Mining challenge goes to court
Navajo communities take on HRI in Appeals Court
A group of protesters in Crownpoint carry signs with anti-uranium mining slogans during a protest in 2007. [photo by Brian Leddy / Independent]

By Kathy Helms
Diné Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — The Navajo communities of Crownpoint and Churchrock, with the assistance of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center and others, are headed to court today over proposed uranium mining by Hydro Resources Inc. in the checkerboard area of Eastern Navajo Agency.

The Navajo Nation imposed a ban on uranium mining and milling within Navajo Indian Country in April 2005. That same year, New Mexico Environment Department received a request from HRI for an underground injection control permit to operate a uranium in-situ leach mine in Section 8.

As a result, NMED formally requested U.S. Environmental Protection Agency make a decision on the Indian Country status of Section 8 land, with the underlying issue being which was the appropriate agency to consider the UIC permit application.

On Feb. 6, 2007, EPA found that Churchrock Chapter, which includes Section 8, is a “dependent Indian community” and that EPA was the proper authority to issue the permit. HRI contends that the EPA ruling is delaying its plans to begin operations.

Attorneys for the New Mexico Environmental Law Center in Santa Fe will present oral arguments to a panel of federal judges at 1 p.m. today before the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver asking that the NRC decision to allow ISL mining by HRI be set aside.

HRI and parent company Uranium Resources Inc. met with the NRC on May 1 in Denver to discuss the Crownpoint Uranium Solution Mining Project, as it is called, as well as plans for a uranium recovery facility at Ambrosia Lake and licensing issues for new conventional milling facilities.

Eastern Navajo Diné against Uranium Mining, aided by Southwest Research and Information Center of Albuquerque, is the first community group ever to fight the NRC on a source materials permit for an in-situ leach uranium mine,according to Eric Jantz, an attorney with NMELC.

“The importance of our hearing on May 12 cannot be overstated,” Jantz stated in a press release. “We are talking about the land, water, air and health of two whole communities. There are people on this land grazing their cattle and hauling their daily drinking water.”

HRI has four proposed mines in the Churchrock-Crownpoint region. In 2006, the NRC approved the license for all four sites. NMELC filed suit in 2007 against the federal agency to overturn the license.

NMELC intends to argue that the NRC violated the Atomic Energy Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and its own regulations when it issued decisions in the matter.

NMELC’s clients contend that HRI failed to prove that it will protect groundwater from contamination and that its proposed financial bond is inadequate to ensure cleanup.

A study by the U.S. Geological Survey published in January 2007 for the NRC found that while in-situ leach mining techniques are considerably more environmentally benign than traditional mining and milling, “Nonetheless, the use of leaching fluids to mine uranium contaminates the groundwater aquifer in and around the region from which the uranium is extracted.”

As a result, the NRC requires licensees to restore aquifers to established water-quality standards after operations cease and to ensure that sufficient funds are maintained to restore sites to initial conditions.

According to the 1997 Final Environmental Impact Statement for the HRI projects, in the event water quality parameters cannot be returned to pre-mining levels, HRI might request a license amendment from the NRC that would allow a change in restoration requirements.

Because groundwater restoration represents a substantial portion of cleanup costs, “a good estimate of the necessary volume of treatment water is important for approximating the overall cost of decommissioning,” the USGS study said.

It cites a Wyoming pilot project and two ISL facilities that have completed groundwater restoration, including the A-Wellfield Highland Project in Wyoming. The original estimate for restoration included the use of 12.5 acre-feet of water over four to seven years. Actual restoration occurred from 1991 to 1998 and required 30 acre-feet of water.

The report for the NRC also suggests that upgradient groundwater entering the restored mining zone eventually could cause the reduced minerals to be reoxidized, leading to increased concentrations of uranium, selenium, and arsenic in the groundwater.

As a result, the study said, the licensee would have to account for any potential future mobilization in the preparation of its surety bond.