ATLAS CORPORKrION R

_ . - -

,,

1

L . ATLAS CORPORKrION R 5"Te''N'$ [**"'""'" """"" "r

Telephone:(303) 629-2440 Faw (303) 629-2445

klCHARD E. BLURAUGliVice Presidern Environmentaland oovernmental Affairs

August 6,1997

Mr. Joseph J. iiolonich, ChiefIllgh Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch !

IDivision of Waste ManagementOffice of Nuclear Material Cafety and SafeguardsU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20555-0001

Re: License SUA-917, Docket No. 40-3453, Comments on the Fish and WildlifeService's June 26,1997 Draft Biological Opinion

Dear Mr.1Monich:

Transmitted herewith is a copy of Atlas' technical conunents on the DBO as preparedby liarding Lawson Associates (ILLA). The enclosed document is an Appendix to, andis referenced throughout Atlas' Comments on the DB0 which were prepared withassistance of Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, which is being forwarded to youunder separate cover, also dated this day.

Also, we appreciate that you are agreeable to attending the meeting arranged betweenAtlas, its consultants and the Fish and Wildlife Service August -22,1997 at 9.00 a.m. in

! our offices to further review and clarify our respective comments and opinionsregarding this matter.

We trust you will give serious consideration to our comments in the development of theFinal Environmental Impact Statement. We appreciate the consideration given to our,

concerns in this matter. g

Sincerely th

Richard E. Blubaugh ,1|

Enclosure

! Distribution List

\$\$$\@$N100013! ,m m m ,, ,,0 m -

! PDir, ADOCK 04003453C pg

. _

3'

9 '7

Herene Leween Aseeensees

e

July 31,1997

- Mr. Richard E. BlubaughVico President of Erwitonmental

and Governmental Affairs._ Atlas CorporationRepublic Plaza370 Savontoonth StrootDonvor, Colorado 80202

Comments on the FWS Draft Biological OpinionProposed Reclamation PlanAtlas Uranium Mill and Tallings PileMoab, Utah

Dear Mr. Illubaugh:

At your roquest, llanling Lawson Associatos (IIIA) has prepared this latter to document ourcomments on the Draft lifological Opinion (DBO) preparud by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servico(ISYS) on tht ?mposod Roclamation Plan for the Atlas Uranium Mill Tailings Sito in Moab, Utahdated June 20, l'197. General and spocific comments on the DB0 are presented as follows:

GENERAL COMMENTS

1. The DilO fails to use the best scientific and commercial data availablo

On numerous occasions the DBO fails to uso applicablo data, fa!!s to conduct appmpriato analysos,usos data that aro irrolovant to the proposed action, or misapplios the best scientific and commercialdata availablo. Soveral oxamplos aro listed below and moro detailed examplos are described in thespecific comments pmvided lator in this letter.

The DB0 fails to uso availablo data and studios on the opvironmental sotting and regional water*quality in the Uppor Colorado River Basin to establish appropriato basolino conditions asrequired by ITVS proceduros for Soction 7 consultations. For examplo, water quality.-streamflow, and sedimont data collected by U.S. Geological Survoy (USGS) in the ColoradoRiver naar Cisco, Utah since 1928 woro apparently not considered relativo to baselino conditionsin the Colorado River. In addition, the ITVS, USGS, U.S. Bureau of Roclamation, and Bureau ofIndian Affairs recontly publishod an applicablo study of environmental offects or the ColoradoRiver squawfish and the razorback sucker in the Upper Colorado River Basin (Butler, et.al.,1998). Infonnation from this publication was apparently not considered in the Dilo and was nntcitod in the reference list. Other rolovant publications and availablo data were also apparentlynot considorod.

Tho DB0 disreganis river sodiment and fish tissuo data, collected by Atlas and the FWS, from*

the Colorado River in the vicinity of the Atlas tallings pilo because tho data are considorod to be~1nconclusivo. ILLA maintains that thoso data should be considorod in the DBO as evidence thatthoro is no definitivo relationship betwoon the tailings pilo anel river sediment and fish tissuedata.

Enginseetng and 707 Seventeenth Street. Suete 2400. o nver, co 80202 (303) 292 5365

- Environrnental Servkes asaa.,,,fm.v,4 ugnn u

-

. -. . . - , . . ~ ~. ._ - - .. . . .

,

-t i

};

,

Harding L.awson Associates

July 31, ic90 -|_.

: Mr. Richard Blubaugh :-- Atlas Corporation'Pago 2 ;

Tim FWS inappropriately utilizes data from the Scott M. Mathoson Wotlands Prosorve to support -e

L their opinion that the proposod action will joopardizo the Colorado River listed fishos. Data- from the Scott M. Mathoson Wotlands Prosorvo woro published by Cooper cud Sovern in a 1994report describing research perfonnod for the Rocovery Program for the Endangorod Fishes of the

- Upper Colorado (Cooper and Sovern,1994). Thoso data are irrolovant to ilm proposed action -othor than affinning IIIWs assessmont that them is no potential for groundwater flow from theta!!!ngs p!!o to the Scott M. Muthoson Wollands Prosorvo. Groundwater hydmlogists with theUSGS, USEPA, and NRC havo fonnally concurrod with our assessmont.

2, - The DBO falls to aseems the ebets of the proposed action

'The IMS Endangered Spocios Act intra Sorvico Consultation llandbook states that the Biological- Opinion should "... discuss the egoats of the action on each listod, proposed or candidato spacios and. critical habitat /n the action area ..."(FWS,1994). This discussion is to ccnsist of, among otheritoms, an ovaluation of impacts of the proposed action on spectos and/or critical habitat,quantification of offects of the pmposed action, and a summary of offects to includo the basis for tho

| biologist's conclusion. The DHO contains littlo or no ovaluation of the impacts of the proposeda'ation, or quantification of the offects of the proposod action, and providos no rationalo for tlmopinion that the proposed action will foopardizo the Colorado River listed fishos. This opinionappears to ho largely subjectivo and conjectural rather than based on the %st selontific andcommercial data availabio."

3. The DBO falle to establish baseline conditions in the Colorado River

Tim DBO appropriately statos that the population declino of ondomic Colorado River fishes can bo :

closoly correlatod with the construction of dams and roscrvoirs, introduction of nonnativo fishes,and the romoval of water from tho Colorado River system. The DHO also establishes that of the fourColorado River listed fishes, only the Colorado River squawfish and the razcrback sucker occur inthe reach of Colorado River naar the Atlas tailings pilo. Based on the information provided in thoDBO, it appears that tho occurronco of tlm humpback chub and tho bonytail chub in this reach of theColorado River is highly unlikely.

- The standard of practico for environmental investigations is to establish baselino or backgroundconditions as a control imm which incromontal environmental offects aro measured. Atlas and their.consultants havo repeatedly emphasizod the importanco of recognizing the contribution of -

chemicals from unthropogonic or naturally occurring soun:os in the Upper Colorado River Drainago -Basin. The DHO does not adoquately datormino the origin of chemical constituonts detected inwater or sedimont or to quantify the incromontal offects associated with tlm tailings pilo based on anobjectivo assessment of tlm boat scientific and commercial data availablo. Instead, the DBO simplycomparos observed concontrations to Stato of Utah groundwater and surface water standards.

7 . Specific comments on tho inappropriato application of State of Utah standards are provided later in- this lettor.a" "

_

N

i

. _ _ ._ _ _ _ _

'9

m ,

Harding L.awson Associates

! July 31,1990-Mr. Richard illubaugh

,

Atlas Corporation ,

Pago 3 '

in addition, Adas provklad the RVS with groundwater and surfaco water quality data in a '

transmittal dated October 17,1990 (Illa,1990bt This inft rmation was provided to the FWS to aidin their interpretation of surfaco water and groundwater quality impacts yet backgroundconcontrations of various chomical constituonts were apparently not considered in their ovaluationand interpretation of tho "bost scientific and commercial data availablo'' for the Colorado River.

4. - The proposed reasonable and prudent alternative of relocating the tailings pile proposed isneither " reasonable nor prudent", based on the best scientific and commercial data available

i

Soction 7 regulations (50 CFR 402.02) states that RPA must limit Roasonable and PrudentAltornativos (RPA) to:

alternativos tho Services bollovo will avoid the likollhood of Joopardye

altornativos that can bo implomont >d in a manner consistent with the intended purpose of thee

action. altornativos that can bo imnlomonted consistent with the scope of the agency's legal authority*

and jurisdiction, and -altornativos that are economically and technologically feasible.e

. In light of thoso regulations, wo havo the following comments:

A) The RPA proposed by the FWS would likely result in greator foopardy to the Colorado Riverlisted fishes, rather than avoid the likollhood of jeopardy for the following reasons:

Rolocation of the tailings pilo does nothing to oliminato or minimizo the discharge of+

contaminated groundwater to the Colorado River Contaminated groundwater bonoaththe Atlas tallings pilo roachos depths of 50 foot below the groundwater surface adjacentto the Colorado River, This subsurface groundwater contamination would romain aftorthe relocation of the tallings.

if tho tallings pilo is relocated, administrativo, legal, and engineering issues will likelye

delay any reclamation activities for many years. Without the benefits and contaminantcontainment features of the Atlas reclamation plan, contaminants in the tallfugs pilo willcontinuo to loach into the Colorado River during thoso delays.

. . Rolocation of tho tallings pilo would exacarbate. groundwater contamination at the sitoand hicror.o the amount of chemical contaminants potentially released to the Colorado

- River, The tallings pilo contains largo volumes of water that occupy interstitial porespaces in the tallings (Canonio,1994), As the pilo is relocated, this water will beroloased from thoso poro spaces and will likely loach into the undorlying groundwaterthus oxacorbating groundwater contamination at the sito. Also, if the existing interim

. tallings pilo cover is removed, precipitation will infiltrato directly into the uncoveredtailings increasing the loaching of contaminants into the undorlying groundwater. Thisgroundwater coatamination would oventually bo dischargod to the Colorado River.-

_ _

o

n

Harding Lawson Associates

July 31,1990Mr. Richard illubaughAtlas CorporationPago 4

Surfaco water ru.ioff associated with storm ovonts when the tailings are exposed during.

relocatien could roloaso 1) largo quantitles of water ladon with heavy metals andradionuclidos and 2) uranium mill tailings directly to the Colorado River. The estimatedProbablo Maximum Storm ovent for the vicinity of the Atlas sito would result in a highintensity short duration rainfall event creating about 9.30 inches of rainfall over a 0 hourporlod. This quantity of rainfall over the area of the tailings pilo (130 acres) wouldcroato significant volumes of contaminated water that could potentially broach surfacowater control features and/or infiltrato or wop into groundwater and ontor the ColoradoRiver. Under the Atlas reclamation plan, an ovent such as the pmbablo Maximum Stormwould not have the potential to releaso largo quantitles of chemical constituents from thetailings pilo bocauso of the protectivo features of the engincorod tailings pilo cover.

Tho FWS has stated that they are concerned with depletions of water from the Colorado.

River as the result of Atlas' nclamation plan. Ilowever, the RPA propoaod by the FWSwill actually increaso doplations from the Colorado River. The amount of water requimdto relocato tho tailings is estimated to be at least twico the 154.3 acro-ft estimated byAtlas for tho implomontation of the proposed reclamation plan.

B) As stated above, the proposed RFA must be consistent with the intended purpose of theproposed action. The RPA proposed by FWS is inconsistant with the intended purpose ofthe proposod Atlas reclamation plan which constitutos the proposed action. Tho intendedpurpose of tlm Atlas Roclamation Plan is to reclaim tho tailings pilo at its current location inan onvironmentally prutoctivo manner whilo mooting the requirements of Appendix A to 10CFR Part 40. llowever, the DDO does not demonstrato that the proposed RPA moots thef alanded purpose of the Atlas reclamation plan, particularly with respect to complianco withthe requirements of Appendix A of to CFR Part 40.

C) As stated abovo, the proposod RPA must bo implomonted consistant with the scopo of theaction agency's legal au'hority and jurisdiction. As a result, the proposed RPA cannot boimplomonted by NRC as stated in their lottor to Congressman Georgo Millor on July 2,1997.In this lotter, the NRC stated the follo3ving with regards to the Atlas reclamation proposah

"As an indopondent regulatory agoney, it is NRC's job to dolormino if activitios proposed bylicensoos am in complianco with NRC regulallons. The options available to NRC are to eithor:(1) cccept the proposal; (2) accept the pmposal with modifications; or (3) deny the pmposal.Iloc<mso NRC must have a firm regulatory and technical basis to accept or dony a proposal, itccmnot mako oither decision arbitrurily. For the spocific caso of the Atlas tailings, oron if NBCwore to dony the Atlas proposalfor on site wclamation, this does not mean that Atlas wouldchoose to movo the tailings. Rathor, Atlas, as the party ultimately responsiblefor the site,could (:) roquest a hearing on the NRC donial or (2) decido to modify the donfed proposal andresubmit it to NBC. NHC can only evaluate the proposal modo by Atlas, and datormino ifit isin ccmpliance with the applicable wgulations."

D) As stated abovo, the proposod RPA must be economically and technologically feasible.Although the proposed RPA is tocimologically feasiblo, it is not economically feasible forAtlas to move tho tailings puo. Further, it is not tocimically or oconomically prudent to

__ __ ,

.

.


July 31,1990 *

Mr. Richard illubaughAtlas CorporationPago 5

move the Atlas tailings pilo given that: 1) the relocation would likely causo gmatorjoopardyto the Colorado River listed fishos than the proposed action,2) the relocation woulddo little, if anything, to control the dischargo of contaminated groundwater to the ColoradoRiver, and 3) technologically proven and more cost offectivo groundwater remodiation -alternativos, such as thoso being considorod by Atlas in their Groundwater Correctivo Action ,

Plan, could bo imph montod to protect the Colorado River ocosystem.

SPECIFIC COMMENTS

Pg. O, 2"d Paragraph

This soction of the D110 states that any depletion of water from the Upper Colorado River liasin isconsidorod a Joopanly to the Colorado River listed fishos. The DilO pmvidos no logical justification /for this conchision. Also,if the 13VS has concludod that any depletion of water in the UpporColorado River liasin represents a Joopardy to the fish, it follows that many other water depletions inthe Uppor Cclorado River liasin, such as groundwater pumpage by the National Park Service atArchos Nal*aal Park and other park locations may also represent a jeopardy to the Colorado River

_

listed fishos.

Pg. O, 3'd Paragraph

This soction of the DIlO states that selonium lovels of 1 to 3 ug/l havo boon documented asdetrimental to fish and watorfowl. Ilowever, the Dilo does not acknowledge that backgroundconcentrations in surfaco water in the Colorado River and bedrock aquifors of the area exceed thoselovols. Concentrations of selonium in bedrock aquifors of the Spanish Valloy-Mill Crook area haveboon documented by tho Stato of Utah, Dopartment of Natural Resourcos and the USGS to rangofrom loss than 1 to as high as 09 ug/l(Illanchard,1990), in addition, solenium concentrations abovethe Atlas Mill Tallings Sito in the Colorado River woro as high as 4 ug/l near Cisco, Utah in 1990 anda samplo collected by tho Stata of Utah dimetly upstream of the tailings pilo at the liighway 191

,

bridge was 3.9 ug/l in January 1997. Given thoso background concentrations of solonium in thoColorado River and contribations from naturally occurring groundwater dischargos, it appearsunroalistic for tho ISYS to protect the Colorado River listed fishes from solonium in concentrations aslow as 1 to a ug/1. This dilemma is further supported by a newspaper articlo in the Donvor Post onOctober 14,1990 which reported the results of a recent study of the Colorado River Fish RecoveryProgram. In this articlo, John llammill, Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servico's ColoradoRivor Rocovery Program was quoted as saying "If selonium cousos serious pmblemsfor thereproduction of ondongorodfish, it brings into question a lot of tho things we're doing* . Also, Proioct

- Director, Kathy llolloy of the U.S. Ilureau of Reclamation stated that sho was smprised to find thatnono of the razorback larvao in tho study survived when spawnod in water containing only 4 to 7micrograms por litar of selonium.

Further, the Atlas sito is not contributing selonium to the Colorado River at concentrations abovobackground levols. Solonium concentrations in groundwater adjacent to the Atlas tailings pilo amsimilar to background concentrations in groundwater and as demonstrated lator in this lotter, noincrumental incmaso in solenium concentrations are observed in the Colorado River immediatelyadjacent to the tailings pilo. Itackground solenium concentrations in the shallow alluvial aquifer at

.

_ _- - - - - _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - _ . _ . - - - _ - - . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - - _ _ . _ . _ _ . - . - _ _ _ _ _ . - - . _ __

9

4


July 31,1990hir. Richard IllubaughAtlas CorporationPagoO

the Atlas sito are approximately 15 to 20 ug/1. As stated abovo, thoso background concentrations aretypical of naturally occurring solonium concentrations in aquifers in the hiill Crock-Spanish Valloyaroa of the Upper Colorado River 11asin as documented by lilanchard (1990).

Pg.7

This section of the DIl0 refors to the mquestod sampling of springs in the Scott hl. MathosonW itlands Proservo in April,1995. To our knowledgo, no such requests woro mado and it is ourunderstanding that chomical signatures of groundwater and surfaco water in the Scott M. hiathesonWotlands Pmsorvo woro not documented prior to IllEs lottor to EPA dated October 1,1990.

dPg. 32, i Paragraph

This section refers to the dischargo of contaminated groundwater at the Atlas scop. Atlas objects tothe designation of this groundwator dischargo area as a "soop". A soop is definod in the Dictionaryof Goological Torms, Third lklition, as "A spot whoro water orpetroloum + :from the carth, oftenforming the source of a small trickling stroam." This definition cloarly do . at apply to the areawrefurod to as "soop" by the Stato of Utah no surfaco expression of groundwater oozing from thegroundwater surfaco is observed. Samplos are collected by the Stato of Utah in this groundwaterdischargo area by simply excavating a small hole to the water tablo surface. Groundwater is thenallowed to flow into tho holo and is subsequently samplod This area is moro appropriately ruforrodto as "an area of groundwator dischargo to the Colorado Rivor".

Pg. 32, 3'd Paragraph

Tho Dl10 statos that "The exact charactorization of the constituonts of the Mlings pila, and thoroforo,constituontsfound within the too.yearfloodplain of the Colorado Rivor ano designated criticalhabitat, has not boon complotml despito numerous rmjuosts to do so by concerned partios, includingthe Fish and Wildlife Sonico and National Park Service".

This statomont is mistoading becausa it falls to acknowledgo that Atlas has performed detailedsampling of the tailings pilo and groundwater within the floodplain of the Colorado River, and hasalso performod groundwater and surfaco water quality monitoring over the past la years. Inaddition, Atlas performed sodimont and fish tissuo sampling in conjunction with the ISYS in 1995and 1990.

The inforenco to an " exact charactorization" in the ITVS statomont quotod above does not apparentlyconsidor that scientific uncertainty oxists within any environmental study. D is widely accepted inthe scientific community that an "oxact charactorization"is a concept feasiblo in theory, not in

'

practico,

in the caso of the charactorization of the tailings pilo. Atlas has refrained from the collection ofconventional soil samplos to charactorizo the chemical constituency of the tailings pilo becausothoso samplos wo dd only mpresent tho tailings within a very small volumo. A typical soil sample is

x

p


) July 31,19f*6 ;Mr. Richant BlubaughAtlas Corporation

- Pago 7 :

; based on a' soil samplo_ tubo that ti, o inchos long by 2% inches in diamotorc Atlas has previously' indicated that the water in the tailings pilo providos the best indication of the constituoney of tho -tailings pilo for the following reasons:

. - Tallings pero water samplos were collected from up to thirtoon dowatering wells scrooned witidu. the saturated portion ~of the tallings pile on twelve separate occasions. Those dowatering wells: croato a cono of depression amund each well that servos to induce water to flow toward the well -from tho surrounding tallings. Thus water samplos collected from the dowatering wells providoa bottor indication of the constituoney of the tailings pilo over a larger area.

~ Tailings poro waters aro in phaso equilibrium with tho tailings solids duo to the longth of timo.*

(greator than 40 years) that the liquids have boon in contact with the tailings solids. Thus thechomistry of the tallings liquids aro repro 3outativo of the solids prosent in the tailings pilo. Atlashas expanded their laboratory analytn list and obtained lower laboratory datoction limits toensuro that the charactorization of the water in the tailings is comprohonsivo and completo.

. . Tallings poro waters represent the constituency of the moHlo fraction of the tailings pilo.Consequently, charactorization of tho tailings pero liquids providos the best ropmsontation of thechomical constituents that are most likely to affect groundwater and the Colorado River,

in addition', the NRC made the following comment on the charactorization of the tailings pilo in a !

lottor to Congrossman Goorgo Millor dated July 2,1997.

"in looking at the data availabio on understanding the contents of the impoundment, NRC concludos i

that them are sufficient data to develop a good charactorization. This understanding is based on a i

; number offactors, including: 1) thefact that tho tailings solids are locally mined oro with the uraniumremoved; 2) thepmcoss knowledge of how the mill opomtod and what chemicals wom used to extmctthe umnium; 3) the knowledge that the mill building and other motorial that could not be soldfor -scmp wem butiod with tallings; 4) an analysis performod by NRC, in the late 1980's, of the tallingsliquor in the pilo; 5) an af! davit from a mill emplayoo documenting that nothing but tailings or millequipment was placed in the impoundment; ti) analyses done by the ficonsoo, as part ofits tallingsdowatering program, that idontify what typos of solids are pmsont in the water; and 7) knowledge of ;

. what is contained in other mill tailings impoundments especially as a msult of extensivo analysosDOR undottook in its mclamation work at abandoned umnium mills. Furthermom, for purposes ofevaluating impacts, the most significant chamctorization is of the gmundwater betwoon the tailings

: and the river, This smundwater has boem well-chamctorized, using data fmm Atlas and the State ofUtah."

'

in referenco to FWS and NpS roquests for additional sampling. Atlas and their consultants havo -- y''

; expressed concerns about sampling objectivos and uncertaintios to the NRC. One major source of-: uncertainty was tho establishmont of appropriato background conditions both upstream and - ;

downstream of the tailings pile, The proposed FWS and NPS sampling program consisted of a ono, timo sampling ovent that was intended to ostablish basolino conditions and measuro potentialenvironmental offects from the Atlas tallings pilo on the Colorado River ocosystem. Atlas and their

- consultants understood the uncertaintios associated with the proposed sampling program and j+

recognized that the development of representativo background conditions would likely require long- -|

11

-

;s

o..

Hardmg Lawson Associates

July 31,1996 - _

Mr. Richard BlubaughAtlas Corporation --Pago a ;

term monitoring (1.o., much more than one sampling ovent). This type of long term monitoring-program is curnstly being implomonted in the Uncompahgro Study area of the Upper ColoradoRiver Basin by the ISYS, the US Hureau of Roclamation, the US Geological Survoy, and the Bureau of -Indian Affairs. In addition, the US Geological Survey has dovoloped the Upper Colorado River BasinStudy Unit as part of the National Wator-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program to monitor waterquality and to provido a baso of knowledge for making futura managomont decisions in the UpperColorado River Basin. Givon that those types of long-torm studios are being carried out by variousDopartment of Interior agenclos, wo bollovo that it is most appropriato for Depar'mont of Interioragenclos to: 1) conduct regional studios to establish baselino or background conditions in the UpporColorado River Basin, and 2) perfonn monitoring and sampling of critical habitats for the ColoradoRiver listed fishes as part of the Colorado River Fish Rocovery Program.

Pg. 32, Water Quality

This section refers to surfaco water quality data collected by the Stato of Utah and others forapproximately the last 19 years but fails to provido any evaluation of thoso data. IILA hasconducted a detailed ovaluation of all availablo surfaco water quality dat , for the Colorado River inthe vicinity of the Atlas sito. This ovaluation consists of two components: 1) a statistical comparisonof upstream and downstream water quality data collected by Atlas and the Stato of Utah in theColorado River, and 2) a detailed ovaluation of water quality data collected in the mixing zonealong the bank of the Colorado River adjacent to the Atlas sito. IILA considors the data collected byAtlas and tho Stato of Utah to be reprosontativo of the Colorado River as a wholo both upstream anddownstream of the pile whereas surface water data collected by the Stato of Utah along the riverbank is considered reprosentativo of the mixing zono.

Statistical Comparison of Upstream and Downstream Water Quality Data

An analysis of surfaco water data for samplos collected by the Stato of Utah (Utah) from May 1995through July 1996 end Atlas from March 1981 through November 1996 was performod to ascertainwhether thoro woro notablo differences in concentrations of chomical constituents in surfaco watersamplos collected in the Colorado River at locations upstream and downstream of the Atlas tailingspilo. Data used for this analysis consisted of analytical results for which thoto woro_ at least twodotections of the chomical constituont at the upstream location and at least two detections of thechomical constituent at the downstream location, with the exception of ammonia. Ammonia datacollected by Atlas showed no datoctions in the upstroam k> cation and detections in the downstreamlocation. Ilowever,because of tho emphasis on this chemical constituent in the DHO,it wasretainod in the data analysis. For any concontrations that woro reported below the reporting limit,tho value of the reporting limit was used in the analysis. Tim surfaco water data from each locationwas pmcossod using tho Microsoft Excel data analysis program for tlm t test assuming unequalvariancos in the data. The t test was performod with the hypothesis that the difference betwoon thomeans of the data was zero at the 95 porcont confidenco lovel. There is only one sampling location

i for each of the upstream and downstream data sets. The data analysis was performed on the surfacowater data collected from multiplo sampling ovents. Thus, the analysis is representativo of the

. overall constituent concentrations in tho surfaco water over the period measured._

. _-.

I

, _ -

- , .:

.. .

, . g

Harding t.awson Associates

July 31/199C1Mr. Richa d lilubaugh ~

TAtlas Corporation-pago9-,

I The m~lts o'f tho data analysis are prosonted in Tablos 1 and 2 for the Utah and Atlas data,roJpoctively, Thoso tablos show the moan and varianco of the data as well as tlm number of .observations used in the data analysis. The upstmam and downstream results are prosented in tho -columns labolod "Up" and "Down", respectively 'Tho "t Stat" shown in tho tablos is the valuo from<

- standard statistical tables for this analysis based on tho degroos of froodom (df) end the confidoucolovul (95%) To tost tho hypothosts that the means of tho two data sots are equal, ono comparos tho"t Stat" value to olther the "t Critical ono-tail" or "t Critical two tall" valuo. Tho "t Critical ono-tail"

,

valuo is more ropmsontativo of how the data compams at the uppor and of the distribution and the "tCritical two. tail"is moro representativo of how the data comparos for tho total distdbution, if the "tStat" valuo~ is loss than olthor tho "I critical ono-tall" or "t critical two-tail" vaho, than thohypothosis is accepted (l.o., the means are equal) for that caso in which it occurs. If the "t Stat"value is gmator than olthor tho "t Critical ono-tall" or "t Critical two tail" valuo, than tlm hypothosts<

is rejocted (l.a., the means aru not equal) for that caso in which it occurs.

As shown in Tables 1 and 2, the "t. Stat" values aro always loss than oither tho *t Critical ono-tail" or"t Critical two-tail" valuos. Thus the data analysis ludicatos that the concentrations of constituontsin surfaco wator are statistically tho samo in the upstmam and downstroam locat;ons and cannot bodistinguishod from nach othor. Asido from specific ovents in which thoro may bo difforoncos inconcontrations of constituonts in surfaco wator at the upstmam and downstream locations, the dataanalysis indicatos that over timo tho offocts of the tailings pilo on the Colorado River outsido of tho

- mixing zono are negligible.

Detailed Evaluation of Mixing Zone Water Quality Data

Additional data on tho water quality of the mixhig zona adjacent to tho Atlas tallings pilo woro !collectod by the Stato of Utah on January 7,1997 during relatively low flow conditions (3,9110 cfs).Surfaco water samplos woro collectod upstream of the Atlas tallings pilo at the liighway 191 bridgeand downstream at ntno locations along the bank of the Colorado River. Sampling locationsextended approximatoly 12,090 foot downstream of the liighway 101 bridge. Samplo rusults for themajodty of constituonts aro shown graphically on the attached figuros. Closo ovaluation of thosographs and supporting data indicato that ammonia, nitreto, molybdonum, manganoso, uranium,gmss alpha, gross bota, and total dissolved solids concentrations am clovated abovo backgroundconcentrations adjacent to and downstream of tho tallings pilo. Of those constituonts, ammonia,nitrato, gross alpha, and gmss bota excond Stato of Utah surfaco water qurdity standards for aquaticwildlifo (UAC R317 2). It is our understanding that Stato of Utah aquatic wildlife str.ndards do not -

- exist for molybdonum, manganoso, uranlum, and total dissolved solids.

? Despita incmased concontrations of iron, ahiminum, and load downstream of the liighway 191bridge, wo have concluded that tbn tailings pilo is not a sourco of thoso constituonts to the mixingmono for tho following reasons:

.- - Cmundwater samplos from monitoring walls at the Atlas sito and gmundwater samplos colloctedby tho Stato of Utah immediately adjacont to the river in the "aroa of grmmdwater dischargo near- .j'Moab Wash", indicato that thoso motals aro not detocted or am datocted at concentrations muchlower than observod in the Colorado River.

1

.

=

.


July 31,1990Mr. Richard Illubaugh

. Atlas Corporationpago to

Samplo results for iron, aluminum, and load appear anomalously low at the liighway 191 bridge..

Closer ovaluation of analytical data collected by the Stato of Utah at this sampling location since1995 indicates a high amount of variability in samplo results for thoto metals possibly due tovariations in samplo filtration or preservation tochniques.

Pg. 34,4* Paragraph

This secton datos that tho mixing zono for all other contaminants has not boon characterized.Rocont data provided by the Stato of Utah providos information on the mixing zone for othercontaminants. As described earllor in this letter, additional mixing zono data woro collected by thoStato of Utah on January 7,1997 ut relatively low flow conditions (3,980 cfs). Closo ovaluation oftheso graphs and supporting data indicato that only ammonia, nitrato, molybdonum, manganoso,uranium, gross alpha, gross bota, and total dissolved solids concentrations are olevated abovobackground concentrations adjacent to and downstream of tho tallings pilo. Of thoso constituonts,ammonia, nitrato, gross alpha, and gross bota oxcond Stato of Utah surfaco water quality standardsfor aquatic wildlifo (UAC R317 2). It is our understanding that Stato of Utah aquatic wildlifestandards do not exist for molybdonum, manganoso, uranium, and total dissolved solids.

Pg.34,5 Paragraph

Th's paragraph refors to an inforrod proforential groundwater flow path to the Colorado River and an"carly wport" by Atlas which "suggestod loachato and smund waterflow awayfmm the tallings pilamay be uniformlydistributod across the shallow aquifor". Wo ato uncertain to which "carly Atlasreport" is being reforancod, but bolfovo groundwater contamination was assumed to be uniformlydistributed across the shallow aquifor to provido a " worst caso" estimato of groundwater dischargo tothe Colorado River. Similarly, the NRC in the Draft EIS,111ological Assossment, and tho supplomontto tho Diological Assessment, conservatively overestimated the amount of groundwater dischargo tothe Colorado River in their ovaluation of potential impacts to the Colorado River. Atlas recognizasthat variability in groundwater concentrations exist within tho shallow alluvial aquifer adjacent toth9 Colorado River but bollove that groundwater concontrations moasured in their Point ofComplianco well, Ah!M 2. located directly downgradiant of the tallings pilo, represents reasonablomaximum concontrations in groundwater discharging to the Colorado River. Further, Atlas iscommittod to working cooperatively with the NRC to resolvo any groundwater charactorizationissues in support of the development of a Croundwater Correctivo Action plan.

Pg. 34, Intensive Ammonia Sampling

Atlas recognizos concerns reganling ammonta concontrations in the Colorado River and iscommittod to mooting applicable standards for ammonia in tho Colorado River as part of theGrour.dwater Cormctivo_ Action plan. Ilowever, in tho development of the Groundwater CorrectiveAction plan, the following issues must be considorod relativo to ammonia:

A. Not all fonns of ammonia are of equivalont tcxicity to fish. Unionized amonia is by far themost toxic form. Data collected by the State of Utah represent measuromonts of total ammoniawhich includss both the ionized form (Nila) and the unionized form (Nil 4+). The proportions

*

*


July 31,1000 -Mr. Richard IllubaughAtlas CorporationPago 11

ofionized and unionized ammonia are controlled largely by temperature and pII. As a result,the offects of temperaturo and pli changos in the river and the resultant proportions of ammoniamust bo considered when ovaluating toxicity to fish,

11. Ammonia is converted to nitrato in an acrobic aquatic enviromnont such as the Colorado Ufvo .Consoquently, incromontal increases in ammonia concentration downstream of the mixing zonoare likoly insignificant.

C. Ammonia is not present at lovels of concern during periods of high river flows. Consequently,ammonta is not prosent at lovels of concern when the most sensitivo life stages of (larval) listedfishes may be adrift in the river. Data collected by Atlas during high flow conditions on May 22,1997 indicatos that ammonia is not present in detectablo concentrations in the mixing zono

'during periods of high river flow when larval fish could be prosent.

D. Data on tho toxicity of ammonia to fish am based largely on bloassay results which exposed fishto ammonia over a period of 00 hours (4 days). Ilased on an estimated flow velocity of 0.85 footpor second in the Colorado River under mean flow conditions, the residence time of a larval fishin tho mixing zone would be approximately 3 hours. This conservatively assumes that themixing zono extonds downstream 8,000 foot and the larval fish drifts through the entire longth ofthe mixing zona.

It Ammonia has also boon detected upstream of the tailings pilo. Water quality data collected bythe Stato of Utah on January 7,1997 indicated dissolved ammonia concentrations of 0.095 mg/lat the liighway 191 bridgo located about 1 milo upstroam of the tailings pilo. Water quality datafrom the USGS gaging station near Cisco, Utah, located more than 20 miles upstream of Moab,also indicato the prosonco of ammonia. Consequently, other anthropogonic sources of ammoniain the Colorado River must be considorod when ovaluating the potential affects of ammonia inthe Colorado Rivor.

P s. 35 38 River Sediment and Fish Tissuu8

Thoso sections of the DilO conclude that river sediment and fish tissuo data collected by the RVSand Atlas am inconclusivo. Atlas agrees that thoso data are inconclusive relativo to demonatratingimpacts to the Colorado River ocosystem from the Atlas tailings pilo, The best scientific andcommercial data availablo demonstrato that thoro is no definitivo relationship betwoon the Atlastailings pilo and measured concontrations of various chomical constituonts in river sediment andfish tissuo. Tho D110 citos the lack of consistoney in the collection and analysis of samplos are causofor inconsistoney in data results thus invalidating any comparison of data sets. Ilowever, the RYSfails to acknowledge that they collected samplos on two different occasions (April 1995 andSeptember 1990) using their own sampling protocols and laboratories. Consequently, the two RYSdata sots should, at a minimum, be comparablo.

Tablos 5 and 0 in the D110 compara mean sedimont and fish tissuo concentrations upstream anddownstream of tallings pilo for throo sampling ovenis in the Colorado River. Thia simplocomparison of moan concentrations is used in support of the RVS assertion that the Atlas tailingspilo is affecthig sedimont quality and fish tissuo body burdons in the Colorado River despite the

. . ~ ~ -- . ._-- . - - -_- . - .. - - - . ,~ -. _- - . -

%

. s-

Harding Lawson Associa'tes ~

} july 31,1996 _ ''

' Mr. Richard Blubaugh? Atlas Corporation: Page 12 -

t

carlier statomont that the data are inconclusivo. Atlas bollovos that the simplo comparison of meanconcentrations of chemical constituonts in sodiments and fish tissuo upstream and downstream ofthe tailings pilo is inappropriato in light of the following:

_

_e - Tho simplo comparison of mean concentrations in DB0 Tables 5 and 6 ignoms other potentialanthropogonic and naturally occurring sourcos of chomical constituonts to river and fish tissuodata. Consoquently, mpresentativo backgmund concentrations must bo established in riversodiment and fish tissuo beforo inemmental environmental effocts from the Atlas tailings pilocan bo dotorminod.

. A simplo comparison of mean concontrations upstream and downstream is not a statisticallyvalid method to compara two samplo populations, particularly when other sources of

' contamination, such as Court flouso Wash and Mill Crook, contributo chomical constituents to' the Colorado Rivor in tho vicinity of cortain samplo locations. As shown on Tablos 5 and 6 in

the Ullo, the standard doviation around the mean values varios considorably. Consoquently, a-

valid statistical comparison must bo performod to detonnino if tho two populations arostatistically uniquo. III.A has performed a valid statistical comparison as describod below:;

Statistical Evaluation of River Sediment Data,

..

An analysis of sediment data for samplos collected by FWS in April 1995 and Atlas in May 1995 wasperformed to ascertain whethor thoro wem notablo differences in concontrations of clmmical'

constituonts in the sedimont samplos collected in the Colorado River at locations upstmam anddownstroam of the Atlas tailings pilo. _Upstmam locations consisted oflocations numbered 1through 3 and downstream locations consisted oflocations numborod 4 through 15. Data from eac)location was combined into an " upstream population" and a " downstream population".

'

Furthormoru, data used for this analysis consisted of analytical results for which thoro were at leasttwo detoctions of the chemical constituont at the combined upstream locations and at least twodetections of the chemical constituont at the combinod downstmam locations. For any

- 'concontrations that woro reported below the reporting ilmit, the value of the reporting limit wasusod in the analysis. As with tho surfaco water data, sediment data from thoso locations woro.

- processed using the Microsoft Excel data analysis program for the t-test assuming unequal variancesin tho data. Tho t tost was also performed with tho hypothosis that 'ho differenco betwoon the meansof the data was zoro at tho 95 porcont confidence loveli

The twults of tlm data analysis am presented in Tablos 3 and 4 for FWS and Atlas data, respectively.Those tablos aro set up identical to Tablos 1 and 2 described above. As shown in Table 3, thomajority of tho "t Stat" values am loss than e!!hur tho "t Critical ono-tail" or "t Critical two tail"-

' values, For thoso casos in which the "t Stat" values aro greater than olthor the "t Critical ono tail" or"t Critical two-tail" values, tho differenco in means to attributed to the concentrations of chemicalconstituonts in the upstream sodiments being greator than the concontrations of chemicalconstituonts in the downstream sodimonts. As shown in Tablo 4, the "t-Stat". values are always lossthan olthor tho *t Critical ono-tail" or "t Critical two-tail" values. Thus the data analysis indicatos-

|.

,

p

4

y- 9-gg,r e .g. to.,-r e y- ygn+- g- --m,..- y.-- g +gy ,4.-- # .- - - -- - - vv se,.tyt, * , , w

- . . _ . . . _ _ . . _ _ _ .___ _ - _ _ . _ _ . _ ___

w

es

h

HaMing Lawson Associates

. July 31,1990 -Mr. Richard IllubaughAtlas Corporation :

Pago 13

that the concontr-tions of constituonts in sodimoni are statistically the same in the upstream anddownstream sodiments and cannot be diatinguished from each ottwr, Thoroforo, the statomont inthe DilO that " numerous paramotors showod increases in tho sediment downstream of the tailingspilo"is misloading and unroprosentativo of the best scientific and commerciai data availablo.;

In addition Atlas provided the 13VS with an ovaluation of spatial trends in river sodimont and fishtissuo concontrations in a transmittal dated October 1,1990 (IlhA,1990a). This ovaluation consistedof graphical mpresentations of the April 1995 samplo data collected by the 13VS and May 1995 data

; collected by Atlas. This ovaluation indicated no definitivo relationship betwoon the Atlas tallings' pilo and river sedimont and fish tissuo data and also considorod potential chomical contributionsfrom other drainago features (l.a., Court ilouso Wash and Mill Cn,ok) into the Colorado River both

'

upstream and downstream of the tailings pilo. Apparently,13VS may not have considorod thoso dataduring the preparation of the DilO.

Page 38 and 30, Scott M, Matheson Wetlands Preserve

This soction aplios that the Scott M. Mathoson Wollands Proservo is contaminated with traco'

metals abovo stato standards for aquatic lifo from local groundwater dischargo. This section ismisloading becausa: 1) it does not acknowledgo that thoso troco metals are naturally occurring in the:

;~

bedrock aquifors in the uppor Colorado River drainago basin, and 2) it implies that naturallyoccurring constituents represent contamination.

Page 39 Permanent Loss of Floodplain liabitat

This soction states the proposed action will result in the permanent loss of floodplain habitat alongthe Colcrado River. This statouent is misloading because the majority of the 100 year floodplaincurrently occupied by the Atlas tallings pilo would not be considered suitablo habitat for theColorado River listad fishos even if tho tailings pilo was not present at its current location. As statedon pago 17 of the Dilo, designated critical habitat for the Colorado River listed fishes consists ofthoso portions of the 100 year floodplain that havo the primary constituont olomonts of water,physical habitat, and biological environment. A key component to the physical habitat olomont isthe prosonco of backwater habitats in the too-year floodplain. Aeria1 photographs of the Atlas sito

! prior tc the construction of the tallings pilo indicato that the Atlas tailings sito does not occupysuitablo backwater habitats for the Colorado River listed fishes.

' Page 39, Reconfiguration of Moab Wash.

This section of the DilO expressos concerns regarding: 1) a temporary increaso in sedimentationassociated with the proposed action, and 2) the loss of a small backwater area at the mouth of MoabWash. In addition, the DilO statos that the Iliological Assessment did not detail the rock too/ apronalong the too of tlm omhankment adjacent to Moab Wash,

~

i First, Atlas acknowledges that somo incroated sedimentation may occur as the result on tho'- proposed action despita plans to implomont best managomont practicos to control erosion.

,

llowever, this potential short term increase in sedimentation is small in comparison to potential

1

:

,~

- s

,- o e + a v - ~ ,, - , ,n.

--. .

.

o


July 31,1000hir. Richard IllubaughAtlas CorporationPago 14

|

sodimentation associated with the relocation of the tailings pile as proposed by the FWS. As .tatedearlier in this lottor, a Probablo hiaximum Storm ovent during the proposed relocation of the tallings ,

pilo could potentially releaso significant vo:umos of sodimondladen contaminated water. !l

Socond, Atlas acknowlodges that relocation of hloab Wash willlikely result in the olimination of a i

small backwater area at the mouth of hioab Wash. Ilowever, the propoe.od Atlas Roclamation Planwill rostom the location of hioab Wash to its original location ami improvo conditions to support thedevolepment of another backwater habitat for the Colorado River listed fishes. This restored habitatwill bo of substantially higher quality than habitat cununtly existing at tho mouth of hioab Wash.

Third, the possibility of tallings impoundment crosion from hioab Wash has boon thoroughlyevaluated and detallod by NRC as part of the proposed action. Atlas conducted a study of thoorosivo capability of the Colorado River and hioab Wash on the tailings impoundment (hfussetterEngineering, M94 and Smith Technology,1990). The Draft EIS clearly describos and illustratos abutiod rockwall along the too of the embankmont adjacent to the current location of hioab Wash.Given that tho Iliological Assossmont is an appendix to the Draft EIS it is clear that NRC consideredthe buried rockwall along hioab Wash as part of the proposed action.

In addition, Atlas submittod the Final Reclamation Plan (Smith Technology,1990) to the NRC inOctobor,1990. This document contains a comploto description of tailings impotmdmont crosionprotoction features to be constructed as part of the Atlas roclamation plan. This document wasreferenced in tho supplomont to thu liiological Assessment pmpared by NRC thus providing furtherevidenco that NRC had considorod crosion protection featun.a along hioab Wash in both theIliological Assossmont and the supplomont to the Iliological Assessment. Consequently, the FWS'assortion that tallings impoundment crosion from hioah Wash has not been considorod by NRC aspart of the proposed action is clearly unfoundod.

Pg. 40, Scott M. h1athoson Wetlands Preserve

The IMS states that it cannot discount possiblo impacts to the Scott ht, hiatheson Wotlands Preservogiven a controversy over the potential for contaminated groundwater to now from the Atlas tailingspilo to tho Wotlands Prosorvo. The Department of Interior. Offico of Environmental Policy andComplianco lottor dated htarch,1995 referenced in tho DB0 described a groundwater flow pathwaythat is contradicted by widoly accepted concepts in groundwater hydrology. Groundwaterhydmlogists with the USGS. USEPA, NRC, and IILA, all agroo that the thoro is no pou :tial forgroundwater flow from the Atlas tailings pilo to the Scott hl. hiathoson Wetlands Prosorvo. Excorptsimm lotters rocoived from the USGS and the USEPA on this issuo are providad below:

Excerpt from USEPA Lottor dated November 10,1990

"1ho swtor quality data prosented by fila for the ama naar the mill sito loads us to conclude that thewator in the Scott Mathoson Wotlands Prosorvo appanntly has not boon influenced byloachatoleaving to mill tailings site. Tho water quality signatures of samplosfrom walls within the wetlandspnsono aw typical of either river water or brinos from the top of the Paradox Salt Unit which

' underlios the presono and are materially difforont than the unter quality signatures ofground wator

o

o


July 31,1990Mr, Richard IllubaughAtlas Corporationpage 15

near the mill sito. Further, the water lovols during lowflo:v periods (as correctedfor densitydiffonncos) Indicato Ihat dinction ofswundflow is towards the riverfrom both the mill sito andfwm

. the wollands pmsorvo."

lixcerpt from USGS 1,ottor dated January 30,1997

'It is our conclusion, that under the pwsont conditions, thoto is not potontialfor shallow swund watoron the north sido of the Colowdo liiver to dischargo to the wollands on the south sido of the ziver. Alloxisting infarrnallon and data, as wall as the accepted concept of the Colorado Riverfunctior!ng as aRegional dwin, support this conclusion It would wquire a monumental alloration in the existingground water system to croato a situothn that would causo shallow gwund waterfrom bancath thetailingn to movo under the river and ditchargo into ilm Pwsvrvo. Such an alteration of the system isnot impossible given the engincoring capability of humans, or when couched m terms ofgeologic time,but it is highly impwbable. In addition, an allomtion in the swund water sysicm of this proportion

- would, in all filollhood, climinato the wollands ~

In addition, this section of the DilO states that contaminants in the Scott M. Mathoson WetlandsProsorvo am possibly related to airborno tailings constituonts and that impacts to the Prosorvo havenot boon addmssod as part of the proposed action. Tho DilO should be considor an analysis ofpotential offocts from the proposed action not from existing conditions. In responso to this assortionit is important to noto that thoro is no evidonco to suggest that tho Scott M. Mathoson Wotlandsprosorvo is contaminatod. As stated earlier in this lotter, the more prosonco of naturally-occurringchomical constituents in groundwater or surfaco water does not indicato contamination.

Wind blown transport of tallings constituents to the Scott M. Mathoson Wollands Proservo is highlyunlikely given that: 1) wind blown transport processos generally do not movo sodiment across openbodios of water, and 2) the Wotlands Prosorvo is located east of the tailings pilo whoroas theprodominant wind direction is to the wast. Also, the potential for wind blown or airborno transportof tailings constituonts during roclamation was addressed by NRC as part of the proposed action(NRC,1996).

Pg. 41, Ability of the Tallings Pilo Cap to Indefinitely Isolato the Contaminated Tallings

This section of the DIlO expressos concerns about tho offects of high stago river flows on the tailingspilo and tho offects of radon gas on aquatic wildlife as well as the offects of a hypothotical roloaso of1,9 million matric tons of tailings into the Colorado River over a 10-hour period. In addition, theDIlO states that ilm lifological Assessment prepared by NRC did not address rodent burrowing intotho tailings pilo and plant uptako of radioactivity,

Thoso issues havo boon adoquately addressed by NRC in the Dmft EIS, the Illological Assessment,and supplomont to the Iliological Assessment. Atlas has provtled the FWS with water quality datadomondrating that groundwater concentrations in shallow alluvial aquifer actually decreaso as theresult of bank storago during high stago river flows. Consequently, water quality in the shallowaquifor adjacent to tho tailings pile is actually improved by high river stago flows. Further,exposures of aquatic wildlife to radon gas from the tailings pilo during flooding events will benegligible becausm 1) the sides of the tailings pile will be covered with more than 7 foot of clean soil

o

o

Harding 1.awson Associates

July 31,1990hir. l(ichard IllubaughAtlas CorporationPago 10

and a rock snuor layer thus proventing the aquatic wildlifo from exposure to thu tallings,2) theaquatic organisms would likely bo in the river adjacent to the tallings pilo for only short periods oftimo because of high river flow and the relativo short duration of flooding ovents, and,3) radon gaswould not ponotrato the flood waters thorofore tho ionizing radiation would not reach aquaticwildlifo.

In addition, the proposed roclamation plan contains features to provent burrowing rodonts and plantuptako of radioactivity. Thoso features includo a rock annor 4 inchos thick on the top of the tailingspilo and 0 inches thick on tho ombankmonts. On the tailings embankmonts, the total coverthicknoss will be more than a foot, inclusivo of the rock annor, filter raatorial, and borrow soil

.

layers. Although the rock armor is designed to discourago plant growth, somo voluntoor vogotationmay occur. Such vogotation will most likely bo shallow-rooted grassos that will not ponotrato thecover matorials (1.o., rock and borrow soll) overlying the clay radon barrior. Tho rock annor will alsoact to discourago rodonts from burrowing into tho underlying cover material and radon barrior). Inaddition, the tailings pilo cover will be under the survoillanco and long term care of Atlas untililconso tonnination at which timo the fodoral government will be responsiblo for periodicinspections and maintenanco of the tailings pilo cover in porpotuity.

Pg. 43, Leaching of Tailings Pilo Constituents into the Colorado River

This soction of the Dilo citos concerns about the minimization of potential impacts from tailingsh.achatos on water quality in the shallow alluvial aquifor and tho Colorado River. It appears that incortain instancos, tho ITVS misapplios data from tho Scott hi. hiathoson Wotlands Prosorvo, locatedacross the Colorado River, in an attornpt to demonstrate that cortain trace olomonts in tho tailingspilo aro affecting wotor quality in the Colorado River. As discussed earlier in this lottor,it isinappropriato to uso water quality data from the Scott hl. hiatheson Wetlands Prosorve to ovaluatopotential impacts of the tailings pilo en the Colorado River for the following reasons:

Thoto la no potential for grotmdwater flow from the Atlas tailings pilo to tho Scott hi hiatheson.

Wollands Prosorvo. Groundwater hydrologists with the USGS, USEPA, and NRC agroo with thisconclusion as described earlier in this lottor.

Wator quality data in Scott hl. hiathoson Wollands Prosorvo is largely influenced by naturally-.

occurring chomical constituents dischargod to the wetlands from bedroci aquifors.

In addition, the dotalled ovaluation of surfaco water data collected by Atlas and tho Stato of Utahindicatos that a number of water quality paramotors cited by ITVS am not affecting water quality inthe Colnrado Rivor. Specifically, ITVS assortions regarding potential contributions of cadmium,copper, iron, load, manganoso, solonium, and zine to the Colorado River from tho tailings piloappear to ho unfounded as discussed earlier in this lotter.

Pg. 53., Conclusion

This section of the DBC concludos that "imptomontation of the proposed action is likely to foopardizo- the continued oxistance of the Colorado squanfish, razorback suckor, humpback chub, and bonytailch ub . . . ".

_

4

O


July 31,1990Mr. Richard illubaughAtlas CorporationPago 17

The rationalo for tho inclusion of the humpback chub and bonytail chub in this conclusion isparticularly unclear given that: 1) thoso spectos are likely not present in the Colorado River near theAtlas sito as stated on pago 30 of the DilO, and 2) the Colorado River in tho vicinity of the Atlas sitohas not boon designatod as critical habitat for thoso spocios. As doscribed in this lettor, the rationatofor tho abovo conclusion is not supported by the infonnation containod in the Dilo and is notsupported by the best scientific and commercial data available.

Closing

lilA welcomes the opportunity to discuss our comments with you, the IMS, and NRC at yourroquest. If you have any questions about iho information prosented horoin, please do not hesitato tocontact any of the undersignod at (303) 292 5305.

Sincoroly,

llARp NG IAWSON. ASSOCIATES

\qu . nt I., Ohland

Prfficipal liydji;oologist/

UU {{~ y/

firian .aFlammo n

Princihal Goochemist

')o *~ 4 yryvv'

obtp ,, Wogryzn' ~U V ~

Tssociato Environmental Scientist

Gl,O/llDl/JGW/jmdhocmuloc

cc: Tony Thompson - Shaw Pittman, Potts, & Trowbridge

Attachmonts:

Reforonco ListTablo 1: Stato of Utah Surfuco Water Data (5/95 - 7/90), Comparison of hinansTablo 2- Atlas Surfaco Water Data (3/81 - 10/96). Comparison of hioansTablo 3: US Fish and Wildlife Sodiment Data (4/95), Comparison of NicansTablo 4: Atlas Sodiment Data (5/95), Comparison of hioansFigums (c): Stato of Utah Colorado River Sampling, January 7,1997 Sampling Ever:t

,. . -- . . -.~ , , . . _ . . . . - . ~ . . - . - - . ~ -~ ,-

a.

-p [

.

Harding Lawsoo Associates -J

.y-

: REFERENCE LIST i*-

. _

u _.

111anchard, P.JJ 1990. Ground Water Conditions in the Grand County Area, Utah, with emphasis on ?the Mill Crock-Spanish Valley Area, Stato of Utah, Dopartmont of Natural Resources TechnicalPublication No.100.

Ilutler, ot.al.,1990. Dotal!cd Study of Solonium and Other Constituents in Wator, Ilottom Sodimont,..+Soil Alfalfa, and lilota As.sociated with irrigation Drainage in the Uncompaghro Project Area and in

. the Contral Valley, West-Contral Colorado,1991 1993, U.S. Coological Survoy Watordiosources- Investigations Report 90-4138.

Canonfo Environmontal,1994. NRC TechnicalInformation Roquest, Atlas Corporation Ground ,

4- _. Water Correctivo Action Plan, Uranium Mill and Tallings Disposal Area, July.,

Cooper, D.J.~ and C. Sovern,1994. ' Ecological Characteristics of Wetlands at tho Moab blough, Moab,~ Utah Publication, February.

.

- FWS,1994. ' Draf t Endangorod Spocios Consultation llandbook (730 FW 4A), Proceduros forConductJng Socilon 7 Consultations and Conferences, U.S Fish and Wildlife '', vico, November.

,

llLA '1990a. Lottor to NRC dated October 1,1990.:

lli.A 1996b. Transmittal to FWS and NRC dated October,17,1990.

Mussottor Enginnoring 1994. Goomorphic,Ilydraulic, and Latoral Migration Characteristics of theCobrado River, Moab, Utah, Job No. 94-02, prepared for Canonio Environmental Services Corp. andAtlas Corporation, May.

.. NRC,1990. Draft Environmentalimpact Statomont Rolated to Roclamation of the Uranium MillTailings at the Atlas Sito, Moab, Utah, NUREG-1531, January.

NRC,1997. Final Tacimical Evaluation _Roport for the Proposed Roylsed Roclamation Plan for the-

.

Atlas Corporation Moab Mill; Sourco Matorial Licenso No. SUA 917, March.r

Smith Technology Corporation,1990. Final Roclamation Plan, Atlas Corporation Uranium Mill and[ Tailings Disposal Area, Octobor.

i *,

; s ,

y

-

"

m.,

: ,

j ..

-l',

^ ,: . .,n_. .| ,

- _ . - _ _ _ - -

< , , ,

_ -

* *

*

TmMr 1: Sense at Utah murence Wmeer Dean (S95 -7/M)r . L at Memme

Ahmedesm (msg 4 dimeshed h(migt enemi Ammmands (smg4 W,

Up Deruse Up Domar _ Up DeaurMean 0.05 683333 0 0416 Mene 3 22425 35106 Mena 0.1032 ' 03354Vanance 0 00053837 0 0004653 Venance 5327186 7.735387 Vansece 0 006425 0.108335 IObservations 6 5 Observanons 4 5 Observenons 5 5flypotnesued Mene Dderence 0 HyAa Mena Diflerence 0 Hjf Men Deerence O

*

C 9 df 7 df 4Stat 0.745813005 : Sat -0.16732 t Stat 1.52605

ITT<-t) oneemd 0.237404044 f\ f<-t)ene-emil 0435925 P(T<=t) one emil 0.100849Cnecal ene-east 1.833113856 :Cntsca8 W I.894578 t Crocrieme emil 2.131846 ,

P(T<-t) two4 ant 0474808088 ITT<-s) eW 087185 P(T<-t)tweer2 020I698 |

t Cnecal two4 mil 2 262158887 t Crmcan tweenit 2 364623 t Cracal eme eas7 2.776451-

Berhamn fangD dimmehed Barham (seg4 emeal Gream Alpha (yG4dhmatoedUp Douer Up Downe Up Dower

Mena 0.059642857 0 072333333 Meas 0.0955 0235 Mene 6.081818 833Vansace 0.000139393 0 001132667 Vanance 0 001242 0.111134 Venance 18.05364 45.13344Obser==tsons 7 6 Observations 4 5 Observenees 11- 10IlyAa Mena Difference 0 HrAa Mean Dderence 0 IL " " Mesa Ddkrence 0df 6 of 4 of 15t Stat 4 878468137 : Stat 4.92923 tSamt 4.90622ITT<=t) one tad 0 206740773 P(T<-t)one4ad 0202623 P(T<-t)one emit 0.189574

"

Cntical one-teil I.943180905 t Cnticalone-emil 2.131846 t Cnacal one emil .1.753051P(T<-t) two-tad 0413481545 P(T<=t)two4mit 0.405367 ITT<-t) tweemd 0379148Cnacal te+ tail 2A4691364I t Cnucal tW 2.776451 t Crecal two4mit 2.131451

Crmme Bres (pOS dheshed lean (ame@ dimeshed !ress (magg emealUp Downe Up Dower Up Downe

Meaa 1031818182 10.97 Mean 0 053 0.0612 Mama 2 615 2396Vanence 0.613636364 4.809 Venance 0.001715 0.00323 Venance 7.400367 6.92413Observations 11 10 Observmboes 7 6 Obmarvenmas 4 5Ilypeshesund Man Dderence 0 Ilypothesued Mean Dderen6e 0 Hypeehneemd Mems Ddisream 0 !df II df 9 df 6: Stet -0.889747327 tStat 4 29299 tStat 0.121762ITTc-t) one4ad 0.1 % 322389 P(T<=t) one-taii 0 388088 P(T<-t) eme-tail 0.453532

,

t Ci:icalone-tad 1.795883691 t Crmcalone-emil 1.833114 t Cnecal o_ne4mit 1.943181,

ITT<-t) two-tad 0 392644777 P(T<-t) two-tal 0.776176 P(T<-t) tweimil 0.907063 ;

,

t Cnbeal two-tail 2 200986273 Cntical two ted 2.262159 :Cracal tweemit 2.446914

Atl._IdftA M men WW seep AM f*ge 1 O

_ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ __. ._ __- __ .___ . , , , . , -

. . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _

* *

*

TeMe 1: Steer of Uemb Serface Wmeer Dean (5/95 -7/96)c , afMeans'

lead (engT)dheelved Isod (msg 4) eseal P. (smg9)esamesedUp Douse Up Douse _ Up Deuse

Mean 0003837143 0.003 Mean 000775 0.007 Mene 22.16 25.57Vansece 5.14286E46 2.71051E 21 Venance 1.83E45 1.95E-05 Vanesce 63.18267 119.7934Observatican 7 6 C' --. A 4 5 Obserseeines no 10Hypothesized Mama Dillerence 0 Hypothesued Mean Dderence 0 H,,

"" Meme Deerence 0

of 6 of 7 df 16 '

* Sist I t Seas 02578I1 t Samt 4.79718ITT<-1) oseasil 0377958842 ftT<*t) coo-east 04015t2 P(T<*t) usHail 0218508t Cntical oeHasl I.943180905 t Cntical enMail 1.894578 t Cnecal oneemil 1.745884

. ITT<=t)twend 0355917684 P(T<=t)teo4 mil 0.803963 P(T<=t) tweemil d437017: Cnescal twetail 2.444913641 : Cnecal two emil 2 364623 t Cnecal two-emil 2.I19905

Mangsmane(ad namelved M. . (msg /I) seema " " " , " " (msg 4)wUp Douse Up Douse Up Deuse

Mean 0.013957143 0.032683333 Mena 0.1115 0.123 Mona 0.00598 001154Venance 0 000140946 0 00118617 Venance 0.010394 0.019147 Vanmace 3.9E46 0.000148 '

Observessnes 7 6 Observations 4 5 Obmarveemes 5 5Ilywebesized Meen Difference 0 11 -. 1 ' _" Mean Dderence 0 Hypothesamed Meme Difference 0'3

U 6 df 7 df 4Stat .I.268792131 1 Stat -0.14344 t Stat -1.00805

ITT<-t)onMail 0.125757099 P(T<-t) one-tad 0.444992 P(T< t)ceHeil 0.18523: Cntical coo-tad I.943180905 t Cnacal enMad 1.894578 t CnecalceMail 2.131846P(T<-t) tweted 0 151514198 P(T<=t) two-tail 0.889955 P(T<=t)two emit 0 37046 :1 CrMcal two-tad 2.446913641 Cdtical two-ted 2 364623 t Cnescal tweemit 2.776451

M2," ' _ (smg4) estal Nitrate (smg4)dimmelved Selmsdamm (smWI) assolvedUp Douw Up Deuse Up Deuse

Mean 0.006 - 0.0055 Mean 0386 0.496 Mama 0 002829 0.002467 iVariance 8E46 4.5F 06 Vanance 0,00383 0.02273 Vanesee 1.41E46 9 87E47Observenons 2 2 Observations :p 5 Obmarvanons 7' 6!!ypothesszed Mean Difference 0 IIw AW Mean thfierence 0 H,, - - Meme Ddurence o

,

df 2 df 5 df II s

i t Stat 02 Sant -1.50926 t Stat 0.598815I P(T<-t)one ted 0.429985996 P(T<*t)oness! 0.095806 ITT<-t)coe-emil G280713 ,

t Cntical one-ted 2.91998731 1 Cntical one-tait 2.015049 t Cnment ceMail I195884| P(T<=t) two-tad 0859971992 P(T<-t) two emil 0.191611 P(T<M) two-amil 0.561425! t Cntical two tail 4 302655725 t Cnhcal two tail 2.570578 t Cnencal two emil 2 200956

,

|

I|

! = . = - -nm i.* m. % 2.ts *

_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . ._

. _ _ . . . . - _ _ _

'

:et+ .

.

TeMe 1: Senee of Utah Surisce Weser Does (595 - 7/96)C , _ et Menas

$stadusa (eng4) emeal Ursedums (pCM) estal Zhme(og )Wg

Up Utren Up Dm Up DomarMene . 0 002 0.0022 Mean 4.077773 63375 Mona 0.03 0.032733

' Vanence 0.000002 OD000012 Venance 4.154444 47.C79E2 Vennece 0 4.4tE45Obsensteens 4 5 Otarvatoes 9 2 Obsenemoes 7 6Ilypotheaemed Mean Defkrence o ifypothemmed Mean Dif5mece 0 Hg " _---! Mean Dderesee OC. 6 df 8 K $t Seat -0 132495277 tStar -0.39675 t Seat -1P(T<=t)omenil 0 411940458 P(T<-t) onHeit 0.199018 P(T<-t)eeMail 0.181609:Cnacet coe es I 1.943190995 CrecaleeHeil 1.859548 t Cnhcalcue4md 2.015049P(T<*t) twMed 0.823880917 INT <=t) twMad 0396036 P(T<-t)tuo4 mil 0363217:Crieical twMed 2.446913641 : Cracal two4 mil 2 306006 t Crecelt= M ast 2.570573

'Ihne (smyT) seemi

09 Dom,,

Mean 0 043075 0 04204Vanance 0.000585223 0.00027220sObsc vseems 4 5flypothesized Mean Di5cresce Odf 5tStat 0.073049219P(T<=t) couad 0.472299585t Cruscaloneail 2.015049176

ITT<-t) t= Mad 0.944599169t Critical twMad 2.570577635

i

L

h

ASLJPH2 MA meme ss endeN Be# AM PugsIcf 3

- . _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ __- . , _ . _

.

* e

li

e; Table 2: Asian Surface Weeee Dean (3/31. ItM)( C- , " _. et Meses.

Ammmmeda (seg9)essolved Arsenic eng%g)Moselved Coppee (smgT) silmmsteedtip ikwer Up Denner Up Ekumer

Mena 0.083333333 0.24 Mean 0 021 0.020828 Mene 0 021464 0.019429Vanance 0.000833333 0.0228 Vansace 0.00144 0.001555 Venance 0 000868 0.000716Ct -.- w 3 3 Observations 28 29 Observenons 21 28

! IlypcabezaJ Mena Dderence 0 ifypodemzed Menn Dahm 0 IIAM Meen Ddlerance 0,

di 2 of 55 of 54' ' t Stat -1.765122051 tStat 0.016823 t Sese 0.2* "33

P(T<-t) one tad 0,109793873 P(T<-t)oneasil 0.493319 P(Te-t)one teel 0393814t Cntxal one-tail 2.91998731 :Crmcal oecamil I.673034 t Cnexalone.end 1.673566P(T<-t) two4ad 0.219587746 ITT<-t) twc> tail 0.986638 P(T<-t) ti+4mit 0.787629

Crecal two-tad 4 302655725 t Cnecal tm+end 2.004044 t Cnecal tw+ tad 2 604881

Iren(msgT)damelved Mempassene (eng/I) enemtved Niermee(sug4) ammelvedUp Dovre Up Dovre Up - Deuse

Mean 8 812 6.171625 Mean 0.176688 0.127765 Mess 1.116133 1.017833Vanance 593.8812836 285.8880715 Vanance 0.178248 0.082681 Vansace 2.137099 0 841665CL-. .as 15 16 Observations 16 17 Otruervatacas 30 30 ;

,

Ilypothenzed Mean Difference 0 11ypothenzed Mean DMerence 0 U- AM Mean Dd5srence O,df 25 df 26 of 49t Stat 0348323248 tStat 0386719 t Sant 0 311958ITT<=t) one-tad 0 365256807 P(T<-t) onertad 0 351055 P(T<=t)onertant 0 378198: Crmcal onedail 1.708140189 Crmcal one4ad 1.7C%I6 t Cnecal one-tail I.676551P(T<-t) tu+ tad 0.730513614 P(T<-t) tueted 0.702111 P(T<-t) twc>end 0.756396Critical tuossal 2.05953711 t Cntical two tad 2.055531 t Cnecal t= creed 2 009574

'ledoniums fung 4) dimmeeved tiranham (mag 4) dhmalvedUp Dowre Up Downe

Mean 0.051551724 0.0501 Mena 0.005314 0350473Variance 0.016551399 0.016045679 Vanance 4.76FA6 1286274C L ;.:::s 29 30 Observations 9 11Ilypothesired Mean Ddference 0 flypoeemzed Mean Ddference 0df 57 of toa Stat 0.043660257 t Stat -1.00936P(T<-t)one-tail 0.482663905 P(T<-t)one. sad 0.1683t Critical one-tail 1.672028702 t Cntscal one. tad 1.812462P(T<-t) two-tad 0 %532781I P(T<-t) two esil 03366

Crmcal two-tad 2.002466317 Cntical twcread 2.2281.29

un uns un ..nwnem esw as rey t et t

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - - - - . - - . --

.. .. . . . . - . . . .

o

.

O

TaWe 3: US ndi med inese h Data (495)C , L et Memme

Ahambene (seg%g) Arande (ag%g) _Bartant(msg %g)Up Dome Up Dmme Up Douw

Mene 452039 29883 % Mean 3.420667 2.428222 Mena 9897 M70244Vanance 276210fi 2592904 Vanance 0.077154 2.012901 Vanance 290.7317 942.9779 *

Obsenarbas 3 9 Observatsons 3 9 Obearvaames 3 9Hypahemund Mesa DMence o flypoehaszed h Dderence 0 ::u " * Mama Ddenece 0df 10 df 9 df 7

,

tSeat 2.48499 :Stan 1.987J79 tSeat 2.149109P(T<-t) coe-tail 0.016133 P(T<-t) ceHeel 0.039063 P(T<-t)eme4md 0 034352 |t Critical oeHail 1.812462 t Cnecal one-end 1.833114 t CnecalemHad 1.894578

iP(T<-t) two end 0 032266 ITT<-t) twenil 0.078126 P(T<.=t)tw e ed 0.068704 '-

tCnnemitw Mad 2 228139 t C.aical two amit 2.262159 t Cnescal tweed 2.364623

Cadsahume(eng%g) Garnadema (ag4ng) Capper (eg%g)Up Dowen Up Douse Up Domme

Mean 0.659333 0 428222 ,Mean 1545333 4 066 Mene 11.10667 8203667Vanence 0.013386 0.022093 Venance 0.429901 3.494723 Vennece 3.842633 15.56972Observances 3 9 Obsentions 3 9 Obammasons 3 9ff,4 M Mena Difference 0 HyAM Mme Ddmace 0 H,, " - Mesa Ddersece 0

"

df 4 df 10 df 8t Seat 2.775842 tStat 2.029018 t Seat 1.673026P(Tc-1) onMad 0.024939 P(T<-t) one-tail 0.034 % PU<-t)eeweil 0.06643: CnticalonMail 2.131846 : Cnticalensail 1.812462 t Cnecal ceHeil 1.859548P(T<-t)two tail 0 049878 P(T<-t) twenil 0.069919 P(To t)two-ted 0.13296t Cntical tmwtail 2.776451 : Cntical tweed 2.228139 : Cnecal t= Heil 2 306006

Irma (ame%g) Isad (meta) M. (ung%g)i

Up Dome Up Downe Up Down |

,

Mean i165836 7353 097 Mean 93 82333 8.094444 Mame 7065398 7298 839'

Vanance 1053091 12921202 Venance 0.687886 3.404753 Venmece 1653398 26169262. 'Observations 3 9 C' - A s 3 9 Obsmetsons 3 9 '

ily4M Mean Dderence 0 Ilypothesszed Mesa Dderence 0 Hypoebesized Mean Dderence 0 |df 10 of 8 df to*

* Stat 3.22101 tStat 1.652224 Stat -0.12391P(T<-t)one4 mil 0.00458 P(T<=t) onMail 0.068546 P(T<=t) eeHail 0.451922t Critical one-tad I.812462 t Critical enNail 1.859548 t CnecalenNail I.812462P(T<=t) tweed 0.009159 P(T<-t)IwMail 0.13709I . P(T<=t)twenil 0.903844Cntical two tai: 2.228139 t Critical tweed 2 306006 t Cnecal townii 2228139

,

MNUMMMsraeet 30 M mas I er 2

1

___ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _

_

.4

4

Tame 3: LU fluen and WBAAr Sadhassel Data (4t95)e 6atMeans

Mangammae(eng%) Nkhal(aug%) h fung %)vp vo-. up oo Ur o =.

Maan 282.96 219.4144 Mean 8.956667 7.874 Mana 94.09267 117.7444Vanance 4131.532 8719.876 Vanance 1 380033 2.596014 Vanamee 117.9095 4808.186Observatanas 3 9 Olneevatmos 3 9 Observuesons 3 9Hypoebsenzad Mena Dderence 0 HjM Mesh Di5erence 0 W=8 Mama Dderence Odf 5 df 3 of 9tSeat 1 311947 *St2 1.251444 tStat 0.98763P(T<w) messed 0.12327 P(T<-s) erussil 0.133066 P(T<M)enM 0.174571Cracalend 2.015049 : CrmcalensHail 2.015049 :Cemcelcoe4 mil I.833114

P(T<-t) two.4 ail 0.24654 P(T<-t)two4 mil 0.266132 P(T<-t) twwnil 0349142: Critical two4 mil 2.570578 t "A two emit 2.570578 t Crecal t=> emit 2.262159

.

VanasNamm (eng%g) 2 hic (ang%g)Up Dome Up Dmws '

Mena 13.% 527 9.700778 Mean 44.775 3230578Venance 2.050443 23.45661 Vanance 713 8574 324.8595Observations 3 9 CL.es 3 9Ilypothesized Mean Difference 0 Ilypotheured Mean D Serence oof 10 #f 8t Stat 2351171 tStat 1.611237P(T<M) ono4 mil C.02028 P(T<=t)onesail 0.G72897

Cnecal caused 1.812462 t Cntical meMad 1.859548P(T<-t)tw 0.04056 P(T<=t) two4 mil 0.145793t Cnacal two ted 2.228139 t Crmcal two-tail 2306006

au_wnnsa--se n.,Merr ms: aos 2 of 2

. _ _ -. . . - . -

. g_

.

e ;

TsNe 4: Adme Seemsus Does (595)C. " etMesma.

Ahmuhume (eg4g) Arsrude (ag4@ Bartumm(m @ @Up Dower Up Damer ' US Dewar ;

Mama 5406 667 6102.5 Mene 4 5 Meam 18.'3333 207Vansace 551633 3 1526492 Vanamoe 0 4 666667 Vanance 6333333 718Observenues 3 4 Observehoes 3 4 Obeurvaanans 3 4

,

Hypothesmed Mean Ddlerence 0 Hypcabeseed Mesa Ddissence 0 ::,. ' " Mene Ddrename Odi 5 df 3 df 3'tSant 4 f2531 : Stat 4.92552 tSamt -I.45935P(1<-t) one-ted 0.199633 P(T<-t)one4 mil 0211413 P(T<=t) ceMail 0.120286: Cnhcal one-end 2.015049 t CrMcel one4 mil 2353M3 t Crecal one4m;I 2353 %3ITT<-t)twend 0397266 P(T<-t) twHasl 0.422826 P(T<-t) two4 mil 0.240571: Cniscal twumil 2.570578 Cnescal t=wnil 3 I82449 Crecaltw wmil 3 182449 -

meryehms (seg%g Cadmuham (e.g%g) h (agtg)Up Douer Up Douse Up Deuse i

Mona 0 266667 03 Mean 03 0.425 Mens 6.6 7.125Venance 0.003333 0.006667 Vansece 0.03 0.0425 Vensmo. 0.91 1.309167 'observanoes 3 4 C"-. ..as 3 4 Observasions 3 4Hypotheaued Mene Ddlerence 0 11 -- -"- '_ t Mean Ddlerence 0 E ; ^^ " Mens Ddlerence 03 3df 5 df 5 df 5tSeat -0 63246 tStat -0.87039 t Seat 4.59612P(T<=t) oneted ' O.277439 P(T<-t) one-emil 0 211949 P(T<=t)eme-emil 0288527t Cnecalone-teil 2.015049 : Cntica! one-tait 2.015049 Cnhcal oenail 2JD15049P(T<* f)two-end 0.554878 P(T<-t)twHnil 0.423897 P(T<-t) two 4.3 0.577055t Cnhcal two4 mil 2.570578 : Cnacalt h 2.570578 t Crecal two-amil 2.570573

.'

Ceyyer(msge ) Crems Anyhm(yCWs) Green Beem (yOg)sUp Ikpuse Up Deuse Up Deuse [

Mean 12.56667 14.55 Mena 14.66667 17.25 Mean 25 25.25Venance 2.123333 10.51667 Venance 9333333 4.916667 Vanames 3 4.916667 ;Observessoas 3 4 Observehens 3 4 * traervehens 3 4Hyph=f Mean Ddiercom 0 liypotheneed Mean Diferee:* 0 ::u ' - Mama Ddlessene 0 :

"

df '4 of 4 df 5 ['tSeat -I.08573 i Stat -1.24 tSeat -0.16744 !

P(T<-t) one-end 0.169327 P(f<-t) ce> tail 0.141373 P(T<=t) ceHeil 0.436791'

1 Cnecal one-es 1 2.131546 t Cnhcel one4mit 2.131s46 :Cnecalemeemd 2.015049 iP(T<-t) two-emil 0338654 P(T<=t) two emil 0.282747 P(T<-t) two-emil 0.873583 '

s Cnhcal tw&4md 2.776451 t Cnhcel two-ted 2.776451 t Cnacal twund 2.570578:i

!,

5

M&MMdWwpet senane IeO

_ _ - . . - .

. .

#t

i

4

TaMr 4: Adam N Daea (3/95)j C , - at Memen

i Ires (seg/kg) Land (amp %g) ''; (ag%g)

| Up Dmer Up Deuce Up DeemeMens 9830 10965 Mean 14 17.75 Mean 7953333 8412.3 '

i Vanance 1064700 5890367 Venance 13 22.25 Venance 391233 3 NSObervanons 3 4 Observations 3 4 Obsenweiosas 3 4

' 11, " M Mena Dd!rrence 0 ifyri M Mean Ddlerence 0 11,, " " Mene Ddierence Odf 4 df 5 df 4

Stat 4 84017 t Seat -1.19208 t Sent 4 3126P(T<=t) owtail 0 22405 ITT<-t) one-ted 0.143359 P(T<-t)emoemm1 031762t Cnticalone-tail 2.131846 Cnucal one-tail 2.015049 Cnticalene4 mil 2.131846P(T<=t) tuoted 0448101 P(T<-t) tu+ tail 0.296718 P(T<-t) tweenil 0.63524t Cntical tuotoil 2.776451 1 Cntical two4 mil 2 370578 t Cnacal tweemil 2 276451

Menganese (seg%) Mehr!(eng%g) Setendamm (ag%g)Up Dowse Up Daise Up Domus

Mean 343 379 Mean 9.666667 11.75 Mena 0.533333 0.575Vanance 972 5275333 Venance 0 333333 9.583333 Venance 0.013333 0.0625Observanons 3 4 Observehens 3 4 Observanons 3 4Il7,~1.M Mean DMerence 0 flyri M Mean Difference 0 Hn- f Meme Ddissence Odf 4 of 3 of 4: Stat 0 88819 tStat -131579 tStat 4 29412P(T<-t) one-tail 0 31231I ITT<-t)one-tail 0.13988 P(T<-t)oneenil 0 391649:Cnocalano4ad 2.131846 :Cnticalme ted 2 353363 t Cracal coe-emil 2.131846P(T<-t) teetad 0.424622 P(T<=t) twMad 0.27976 P(T<-t)tweenil 0.783299t Cntical tu+ tad 2.776451 t Cntical tuoteil 3.182449 :Criticaltweenil 2.776451_

8eromehsen (ug%g) Urandsmus (ang/kg) U-234(pCy )gUp Deuse Up %use Up Deuse

Mens 114 1203 Mesa 2.566667 2.675 Meas 0.533333 0.85Vanance 49 460.76 Vanance 0.403333 0315833 Vansene 0.093333 Of9Observanons 3 4 Observer. ions 3 4 Observassoas 3 411yA=i Mean Difference 0 II,; -" -i-3 Mean Ddrevence 0 11 , _ "_ ' Mean Ddienmoe 0

-

,df 4 df 4 df 4t Stat -0.54934 : Stat 4 23451 t Staa -136765

4

P(T<-t) one-tad 03CG QT<-t) one-emil 0A13052 P(T<-t)ese tail 0.121613t Cnecal eno-tad 2.131846 t Critical one. tail 2.131446 t Crecal eme tail 2.131846 (P(T<=t) tuwtail 0.612001 P(TN) two-tail 0.826104 P(T<-t)two enJ 0.243225 '

t Critical two-tail 2.776451 : Cntical tuotail 2.776451 Cnticaltwo emil 2.776451

>

NH&Wnee eessans 2ef 3

;

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ ______________.a__

. ,

.

4

-

4

Tame 4: Adme saw Deen (5/95)C , _'_ of Means

tk238 (yG/g) Ve W 2kse (say%g)Up Dow Up Demer Up De=e

Mean 0.8 0.3 Mesa - 15_83333 17.325 Mena 70 30Vesiance 0.12 0.153333 Vanance 2.123333 11.47583 Vanance 157 2373333Otarvetzms 3 4 CL~ ..a 3 4 Observemons 3 4flypoebemed Mean Discresce 0 II,iAM Men.Odierence 0 W Mena Dduquee 0of 5 df 4 & 5t stat 0 tsist -0.7ss73 sw 4 39742P(T<-t) W 0.5 P(T<=t) onM 0237194 P(T<=t)eme4 mil 0 20531t Crmcel eno-ed 2.015049 t Cnecal one4mI 2.131846 t Cnnemi cee4mii 2.015049P(T<-t) teotail I ITT<-t) tw 9 474388 P(T<-t) tw 0.410619Cemcel tetail 2 570578 :Cnucal t%I 2.776451 tC hialtwiHmil 2.570578

!

,

momams-w .

W349?t*13AM 3d)

s_. . . - - - - _ _ . . -

.,

o*

.

.

O!

; State of Utah Colorado NWJanuary 7,1997 Sampung Event

80Ie

!80 ~

$i{ -+-Grcss #Jpha WJ

-e-Total Urarnum (pCVf)70 ,

*-*-Gross Beta (nCL9-*-Radun 226 (pCM) g

60 '

5Va.

30eo

i2 40e

8 ;

.l

30_ '

<

r20 - . : :

10 ' -

i- = __

.,- =.

- == x :_ -

0 2000 4000 6000 M IM l#Destance Downstream from Highwey 191 Bridge M

Prepered by Harding Lawson Assodates

._

- o

.

.

.

State of Utah Colorado River SamplingJanuary 7,1997 S .,," 4 Event

2G

6

18+ Ammonia (mqvQ

T

16 -+hes (@

14 -

-

E 12ECoj 10

liie >

U *

8ou |

:i

6- !

t

1

4

2- !

f.

_ .

w

0'

O 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Dista.we Downstroom from Hury 191 Beklge (foot)

!

Prepared by Harding Lawson Associates

! -

L

_ . - _ _ _ . . .

- _ _- _ _ _ _ A . _._ m . .J_

O..g

.

-.

,, <, .,, . -

1isiaa;)}u|!" <. .,,

,-,,., x,,

(i .r!<, .gj

._

-" , , .n'

(, WBil <> < tj

,

s=

[N - ,, .,,

g ,,

1"[ I" <. .,,3

e .a

" o .n :

- _ _$

1s <

}ei

i~ ~ "a f# a N N a e og

(unn) uonsnunuooI

.. _ . _

a ._ .m-,- % A=2E_.4o._m _A_.a_ aa Am1_hmaa,4 . A. mi3 u..A _ a. 4,__ _ , _ _ , ,4--.-_J - ,aJam 4-_agu_4 4i4 .% %4.__.

.

4

f

gi u

!I 1 ilIi til u il

!Eq l.sl= !,, u

l' igl ,, . - ,338 Iga , , u

h[3

b, u

, u.

$' 11

.i,

_ ; .

3_._.,

. . . , --

l- e.eN.

,

.s

State of Utah Colorado River Sampling,

January 7,1997 Sampling Event1200 --

,

!i

1000 -- --+-TDS (mgA)

1

?*

800- {

5'

|E*

--

-C "

o : '* 600 -

'

E

l.i!'

oco 5

0

400 -

.

L

200-!

4

1

0 ;--, ,

0 2000 4000 0000 8000 10000 12000

Distance Doumstream from Hwy 1M BrHge (Seet!,

t

!

,.

Prepered by Hareng Lawson Assodates!

\>

.|- -___ _ _ _ -__ _ _- - -_ - __ - - _ - - . - .-_ , . - - _ _ _ _ _ .

F.

.

<, ., -; ,

f I:-

:l( Ud' <

i i-

R s -

|' ' '

|<>.i nsi ,,

1

4> *| | |k

g1>

-

I,y .t, .. . , ,

e}$j3 <. . ,,

,30"g&5{ <> -i ii

. y* ,.,

i 11 kd' <

.. .I ,

i 1

1,i$

k $ 0 N @ $ 0 * O

gme ..,,........

_

h _____m._ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Documents

ATLAS CORPORKrION R