
is also required by section 42-4-501,C.R.S. as amended. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed
agents and employees shall be held harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by
reason of the exercise of the permit.
111 Changes In use and violations
1. If there are changes in the use of the access, the access permit-issuing authority must be notified of the change. A change in
property use which makes the existing access design or use in non-conformance with the Access Code or the terms and
conditions of the permit, may require the reconstruction or relocation of the access. Examples of changes in access use are;
an increase in vehicular volume by 20 percent, or an increase by 20 percent of a directional characteristic such as a left turn.
The issuing authority will review the original permit; it may decide it is adequate or request that you apply for a new permit.
2. All terms and conditions of the permit are binding upon all assigns, successors-in-interest and heirs.
3. When a permitted driveway is constructed or used in violation of the Access Code, the local government or Department may
obtain a court order to halt the violation. Such access permits may be revoked by the issuing authority.
IV Further Information
1. When the permit holder wishes to make improvements to an existing legal access, he shall make his request by filing a
completed permit application form with the issuing authority. The issuing authority may take action only on the request for
improvement. Denial does not revoke the existing access.
2. The permittee, his heirs, successors-in-interest, and assigns, of the property serviced by the access shall be responsible for
meeting the terms and conditions of the permit and the removal or clearance of snow or ice upon the access even though
deposite.d on the access in the course of Department snow removal operations. The Department shall maintain in
unincorporated areas the highway drainage system, including those culverts under the access which are part of that system
within the right-of-way.
3. The issue date of the permit is the date the Department representative signs the permit which is after the permittee has
returned the permit signed and paid any required fees.
4. The Department may, when necessary for the improved safety and operation of the roadway, rebuild, modify, remove, or
redesign the highway including any auxiliary lane.
5. Any driveway, whether constructed before. on. or after June 30, 1979, may be required by the Department, with written
concurrence of the appropriate local authority, to be reconstructed or relocated to conform to the Access Code, either at
the property owner's expense if the reconstruction or relocation is necessitated by a change in the use of the property
which results in a change in the type of driveway operation; or at the expense of the Department if the reconstruction or
relocation is necessitated by changes in road or traffic conditions. The necessity for the relocation or reconstruction shall
be determined by reference to the standards set forth in the Access Code.
·-~-··--