Pinon Ridge Hearing Transcripts Part 3

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC
561 JUDICIAL ARBITER GROUP JAG NO. 12 A 1318 ___________________________________________________ REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING, VOLUME IV November 9, 2012 ___________________________________________________ IN RE: THE APPLICATION OF ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES, INC. FOR A RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS LICENSE FOR THE PINON RIDGE URANIUM MILL ___________________________________________________
PURSUANT TO NOTICE to all parties in interest, the above-entitled matter resumed for hearing before THE HONORABLE RICHARD DANA on Friday, November 9, 2012, commencing at 8:37 a.m., at 1045 Main Street, Nucla, Colorado, before Candice F. Flowers, Certified Shorthand Reporter
and Notary Public within and for the State of
Colorado.
Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

Denver (303) 296-0017 Boulder (303) 443-0433 Colorado Springs (719) 635-8328 Greeley (970) 356-3306
562 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL By Jerry W. Goad, Esq. 1525 Sherman Street 7th Floor Denver, Colorado 80203 Appearing on behalf of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment MATT SANDLER, ESQ. Rocky Mountain Wild 1536 Wynkoop Street Suite 303 Denver, Colorado 80202 Appearing on behalf of Rocky Mountain Wild, Center for Biological Diversity, and Colorado Environmental Coalition
APPEARANCES: ENERGY & CONSERVATION LAW By Travis Stills, Esq. 1911 Main Avenue Suite 238 Durango, Colorado 81301 and JEFFREY C. PARSONS, ESQ. Western Mining Action Project P.O. Box 349 Lyons, Colorado 80540 Appearing on behalf of Sheep Mountain Alliance FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP By James R. Spaanstra, Esq. Olivia D. Lucas, Esq. 3200 Wells Fargo Center 1700 Lincoln Street Denver, Colorado 80203 and ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES By Curtis H. Moore, Esq. Director of Communications & Legal Affairs 44 Union Boulevard, Suite 600 Lakewood, Colorado 80228 Appearing on behalf of Energy Fuels Resources Corporation
563 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 APPEARANCES (continued) ROBERT LOUIS GROSSMAN, Ph.D. 6215 Baseline Road Boulder, Colorado 80303 Party in Interest

564 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 PUBLIC COMMENTS 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SMA EXHIBITS Exhibit 12 ADMITTED 586 785 DR. THOMAS POWER Direct Examination by Mr. Stills Voir Dire Examination by Mr. Moore Direct Examination Cont'd by Mr. Stills Cross-Examination by Mr. Moore Cross-Examination by Mr. Goad Cross-Examination by Dr. Grossman Redirect Examination by Mr. Stills 716 724 726 761 770 776 779 WITNESSES DR. ANN MAEST Direct Examination by Mr. Parsons Voir Dire Examination by Mr. Spaanstra Voir Dire Examination by Mr. Goad Direct Examination Cont'd by Mr. Parsons Cross-Examination by Mr. Spaanstra Cross-Examination by Dr. Grossman CONSTANCE TRAVERS Direct Examination by Mr. Parsons Voir Dire Examination by Ms. Lucas Direct Examination Cont'd by Mr. Parsons Direct Examination Cont'd by Mr. Parsons Cross-Examination by Ms. Lucas PAGE 565 570 572 574 622 641 652 658 659 687 711 INDEX

565 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A BY MR. PARSONS: Q Thank you for being here, Dr. Maest. Can you please tell us your occupation. I'm an environmental geochemist, and I M-A-E-S-T. DR. ANN MAEST, being first duly sworn in the above cause, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION full name. DR. MAEST: Ann Maest, A-N-N, P R O C E E D I N G S - - THE HEARING OFFICER: MR. PARSONS: Dr. Ann Maest to the stand. (Witness sworn.) THE HEARING OFFICER: State your Mr. Parsons.
We would like to call
work at Stratus Consulting in Boulder, Colorado. Q Can you tell us a little bit about your
educational background. A Yes. I have an undergraduate degree in
geology from Boston University, and I have a Ph.D. in geochemistry and water resources from Princeton University. And it's a joint degree of the geology

566 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 department and the environmental engineering program. Q Thank you. Can you describe your
employment history. A After I got my Ph.D., I did a National
Research Council postdoctoral fellowship at the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park, where I was a research geochemist for six years, and I investigated the patent transport of natural and anthropogenic contaminants in the environment. THE HEARING OFFICER: spell anthropogenic. DR. MAEST: man-made contaminants or... Q (By Mr. Parsons) Excuse me for I was going to mention A-N-T-H-R-O-P-O-G-E-N-I-C You'd better
interrupting, Dr. Maest.
that there are several lawyers in the room, so you will want to dumb down some of your testimony today and perhaps -MR. SPAANSTRA: job to do the jokes. THE HEARING OFFICER: MR. PARSONS: Mr. Spaanstra's comments. Q (By Mr. Parsons) But in all seriousness, Noted. I object. It's my
I did take a cue from

567 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 if there are technical terms that you refer to, I think it would be helpful -- and I'll remind you if you don't -- but to maybe describe them in a little more of a lay term, but sorry to interrupt you. Please proceed. A Okay. So let's see. I worked for the
U.S. Geological Survey where I investigated, in a research fashion, the movement of contaminants in the environment, mostly in surface water and groundwater environments. chief there. And I became a project
And a lot my work was on -- I did
some work on mining, water pollution from mining, and also arsenic contamination of groundwaters. I worked at Environmental Defense Fund in Washington, D.C. for about a year and learned about policy aspects of hard rock mining. And then I
have been a consultant for about 20 years now, and my primary area of expertise is in the environmental effects of hard rock mining, especially on water quality. Q And could you maybe go into a little
detail as far as the work experience you have had. You mentioned you worked on hard rock mine sites. Can you give us a little more -- or flesh that out a little bit for us.

568 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Okay. Yeah. Maybe I should say a little
bit about my experience on uranium and radioactive sites. For my dissertation at Princeton, I
conducted experimental studies of the effect of temperature and organic compounds on radionuclides and looked at the movement in the environment of uranium, cobalt, strontium and cesium. Then I worked for the New Mexico Attorney General's Office evaluating characterization of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in southern New Mexico. And I evaluated the characterization studies and laboratory studies that were being proposed to simulate the long-term performance of that high-level radioactive waste disposal site. I also worked for the State of New Mexico evaluating the environmental effects of about ten underground uranium mines, and I estimated the amount of contaminated groundwater from those mines and the flux of groundwater over time. I also worked for the State of New Mexico in the same office on the Cavira Mill in northern New Mexico and looked at the effects of leaking solution ponds, some of which were lined and many of which were not lined, on groundwater contamination, and also the effect of leaking

569 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 tailings impoundment and movement of wind transport of contaminated tailings and the effect on soils. On mining, I've -- as I think I mentioned -- for the last 20 years, really, my main area of focus has been on the water quality effects of hard rock mining. And I have -- I'm the, I
guess I would say, primary consultant to the Environmental Protection Agency on the water quality effects and characterization of hard rock mines for the regions, EPA regions. I have also conducted a large study comparing what was predicted in environmental impact statements in terms of water quality and environmental effects and comparing that with what actually happened at a number of large hard rock mining sites in the United States. I have evaluated kind of every phase in hard rock mining sites from proposed mines, active mines, inactive mines, abandoned mines at probably about 200 sites in the United States, Latin America, Africa, and Asia. And I have also been on
settlement negotiations with mining companies on some mines. Q Have you served on any -- you mentioned Any other federal
your work for the EPA.

570 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 government committees or task forces or things of that nature? A Yes. I guess the most recent, I have
been involved in a number of National Academy committees that investigate the kind of mineral resource and mining and oil and gas effects. And
I'm just finishing up my second three-year term on one of the standing committees for the National Academy of Sciences. It's called The Committee on
Earth Resources, and we generate studies that recently included a study on Virginia uranium mining -- uranium mining in Virginia. MR. PARSONS: So as not to belabor
it, I think, based on that description of those qualifications, I would proffer this witness as an expert. I'm certainly willing to yield to some
voir dire. MR. SPAANSTRA: short questions. THE HEARING OFFICER: Go ahead. Two, three very
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION OF DR. ANN MAEST BY MR. SPAANSTRA: Q Doctor, that's a very impressive rsum.
Just to clarify, your expertise and your qualifications aren't as a wildlife biologist?

571 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not. MR. GOAD: Can I ask, Your Honor, A Q Definitely not. Okay. Just for my edification, I thought
WIPP was a transuranic waste -- a true waste site, not a high-level site. A Q Yes. That's right.
And I'm not playing games, because people
from Mexico might think, No, Yucca Mountain air. A Q Right. You are correct. What
One last, very important question:
do you think of the Colorado School of Mines' geochemistry? I'm the chair of the board of
trustees, so I wanted some... A Q A So you are asking me what again? I'll withdraw the question. They have some excellent students come
out of there, and we have a number of them working at Stratus, actually. They do a good job. Thank you very much.
MR. SPAANSTRA: I have no objections.
THE HEARING OFFICER:
I would think
what Dr. Maest is being qualified as an expert in? THE HEARING OFFICER: MR. PARSONS: Sure.
I would proffer

572 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Dr. Maest as an expert in geochemistry -- shall I say hydro-geochemistry. And maybe, Dr. Maest, you can explain what hydro-geochemistry is so we can have a sense of that. DR. MAEST: It's a -- I describe it
as the interaction of water and earth materials and the application of chemical principles to earth processes. And mostly I'm an environmental
geochemist and I focus on water resources, water quality. MR. PARSONS: I would also like to
offer Dr. Maest as an expert in the assessment of pollution control measures at mining and mill sites. MR. GOAD: dire, Your Honor? THE HEARING OFFICER: You may. If I may do a little voir
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION OF DR. ANN MAEST BY MR. GOAD: Q A Q Dr. Maest, are you an engineer? I'm not an engineer, no. Okay. Have you designed or worked on
waste retention systems at milling sites? A I have not designed them, but I have

573 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 evaluated plans for them and I have been involved at many sites where those engineered designs have gone wrong. Q So did you evaluate ones that had gone
wrong or ones that were being proposed to be built? A Q A Both. And you evaluated those in what capacity? Well, several capacities. One is looking
at best management practices that could be employed and trying to come up with recommendations for engineered measures that would be more protective of the environment, and also looking at leaks from engineered systems. Q And this would have been from a
geochemical perspective? A In terms of the effect on the But my degree is a joint degree
environment, yes.
with the environmental engineering program at Princeton, so I have a little bit of training in that, but more is my experience over the last 20, 25 years evaluating environmental impact statements and mine operations and adaptive management plans and being involved in mine sites throughout their operational history. Q I think I asked the question poorly. Let

574 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 an objection? me ask it a different way. Did you -- were you asked to review these plans from a geochemical or a hydro-geochemical perspective? You were brought in for your
expertise in those areas? A Q A Q You mean the plans? The plans for --
The waste retention system plan review. Yes. Thank you. MR. GOAD: I have nothing further. Anybody have
THE HEARING OFFICER: Expertise noted. MR. PARSONS:
Thank you, Your Honor.
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF DR. ANN MAEST CONTINUED BY MR. PARSONS: Q Moving on to the substance of your
testimony, you prepared a report that was submitted to the State of Colorado as part of the 2010 or so -- 2010 review of the application materials; is that correct? A Q Yes. In preparing that report, do the opinions
reached in that report accurately recount your opinions? A Yes.

575 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the book? Exhibit 1. THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. MS. LUCAS: Are both of those Oh, it's in Q The written testimony rather accurately
recounts your opinions? A Yes. I believe we have two reports. One
was kind of a follow-up memo, but yes, they do. MR. PARSONS: Your Honor, I will
note that those reports are both in the record. They were made part of the administrative record in the previous lawsuit. of those again. THE HEARING OFFICER: If you have I'm happy to provide copies
them available, I would appreciate it. MR. STILLS: I believe it's in
reports in Exhibit 1 or only the one that you disclosed in -MR. PARSONS: The report at Exhibit The prior one
1 is the December 15, 2010 report.
was, as noted in that December 15, 2010 report, submitted on September 28, 2010. similar. They are largely
I would say that the December 2010 report
updated the September 2010 report, but I'm happy to provide copies of both of them if that's helpful.

576 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Thanks, Travis. Q (By Mr. Parsons) So I would like to move electronically. MR. STILLS: cite to it here. I will get you a record MR. SPAANSTRA: MR. PARSONS: Do you have it? I have it
It's in the record. That's fine.
MR. SPAANSTRA:
on to some of the substance of your testimony here today, and I would like to start off with issues related to the toxicity or the chemical characteristics of the liquid waste associated with the mill process. Based on your review of the application materials, are you familiar with the anticipated chemical constituents' characteristics of the raffinate, mill waste? A Q Yes. What materials did you review in looking
at those issues? A The primary one was the Kleinfelder
report from 2008 that was authored by -- I think it was Scott Dwyer. And that had information on the I also
chemical characteristics of the raffinate. examined the SENES report that evaluated the

577 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 potential effects of the raffinate on wildlife and humans, actually. Q And based on your review, what did Energy
Fuels' consultants do to characterize this waste? A Well, they took ore from actually five
different mining sites that are nearby, but the ones -- the only two that were reported in the Kleinfelder 2008 report were Packrat and Pandora. And they took the ore and processed it as you would at a mill. So they ground it and they subjected it Then they
to an acid leach using sulfuric acid.
took it through a solvent extraction process, as you would at the proposed Pinon Ridge Mill. And
then they extracted it for uranium and subsequently vanadium, and then they created this so-called barren raffinate. material. So that was sort of the starting
And that had a pH of 1.8, so it was
extremely acidic and had high concentrations of metals and metalloids, such as arsenic, selenium, cadmium, lead, manganese, and high sulfate concentrations and total dissolved solids. And then the Kleinfelder report did a study where they increased the pH, so they made it less acidic and more basic by adding lime to it. And they moved it up to pH 4.5 and also to pH 7.5.

578 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 And then they took samples of that solution and they measured the concentrations of the metals and the other constituents to see if they changed at different pH values. Q result? So that's what they did.
And based on your review, what was the I mean, what did they find that those
waste solutions would have in them from a chemical perspective? A They found for many of the constituents,
when you raise the pH, you dropped out some of the metal, so you lowered some of the metal concentrations in those solutions. For some
constituents, it was quite dramatic and others it wasn't so dramatic. But a lot of the
concentrations were lowered at higher pH values. And that's because the solubility or the amount that you can fit in water decreases with increasing pH for many of these contaminants of concern. Q And your understanding -- based on your
review of the materials, your understanding of the pH level that will be part of that waste discharge, is it at the lower pH level or is it at the higher pH level? A It's definitely at the lower pH level.
My understanding is that the raffinate that would

579 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 be put in the evaporation ponds would have, at least initially, a very low pH. It would probably
be close to the 1.8 that they measured in the raffinate that they made from those two mines. And I believe I read that after it's mixed with the tailings -- because what they would do is mix the barren raffinate with the tailings and kind of slurry them out to the tailings impoundment. And the pH of that, because the
raffinate would interact with the tailings materials a bit, it would go up a little bit to, I think, 4.4, which is still a low pH. Q And I'm interested in -- are you familiar
with how these concentrations compare to water quality standards -A Q Yes. -- for drinking water and protection of
aquatic life in this instance? A Q Yes. And I have -- I understand that, as part
of your report, you had a slide that compares that. I would like to pull that up for you to look at. Is this the slide that's produced in your report? A Q Yes. Is there anything that's been added to

580 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this slide for demonstrative purposes? A report. Yes. Actually, all of these are in our But all
This column is not in our report.
it is, is dividing these concentrations here, the maximum concentration here, by the most protective of either one of these. magnitude of exceedance. So this gives the maximum And by that, I mean
simply that if it exceeds one, if it's one or higher, that means it's equal to or higher than one of these standards. Q So to dumb it down a little bit, if
that's an exercise in division, I mean, it's essentially -A This column is just an exercise in
division, that's right. Q All right. So what is the conclusion you
reach from this table? A Well, these are some of the constituents
that were measured, and a lot of these are highly toxic to humans and aquatic biota. This column And
here is for humans, drinking water standards.
this is for aquatic life, and that would be fish and bugs that live in streams. And for some of the
constituents, this concentration is more protective than the other one -- or is lower and this one is

581 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 more protective for other metals and constituents. But generally what you see -- and this, again, is the raffinate that was made from Pandora and Packrat at the low pH values. This is not
after they have increased the pH by mixing it with lime or anything. You can see that some of these
constituents exceed water quality standards by tens or thousands of times. The one that is probably
the highest -- we don't really look at pH here -but is uranium, not surprisingly. And this is in a
barren solution, and it's 12,300 times higher than the drinking water standard. Q Let me interrupt you. When you say "barren solution," you mean after it's been processed to remove the economically recoverable uranium? A Right. That's what they call it. When
it's got the uranium and vanadium in it, it's called pregnant solution; and then after they take it out, it's called a barren solution. So this is what would actually go into the impoundments. It would be mixed with the
tailings and also would go out into the evaporation ponds. So a number of these are many times higher
than water quality standards.

582 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q a bit. What would you expect or what concentrations -- are these concentrations representative of what you would find in the evaporation ponds or tailings over time? A They are not really, because the here, 1.8. THE HEARING OFFICER: DR. MAEST: Okay. THE HEARING OFFICER: If I can
clarify, you said that's at the low pH? DR. MAEST: That's right. 1.8 or 4.4?
THE HEARING OFFICER: DR. MAEST: 1.8.
Yeah, that's up
So it's not -So it's not
THE HEARING OFFICER: yet diluted, mixed with the tailings? DR. MAEST: Right.
Not mixed with
the tailings and not neutralized in any way. THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay.
(By Mr. Parsons) Let's get to that point
evaporation ponds are designed to evaporate this water. So, if anything, the concentrations are
going to get higher over time for most of these constituents. So this is just kind of initially
when you would put it out in the evaporation ponds.

583 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 This might be what it looks like. And I should say
that this is only two samples, so it's only two samples of ore that might or might not be going to this mill. Q I would like to get to that. You
mentioned that the information you reviewed in the application included two samples: One from the Those
Pandora Mine and one from the Packrat Mine.
are the only numbers you saw in the report -- or in the application materials? A Q A Q Yes. Okay. Well, for the Dwyer memo, yes. Thank you.
That is true. But you indicated that there is
information that there were additional samples collected as well. A Q Right, from three other mines. And did you find those numbers
represented anywhere else besides the application materials? A I did. We found a report that Energy
Fuels had done for the Environmental Protection Agency in 2010, and it was about characterization of the raffinate. And it wasn't part of the
license application materials, but it was something

584 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that was created by Energy Fuels for EPA. And in
that report, there was some information on the characteristics of the other raffinates, the other three raffinates, and Pandora and Packrat. MR. PARSONS: So this slide I would
like to proffer as an excerpt of that report that was submitted to EPA by Energy Fuels. I have
handed counsel for Energy Fuels a copy of the text of that report. There were some quality control And I would like to
documents attached to that.
admit this, the report including this slide, as exhibit -- what are up to? 11? 12. It was
THE HEARING OFFICER: MR. PARSONS: submitted to the EPA.
Thank you.
It's a document in the EPA
files and includes the information that was not included in the Dwyer report. objection -MR. GOAD: Do you have a copy? Just note that we That said -Is there an
MR. SPAANSTRA:
are seeing this for the first time.
and it is not relevant to this proceeding, because it doesn't address Energy Fuels. objection to you putting it in. MR. PARSONS: I would note that the But with that, no

585 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in the record? MR. PARSONS: It is not. It was sorry. slide. objection. THE HEARING OFFICER: offering the entire report? MR. PARSONS: I am. Not just this You are EPA report -- sorry -- the Energy Fuels report submitted to the EPA states that these samples were collected from five mines that are represent -they say representative of the ore that would be processed in the Pinon Ridge Mill. So I think that it's directly relevant to the material that would be -- and representative of the material that would be processed at the mill. MR. SPAANSTRA: As I said, I have no
THE HEARING OFFICER: I just want to make... MR. STILLS:
I believe the slide is
already in evidence in the record. MR. PARSONS: MR. STILLS: My apologies. THE HEARING OFFICER: Is the report The slide is not. It's not? Oh, I'm
submitted to EPA but apparently never provided -based on the administrative record in the case and

586 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is August 2010. Q (By Mr. Parsons) And so, Dr. Maest, when report? MR. PARSONS: The date of the report Okay. It's in. the discovery responses, or lack thereof, that we got from the State, it was never submitted to the State. So we have identified this report as
providing information that apparently was not considered to date. MR. SPAANSTRA: Your Honor, we
believe we provided copies to CDPHE, so it's probably in the record. THE HEARING OFFICER: But you don't
have any objection to the report coming in here, do you? MR. SPAANSTRA: MR. GOAD: No.
No objection. Anybody?
And at some point, if you'd give
me a hard copy, I'd appreciate it. (SMA Exhibit 12 was admitted.) MR. GOAD: What is the date of the
you look at these numbers, what do you see -relative to what was analyzed in the Dwyer/Energy Fuels report, what does this tell you?

587 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Okay. Well, this is a little different.
This is part of the experiment that I talked about where they neutralized raffinate and they raised the pH to 4.5 and 7.5. So these top five here are And they measured --
all the same pH value, 4.5.
they didn't have all the constituents in this report for some reason. But they did have the
radium 226 concentrations in the solution at these pH values. And what I wanted to note is that the
Pandora and the Packrat raffinate at these pH values have the lowest reading of 226 activity of the five. I don't know what the other constituents' concentrations are for these other three ores, but we just -- I just note that those are the lowest. So I think the issue here is that we don't have a good characterization of the raffinate or the tailings material, for that matter, that is going into these waste impoundments. Q What additional characterization do you
think should have been done? A Well, we should have received -- and I don't know. But we
maybe it is in the record.
should have received a full analyte list of the results of their experiment. And the reason they

588 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 were doing this experiment was to see if when you increased the pH, if it was more environmentally benign than it would be at the really low pH. So
we should have gotten the information for not just two of these ores but all five of the ores to really get a better picture of the characteristics, chemical characteristics, of the raffinate. In addition, I didn't see anything that mixed this raffinate with the tailings, okay? Usually, what's done at mines is you can send the ore and you would just send core samples to -there are a number of commercial labs and they will literally make tailings for you. So you can make
the tailings and then mix them with this raffinate and then take samples of that and see what the concentrations are. So we don't have a good
characterization of the mixed raffinate and tailings. We don't have a good characterization of
the raffinate because we only have a couple of samples. And we don't have any characterization of
what happens to these over time. When you mix really low pH waters with tailings, you are going to be pulling out or leaching contaminants from those tailings, and that will be in the solution water. And we don't have

589 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 any measurement of that, at least that I have found. Q Thank you. I would like to move on a
little bit to what is -- are you familiar with the concept of contaminant pathways or exposure pathways? A Q A Yes. Could you describe what that is. That's something that you would consider
early on when you are evaluating the potential environmental effects of a site. You would draw
kind of a picture that would be the conceptual model of how these contaminants would move around. You look at the source materials, and in this case for the mill, it would be the raffinate and the tailings and that mixture. And then you would ask yourself, well, how could this get out into the environment and how could it move through soils, into groundwater, through groundwater to surface water to expose to biota, et cetera. So that's what we are talking
about with contaminant pathways. Q In your review of the materials, did
Energy Fuels evaluate potential contaminant pathways for the movement of those contaminants

590 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Q A in that? A Yes, this is one of those diagrams. It's here. from the tailing impoundments and evaporation ponds? A Yes, they did to some extent, and that
was in the environmental report. Q I'm pulling up a figure on the screen This material is in the record. It's in the
environmental impact analysis, Figure 57 at Page 115. Is this an accurate depiction of what was
not a nice picture. and arrows.
Instead, it's a bunch of boxes
And this was in the environmental
impact assessment that was done by CDPHE, but it was taken directly from the environmental report. Q receptors. And this slide deals with human There is another slide, also from the This is Figure 58
environmental impact analysis.
on Page 116 of the environmental impact analysis, and this appears to be slightly different from the previous. Can you -Right. -- identify and describe that difference. This is a lot of arrows kind of going in

591 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a lot of directions here, but maybe one to focus on down here, it says, run off/seepage from radioactive product material storage areas. For
example, those would be the raffinate evaporation ponds and the tailings impoundments. So they are
considering runoff and seepage, and you follow this arrow, okay, and it goes up to soil. So they did evaluate that possible pathway, that there could be leaks or overflows or, you know, breach of, you know, somehow getting those contaminants out to soils. And then it goes
to wind and surface soil, mammals, and birds. There's actually no pathway in these ecological receptors that evaluates the movement of leaks through the soil to groundwater and then to surface water. And Connie Travers is going to talk a lot more about that later than I am, but I just wanted to bring that up as a missing pathway. Q Were these slides also included in the
application materials? A Yes, they were also -- these were taken
directly from the environmental report. Q So the EIA took these slides and just
essentially copied them directly from Energy Fuels'

592 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 application without any alteration? A That's correct. They didn't seem to do
their own evaluation of possible contaminant pathways in the environment. And what -- I guess what we are most concerned about here is the possibility that there could be leaks of all those constituents that we were talking about on the previous slides -- you know, arsenic, cadmium, lead, uranium, vanadium, et cetera -- through the bottoms of these impoundments and go into the unsaturated zone and then move to groundwater or to some of these arroyos. Those
pathways were not considered for the ecological receptors. Q In your experience, is that the type of Do they
review or analysis that is typically done?
typically analyze all of those potential receptors? A Q receptors? A Right. And I think the reasoning behind Absolutely. So this one excludes some potential
it was -- well, number one, we have a great engineering system and we don't think it's going to leak below the lowest liner. Q I'm sorry. And the other --
When you say, we have a great

593 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 one, are you saying -- are you testifying to that or are you characterizing? A No. I'm sorry. Energy Fuels is saying
that they have a very good engineered system that will not leak below the lowest liner and it's a double-liner system. The other issue is that, as was mentioned a lot of times yesterday, Energy Fuels believes that there is basically no groundwater on most of the site. Q So moving on a little bit, you have
talked about the relatively high levels of chemical constituents in these waste streams, and you touched on it before, but I wanted to get to it more directly. Are there ways to reduce those concentrations to make that waste stream less toxic? A Q A Yes, there are. Can you give me some examples? Yeah. I mean, the most -- the cheapest
and the easiest one is the one that was evaluated already, which is neutralization of the raffinate, and lime is not very expensive. The sludge that
would be created from this could probably be put on

594 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the tailings impoundment, so you would raise the pH and then a lot of the metal and other constituents' concentrations would decrease. approach, is neutralization. Another one is the use of barium chloride to remove radium. That's done routinely. In fact, So that's one
I think it was mentioned here yesterday for the mine water, that if you added barium chloride, you would be able to precipitate out uranium and radium and maybe use that as feed to the mill. are a number of methods that are used. Q You mentioned that neutralization was So there
considered and that it is not a difficult or expensive measure. Was that something that was
included in this plan for the mill? A It was considered, but I believe what
Energy Fuels decided in the end was that it didn't reduce the concentrations below wildlife ecological thresholds and, therefore, it wasn't really worth doing. Q A When you say ecological -It did for some, depending on the pH, but
not for all of them. Q So neutralization -- what effect would
neutralization have?

595 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A It would raise the pH, so it would be And
less acidic, and lower the concentrations. this was mostly thinking about putting this raffinate out in evaporation ponds. Q
So it would result in the waste streams
being less toxic? A Q Definitely. And what might be a benefit of having
less toxic waste streams associated with a uranium mill? A Well, there are a number of benefits.
One is that the material -- well, the raffinate that would be in the evaporation ponds would be less toxic to birds and other wildlife that might encounter it. Also, if it leaks through any of
these impoundments to the environment, the concentrations would be lower and the pH would be lower. And it would be less likely to leach
additional contaminants from the environment. Another advantage that I think is really important is that the pH would be lower and you wouldn't have as much destruction of these liners that are put in place. Q A You said the pH would be lower? I'm sorry. The pH would be higher.

596 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q A I see. Right. It would be less acidic. And the
potential destruction of the liners that would be in contact with this raffinate and the tailings mixed with raffinate, it would be less likely that those liners would be adversely affected by this really acidic solution. Q What is the difference between -- should
there be a spill, is it between having higher toxic -- a solution with a low pH that is more acidic and higher toxicity to clean up a spill like that versus cleaning up a spill that has -- or a contamination that has a higher pH and less toxicity? Is there a difference, in your
experience, in the effort and cost associated with cleaning those? A I mean, either way, if it gets into the But you
environment, it is not a happy situation.
would have less treatment of the solution that you would need to extract from the unsaturated zone or groundwater, and that would lower your remediation costs. Q We heard yesterday that the liners were
tested, essentially, for compatibility with the anticipated acidic toxic waste streams.

597 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Q A Q Right. Did you review those testing data? Yes, I did. Can you tell me your -- in your opinion,
what -- how you would rate those, that testing, or what they did and how it compares? A What they did is they took the liner
material -- I believe it was the geomembrane -- and they wetted it up a little bit. And then they
exposed it to this pH 1.8 raffinate, and they exposed it for 48 hours, so two days, to this acidic solution. And then they looked at the
integrity of the liner afterwards. NRC recommends that you do this kind of testing, but what they say is that it has to be done for a sufficient period of time. And they
also note that degradation can occur rapidly after about nine months of exposure. So I don't believe
that a two-day exposure of this raffinate to the proposed lining materials is really representative of what you would have out in the environment over time. Q And, again, with regard to the liners, if
you have -- what's the difference in integrity of the liners between a low pH that is a high acidity

598 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 solution versus a more neutral solution? How do
the liners hold up under those various conditions? A If they are exposed to -- and I'm not an But if the
expert in this engineering piece of it.
liners are exposed to very low pH solutions for a long period of time, they will become brittle and crack and more holes will be in the liner than if they are not exposed to an acidic solution. Q Moving on a little bit. You talked about
how -- you know, we have got a solution here that would be, again, highly acidic and toxic. Were
there some measures that you identified -- and we talked about the ecological receptors. Were there some measures included to help protect, for instance, birds or other wildlife? A Yeah. Part of the plan was to put a
netting over the evaporation ponds and also to have bird balls over the -- kind of the water, what's called the tailings supernate, the water sitting on the top of the tailings cells -- to have bird balls over those to cut down on the exposure of birds to both of those waste materials. Q Would neutralization be an accepted or,
in your experience, a typical measure that would be considered and adopted to reduce that threat of

599 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 exposure? A Yes. And the NRC recommends that
tailings that are created by acid leach should be neutralized before they're put in cells. Q And do we have an acid leach mill system
proposed here? A Q Yes. Now, you mentioned -- and we heard
yesterday a little about -- and you were here yesterday listening to testimony? A Q Yes. You heard about the bird netting, how
originally it was proposed at 2-inch and then it was changed to three-quarters inch? A Q Yes. And that presumably was designed to help
protect larger birds or keep the impacts from -the wildlife being caught in this netting, to limit those to smaller bird or bats. Would reducing the size of that netting have an effect on the chemical characteristics of those ponds? A It would indirectly, and that's because
the -- when you reduce the mesh size to three-quarter inch, it's more like a solid fabric

600 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 than if it's 2-inch mesh. So it's good in terms of
excluding the birds, but it's not very good in terms of evaporation. The proposal is that 63 gallons per minute would be evaporated from these raffinate solution ponds. With a smaller mesh, you are going
to definitely decrease the evaporation rate. Q Did you see an analysis of the effects of
having that lower evaporation rate? A No. And what should be done is the water
balance needs to be recalculated with this new proposed mesh that we have heard about, and I did not see that recalculation of the water balance anywhere. And that's important because then you
might need a different amount of water or you might have more water there -- you would have more water there than you had planned for originally. Q In your expert opinion, if you were to
change a characteristic of the evaporation ponds in that way, would you expect to see the recalculation component and incorporate it into the design? A Yes. And that's something that should be
done at this stage, not after operations start. Q Moving on to some of the waste
containment measures that we're talking about that

601 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have been proposed for this mill, are you familiar in your review of the application materials with the waste containment plan? A Q Yes. Can you describe it briefly with respect
to the tailings, in particular. A Okay. Well, there are tailings cells.
The first tailing cell is divided into two, and then there are two other potential future cells. And the plan for the containment is a double liner, a 60-mil HDPE liner on the top, and then a material in between the two that has a higher permeability or a higher ability to have water move through it, and then underneath that, another 60-mil HDPE liner, and under that, a geo-synthetic liner that basically would be a manufactured clay liner under that. In between those two HDPE liners would be a
leachate collection and removal system, and they could pump any water that went through the first liner through that to decrease the pressure on the lower liner. Q Is that a similar design proposed for the
raffinate ponds? A Q Yes. So we have got double liners and a leak

602 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 leak? A Q failsafe? A No. I think -- it used to be that there Yes. Would you say that these measures are detection system in between them, just to make sure I'm clear. A Q Yes. In your experience, are -- do liners
was a lot of denial about liners leaking, and now everyone pretty much admits, okay, liners leak. I don't think there is a lot of controversy about that anymore. Q And did you find, in your review of the So
materials an acknowledgment -- and I think we may have heard it yesterday in testimony -- that Energy Fuels concedes and recognizes that, yes, liners leak? A Q Yes, they did. They have.
How does that square with a position that
there is no need for the -- to analyze that ecological receptor of potentially having contamination leak through those two liners? A Well, I mean, in my opinion, it doesn't But I think the thinking behind it
square with it.

603 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is, we have a leachate collection and removal system in between these two liners and then a kind of manufactured clay liner underneath, and we don't think it is going to go through the lower liner or this clay liner underneath that. Q Are you familiar with other liner designs
that would account for that possibility, for -that is to say, account for, you know, the possibility that the lower liner would also have leaks? A Q Yes, those are becoming more common. And where, in your experience, have you
seen such a liner designed and installed? A I mean, there -- now even municipal
landfills are using double liners with leachate collection systems and -- you know, in between the liners and underneath. And the one that I made
into a demonstrative is the Fernald site in Ohio, which is a low-level radioactive waste disposal. There's kind of mixed waste, but part of it is low-level radioactive waste. So that is similar to
what would be at the Pinon Ridge Mill. And this, I think, would be definitely considered state of the art right now. are -- okay. And there
And just in the general sense,

604 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 looking at the waste materials from farther away here, there is a double liner, there's leachate collection and removal in between those two liners. But the thing that they have that Energy Fuels has not proposed is this horizontal monitoring pipe. It can be slotted at different locations here so that when and if leachate goes through that bottom liner, you have a very close-by way to get that material out of there, to get the solution out of there and see if it is leaking and see what the concentrations are. of it. If you look -- it's probably not very easy to see here, but there's a couple of liners, there's a number of clay liners and then synthetic liners all lined up on top of each other. There's So that's kind of the overview
opportunity to -- a leachate removal system in between those. And then under the lowest liner, And
there's another system to prevent migration.
even under that, there is another pipe that would remove any leaking solution that would get through the lowest liner and send that to a collection facility. Q In a situation like a uranium/vanadium
mill, what would -- you know, in general terms,

605 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 what would be the benefit of having a detection system under that lowest -- or what are the potential consequences of not having such a system in place? A If you don't have that kind of a system
in place, you don't know if you have any leakage below the lowest liner. And then you don't know --
and I really do believe the way the monitoring system is set up right now, that a lot could happen without Energy Fuels knowing about it. If you have a leak detection system and a leachate collection and removal system underneath the lowest liner, you at least know if you are having leaks below that lowest liner. Q Are there other additional systems that
can be put in place to minimize the risk associated with, you know, accidents or leaks or spills, particularly with respect to leaks from piping? A piping. With piping, you can have double-walled You can have lined collection ditches, and
Energy Fuels has proposed a line collection ditch. And I believe -- at least what I have most recently read -- it was proposed to be single-walled piping. So that's another possible contaminant transport pathway, is these pipes that are bringing tailings

606 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 out to the tailings impoundment and raffinate out to the evaporation ponds. They could breach. So
you need to make sure that those are best practice as well. Q Are there any other aspects of the
contaminant containment design that you found to be less than comprehensive in your review of the materials? A The tailings impoundment cells are mostly They are 80 percent below grade, but
below grade.
20 percent of the material or the impoundment would be above grade. The best practice there would
definitely be to have the entire impoundment below grade. If you don't have it all below grade, then
the berms could potentially breach and the radioactive material could be released into the environment. I did not see an evaluation of that possible pathway. It might be there, but I And I think we heard a
certainly didn't see it.
little bit from Mr. Filas about why they decided not to put them entirely below grade. But that
would definitely be best practice at this type of facility. Q Back a little bit, just to finish up with

607 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the liner systems, I guess to start: Is the liner
system with the leak detection below it, is it unique? Would that be something that you would
expect to -- is it unique in the mining industry? A No, it's not. You know, gold mining --
gold mines that have heap leach operations have pregnant leach solution ponds that are double-lined with leachate collection underneath with what's called vadose zone or unsaturated zone monitoring. So those have been in use for a long time, and so it's not unique, no. Q You used the word "vadose zone." Can you
tell me what that means. A That would be the area underneath the
soil, and it can include the soil, that would be between the ground surface and the regional water table. Connie Travers is going to talk a lot more
about that, but that's a quick definition. Q Okay. In your experience, have similar
systems like that design that you saw, proposed design for the Pinon Ridge Mill, are they of such integrity that it would render planning for failure a superfluous task, you know, unneeded to look at the potential for failure? A No. You always have to plan for failure.

608 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 You hope for the best, but you can't base your monitoring program on hope. In fact, the Nuclear
Regulatory, NRC, recommends that -- in fact, says that you can't assume that liners won't leak. the liners under the tailings impoundment, the liners under the evaporation ponds, you have to assume they will leak and set up the monitoring program so that you can detect, at least detect. And then you have a chance of fixing it more rapidly and having less contamination of the environment. Q And does that apply to both the first So
liner -- are they talking about only the first liner or does that apply to both -- in a double-lined system, would that same recommendation apply to both liners? A No. It applies to both. You have to
assume that, even though you have a double liner and a leachate collection system and removal system in between, that it still could leak through that bottom liner. Q Are you familiar with other areas that
have had problems with their liner systems, other uranium mills, even, that had have such problems? A Yes. Although they don't have such a

609 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 great engineering system, but there are certainly -- in fact, the work that I did at the Cavira Mill in New Mexico, they had lined solution ponds that leaked. So it wouldn't be the first
time we have heard about this. Q Are there states that indeed would --
state laws pertaining to lining design and such leak detection? A Yeah, there are -- I didn't do an
exhaustive search, but the State of Oregon requires this for cyanide ponds, but not only cyanide. Any
solution pond that would have toxic solution waste in it, you are required to have a double liner and a leachate collection and removal system underneath the lowest liner. something similar. MS. LUCAS: Your Honor, we would And California also has
like to register an objection that she's testifying as to a legal conclusion. MR. PARSONS: I would say she is
merely testifying as to her understanding, that there are other states in the country that require this type of design she is talking about, and that is her understanding of the requirements in the industry.

610 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Q THE HEARING OFFICER: To the extent To the
it's a legal conclusion, I will sustain it.
extent it's -- and that gets us to the question of whether it's regulatory or statutory. The
witness -- her experience, it's good enough, but I'll take the objection. answer. Q (By Mr. Parsons) I have some questions I don't have a good
about the -- you mentioned a little bit about the tailings impoundment being above grade and the potential for failure of the retention berms. What is a way to mitigate that potential? You mean if they are -Well, in this case, we have a facility Is there a way to
that is mostly below grade.
better protect against such failure? A I mean, the best approach would be to put And if you are not
it 100 percent below grade.
doing that, then you would need monitoring, you know, around the sides of the impoundment. But the
best approach would definitely be to put the entire thing below grade. Q And what's the consequence of having
above-grade facilities? A I think the main concern is storms that

611 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 could come through. The impoundments are proposed We are in a changing
to be there for 40 years. climate environment.
We don't know what the future
climate could be, but there could be increased frequency of strong storms. So the idea is that
those berms could be breached during a strong storm. If they're below grade, there is a much
lower chance of that. Q In your review of the materials, was that Was that contingency planned
scenario addressed? for? A grade? Q I'm sorry.
You mean to monitor or put it below
Was the potential for severe
storms or otherwise breaches of the retention berms, was there a plan in place to protect against that? A I believe what we heard is that there was I did
a plan for visual observation of the berms.
not see anything that was a plan to shore up the berms in a more stable way or to increase monitoring. I also don't recall seeing a pathway
for breaching of the berms in the tailings impoundment and getting contaminants into the environment. So I don't think it was thoroughly

612 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 evaluated. Q Thank you. One of the aspects that we
saw identified with respect to this site is some of the faults that are -- that exist. Did you
identify any faulting in your review of the materials that may exist at the site? A Yes, and I think we have seen maps There are two faults that run
showing the faults.
through this site, and I didn't see anything about potential movement of contaminants along those faults. And I believe that one of the tailings
impoundments, the fault goes right underneath that. And the concern there isn't necessarily movement along the fault, but if there is a leak, getting that into the fault and then moving it offsite. Q aspect. Would you consider this facility state of the art, in your experience? A Q It is definitely not state of the art. Would you, in your expert opinion -Okay. I'm coming to a close on this
what's your opinion as to whether Energy Fuels has adequately analyzed potential impacts from potential contaminant releases at the site? A I think there is some very important

613 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 missing pathways that were not evaluated in the environmental report or in the EIA. The most
important ones being the movement of contaminants from leaks through these impoundments, through the soil material, the unsaturated zone, to arroyos. That was not evaluated. Q I would like to move on to a portion of You spoke about the term
your written testimony. "adaptive management."
Are you familiar with the term "adaptive management"? A Q A Yes. Can you describe what you mean by that? It's a management approach for industrial
and other types of facilities that assumes that we don't know everything up front and that as a facility is operated, you have a better idea of how management and monitoring might change. However, it's not an excuse not to plan and not to do monitoring; quite the opposite. idea is that you would look at all the possible contaminant pathways and you would, as best you can, come up with the state-of-the-art monitoring and operation. And then as the facility opens and The
has experience, you know, to have, let's say,

614 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 yearly adaptive management plan meetings that would incorporate the public and see how you might want to change the operational plans for the facility. Q So does an adaptive management plan deal
with what -- kind of the if and when something goes wrong -A Q A Right. -- contingency? The idea with the adaptive management
plan is you want to have all that management ideas in up front before you start, so that if something does go wrong -- which at some point will certainly happen -- that you are not inventing the wheel right then. You have something you can look at and
say, for example, if the tailings berm is breached, here is exactly what we are going to do. Q And did you see that sort of analysis in
the application materials or the other materials you reviewed with respect to this project? A There were some measures for emergency -I
I guess they were called emergency response.
believe it was just some of the reagents or spills of some of the reagents. But for more of the kind
of operational characteristics that I'm talking about, I didn't see anything that was sort of an

615 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 if/then. You know, if this happens, here is what
we are going to do. Q Is that -- would that be a typical -- or
in your experience, is that a design practice that's typically used in the industry? A It is becoming more and more common, and
I would consider it a best management practice. Q And is it an important aspect? Would you
consider it an important aspect of a mill design? A It is because -- I mean, for example, I
didn't see anything that says, you know, if the -you know, we have the two liners and the leachate removal collection system in between the two. So
there is a certain rate that you would be pumping at that would be called an action level. And above
that action level, then something would have to happen, okay? You know, you would have to drain,
let's say, the evaporation cell and maybe fix the liner. I didn't see anything that would say, all
right, uh-oh, the leachate collection removal rate is increasing quite a bit here. What do we do?
There was one table, and I think it was Volume 2, Appendix B1 of the tailings management that said leachate action level. It mentioned it,
but I didn't see anywhere else where it said,

616 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 here's the level that we think we want to use and here is what we're going to do if we reach that action level. Q Some of the work you have done -- has
some of the work you have done dealt with identifying potential financial liabilities for a mill in case things don't go as planned? A To some extent. I'm not a financial
expert on this, but I've certainly evaluated remediation costs at a number of mines. Q So your experience is more when something
goes wrong, what are the costs associated with that? A Q Yes. Would an adaptive management plan be a
component of ensuring that the costs are controlled with regard to a uranium mill? A It would be. If you know as quickly as
possible when something does go wrong and you have a plan for how you are going to fix it, then that definitely decreases on the remediation costs in the end. Q Have you reviewed any information
regarding final remediation costs at other uranium mill sites?

617 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 range. A Q Yes. In your report, your written testimony
that you submitted, did you include some of those -- examples of those costs? A Q A Q Yes, I did. And is this that table you have? Yes, it's very hard to see, but... So that is that table from your report. Can you describe what you see here and why you include it and what point you were making. A These are a number of mill sites in
different states around the country, uranium mill sites. And this -- these two columns here are the The first one is the ore that
uranium ore process.
was mined that went to these mills, and this is how much uranium was produced. This is -- the
remediated material volume is how many million cubic yards was remediated and the total cost for remediating those. You can see that there is a pretty wide The highest cost is this one in Grand
Junction, and I think it was Kim Morrison that mentioned they had to move a lot of material for that one, and that was pretty costly. Q So just to clarify, the numbers on the

618 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 right are the final remediation costs, and those numbers, it says, are in thousands of U.S. dollars? A Q Right. That's 540 million U.S. dollars.
And are those costs higher than what you
understand to be the bond in place at this facility? A Most of them are quite a bit higher. I
believe the bond for Energy Fuels at Pinon Ridge is now 15 million, and there are some that are down in that range. But they aren't -- you know, there are
also quite a few higher than that. Q Of course, we recognize -- or do you
recognize that all of these sites -- I mean, there hasn't been a new uranium mill built in the United States in some time. A Right. In 30 years it's my understanding
there hasn't been a uranium mill that's been permitted. So a lot of these are -- somebody might
say, well, it's not really fair, because they didn't have the same environmental protections or engineered barriers, for example, as a mill that would be permitted now. But I think that the main
message is that if things do go wrong, that it is quite expensive to remediate these sites. Q So, again, with respect to the adaptive

619 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 management strategy you discussed, would you consider that a necessary component of a competent mill design and mitigation plan? A Q I do. I guess, again, based on your testimony
here today, would you consider that -- with your review of the materials, do you think that the planned designed for the Pinon Ridge Mill take into account all of the aspects that they should have? A No, they don't. There are a number of
important missing protective measures that could have been incorporated in the design, that should have been incorporated in the design, to make it best practice and most protective in the environment. I mentioned a few of them. I guess
the ones that I'm focusing on are:
What happens
if, you know, these really acidic, high-metal concentration solutions leak out into the environment? We need more protections than what
there is now proposed. Q A And why are those protections important? Because you could have environmental
receptors, including groundwater, surface water, and ecological receptors -- birds, wildlife, et cetera -- that could be exposed to these toxic

620 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 materials. Q You know, we talked about how some of
these mills are old or kind of a previous life of the uranium mining industry. Is there any
difference in the waste between what they produced then in terms of waste and what we have now? A No, there really isn't. I mean, it is
definitely true that the engineered solutions and the barriers have improved greatly in, let's say, 30 years. There are a lot better designs for
preventing or minimizing the release of these wastes to the environment. However, the wastes that are put in these impoundments are every bit as toxic as they have ever been. So the raffinate is extremely toxic,
and there have really been no important changes in the way that's been created; and the tailings, same for the tailings. Q So if this is the first uranium mill in
30 years, would you say that there is any empirical evidence that would demonstrate that the design that they have undertaken here would be protective? A Not really. You know, we have plans for
these improved engineered designs, and there are some mills that have these, you know, incorporated

621 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 around the world. But we don't have a long enough
record of environmental monitoring to really know how long these last and how effective they are. Q And so could you -- lastly, could you
just describe some of those management practices that should be included, if you can summarize some of that testimony in terms of the specifics that should have been included. A Well, I think one of the most important
ones is to have a leachate collection and removal and detection system underneath the lowest liner, and that's not proposed; to have the complete 100 percent below-grade tailings impoundments; and to neutralize the raffinate before it is put in the evaporation ponds and mixed with the tailings so that you don't have the liners exposed to this incredibly acidic solution and that the wildlife that could encounter it in the evaporation ponds and the tailings impoundments are exposed to not such high concentrations. main ones I would focus on. Q Would an adaptive management plan also be Those are, I guess, the
a component of that? A Right. If you had an up-front adaptive
management plan that said, if this happens, this is

622 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 record. you, Dr. Maest. what we are going to do, and we are going to re-evaluate this every year with the public and have a lot of public involvement with that to see how the operations have gone and how you can improve them on an annual basis. I don't see that
in this plan, and that would definitely be another best practice that would be prudent to use. MR. PARSONS: That's all I have for
Thank you very much for your time
and expertise this morning, but don't run away yet. I think some other questions might be coming for you. THE HEARING OFFICER: I think we
have fingers wearing out at this table up here, so we'll take ten minutes and come back. (Recess taken, 10:01 to 10:22 a.m.) THE HEARING OFFICER: Go ahead. CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DR. ANN MAEST BY MR. SPAANSTRA: Q A Q Good morning, Doctor. Morning. Just a couple of -- before we get into We are on the
the details, just a couple of clarification timing questions.

623 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I believe? A Q A Q One of them, yes. That's the later one. The later one, yes. And as I believe you are aware, the Your report was dated December 15, 2010,
license decision was issued in January 2011, and the license itself issued in March of 2011. A Q A Q Okay. You will accept that? I will accept that, yes. So your report was in the record before
the license was issued? A Q Yes. That was just simple arithmetic. Bill
Clinton would be happy with us if we can do that. Now, let's just sort of walk through your testimony briefly. We have up on the screen your And I note that I
dissolved concentrations slide.
the raffinate number we have up there is 1.8.
believe that's similar to the raffinate number in that Dwyer report that you reviewed. A Q Yes. And so all the other numbers sort of flow
from that number, essentially?

624 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Q A You are talking about the pH of 1.8? Yeah. Yes, I believe the tables did not list
the pH, but it was in the written part of the report. Q So in -- have you reviewed the design
operations plan and the mill design plans in Volume 1 and Volume 3 of the application? A Q A Q The facility operating plan? Yeah. Yes. And didn't the facility operating plan
use a number for raffinate of 4.4? A Yes, I think I mentioned that. And my
understanding is that was what the pH would be if it was mixed with tailings. Q Okay. And did you testify it wasn't
going to be mixed with tailings? A No. There are two waste streams. One is
the raffinate that just goes straight out to the evaporation ponds, the barren raffinate, after the uranium and vanadium are extracted. And the other
waste stream is raffinate, barren raffinate, mixed with tailings. And I believe that's the one that
has the pH of 4.4.

625 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Okay. Actually, in those two volumes -That, in fact, the
I think you are mistaken.
barren raffinate that comes from vanadium processing is also 4.4. A Q Okay. And I don't have those two documents with
me, but in the MSHA report that was introduced this morning -- let's talk about that for a second. The MSHA report is for a different purpose, correct? I mean, that's to monitor air
emissions, not emissions to groundwater and the like, correct? A That's my understanding, yes. That's
about the extent of my understanding of that. Q Okay. So fundamentally it does monitor
emissions but to air. A Q Right, from solids. In terms of the issue of whether the
second barren raffinate stream is 4.4, I would like you, if you could, to just read the last paragraph of that report. And I think it clears up the
confusion that actually leachate is 4.4. A Q Okay. It starts here on the bottom of -THE HEARING OFFICER: Which report,

626 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Mr. Spaanstra? MR. SPAANSTRA: This would be the
report prepared by Energy Fuels, submitted to U.S. EPA in August 2010 related to the MSHA permit, which was introduced in her direct testimony. And
I'm using the document that, actually, Jeff handed to me, I think. Q (By Mr. Spaanstra) And I just, for the So it would be the
record, want to clear that up.
last -- Page 4 and then over to the next... A Let me just look at the surrounding
information here first. (Witness reviewing document.) Okay. Do you want me to read this to
myself or out loud? Q A Into the record. Okay. It says: The depleted aqueous
solution (i.e. the vanadium raffinate) flows from the mixer settlers into a raffinate settler for removal of residual organics and then is pumped to the tailings collection box and/or the evaporation ponds. As shown in Figure 2, the aqueous solution
increases from a pH of 1.1 to a final pH of 4.44 during the vanadium extraction process. increase in pH plays an important role in This

627 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 determining the final radiochemistry of the raffinate, as radium, like most metals, precipitates out of solution with an increase in pH. Most of these metal-laden precipitates are
removed in the polishing filters and pumped to the tailings cell for disposal. The remaining
precipitates are either entrained in the organics and removed in the scrubbing stage or remain as suspended solids in the raffinate. Q Great. Thank you very much.
So to the extent that this chart is based on a raffinate pH of 1.8, it really doesn't reflect what's going to happen at Pinon Ridge, correct? A I'm not sure that's correct, actually.
What that paragraph talked about was the vanadium solution, and it sounds like it's true that, you know, a pH of 1.8 is lower than what would be mixed with the tailings and go to the evaporation ponds. However, a pH of 4.4 is also low, and one of my complaints about this, the information that was presented, is that we don't have a full characterization at that pH. Q Thank you for that response. But these
numbers -- that new column that you have added are based -- maximum magnitude of exceedance -- are

628 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 based on 1.8, not 4.4. A Q That's correct. Okay. Great. Let's move on.
You talked a little bit about leaks, but then we got into waste containment in much greater detail later, so I'm just going to skip beyond that for a minute and we'll come back to that. In terms of -- I was a little confused about -- essentially I thought I heard you say that, essentially, in terms of analysis of environmental exposure pathways, that there wasn't much of an analysis related to groundwater and surface water. A Q A You mean in terms of leaks, or anything? No. In terms of anything.
What I believe I stated was that for the
human exposure pathway, there was an analysis that included groundwater. But there wasn't much of an
analysis of contaminants moving through shallow groundwater. Q A Q The vadose zone. Right. V-A-D-O-S-E, vadose. I believe you were here for Frank's testimony, at least part of it, yesterday. And my

629 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A recollection was he said that groundwater existed at the site at about 460 feet, except for one portion away from -A I mean, Connie Travers is going to talk
about this a lot more, but what I remember him saying a number of times was that there really wasn't any groundwater beneath most of the site and that there was groundwater in some limited locations at about 300 to 400 feet deep. Q Okay. And that all is analyzed and
discussed in a hydrogeological report in Volume 5. I take it you've reviewed that? I looked at it briefly. That's really
more Connie Travers' area. Q Great. Maybe we will have some That would be good -- or
conversation with Connie. maybe Olivia will.
But let's move on to neutralization. think you very actively said that neutralization certainly -- I mean, obviously -- well, let me start off. It's obviously 4.4, and we'll have a
discussion of the -- the whole process is really over my head, but we will have some discussion later. But just assume for a second that I'm

630 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 right, that the raffinate is 4.4, the barren raffinate, across both vanadium -- in the mill, let's just assume it is 4.4. A Q Okay. At 4.4 -- and I believe you alluded to
either 1.8 or 4.4, I think 4.5 -- there still would be some toxicity of it existing there. wouldn't totally eliminate it. You
For example,
wouldn't selenium still be at a level that exceeds the standards? A Q It would be, yes. In terms of the impact of that on
wildlife, which I think you testified briefly about, we established that you are not a wildlife biologist. It was just a fact that wildlife could
come in contact with -A Right. I'm just looking at some
thresholds for wildlife. Q Moving on to -- your testimony related to
wildlife, and that's the controls on the evaporation ponds, and you talked about the netting. And I think you stated at one point that
the less evaporation that occurs in terms of having the netting be finer, thinner, decreases -- the more evaporation that occurs increases the toxicity

631 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of the material that's left. A Q In general, that's correct. And so there was some suggestion that we
should have netting that decreases the evaporation -- that allows for evaporation? A Q I'm sorry. Could you...
I believe you made the point that And so in the
evaporation increases the toxicity.
context of the controls on the evaporation ponds that are there for wildlife, you have to consider things that -- you want to do things that mitigate the level of evaporation? A Q A Q netting. A No. What I said was that moving from a I don't think I said that. Okay. I'm pretty sure I did not. Well, in terms of the fineness of the
2-inch mesh to a three-quarter inch mesh will decrease the evaporation rate on those impoundments, which will change the water balance. I wasn't talking about the toxicity and how that would change the toxicity at all. Q A I'm sorry. Then I misunderstood.
Yeah, I was just talking about the water

632 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 was: balance and how that wasn't recalculated. Q Okay. Yeah, you did. Where I was going
It sounded like you were advocating for less
evaporation, but then you were saying, but if you have more evaporation, it would mess up your water balance. And so the question is: Aren't you in a
damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario? A No, you are definitely not. What I was
advocating for, if anything, is treatment of the raffinate before it goes out to the evaporation ponds. Q Let's move on to waste containment. You
very graciously acknowledged that this double HDPE -- HDPE with a GCL underneath is certainly an advance over what's been used at other sites historically. A Q For uranium mills, yes, definitely. In fact, isn't it true that that's
essentially -- I mean, that structure is a structure that EPA requires for hazardous waste facilities across the country. A Q A It's pretty close, yes. In terms of the thickness -For --

633 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q A Q A Q -- and the --- B and all that? Correct. Yes. Obviously, one of the issues is the leak
detection under the GCL, and the hazardous waste regulations provide for that but also provide for a waiver if you're in a situation with minimal groundwater. A That's correct? I'll have to take your
I don't know.
word on that. Q Okay. We'll get back to the leak I think you cited, as an
detection in a minute.
example, a facility that has a leak detection facility -- excuse me -- leak detection technology under the GCL layer, or at least the bottom layer, maybe not the GCL, is Fernald. A Q Right. And you indicated that Fernald -- and
that is -- just so you know, I'm involved in Portsmouth now and wasn't involved in Fernald. recollection -- I'm getting old, you can tell -but that facility was built ten years ago, maybe? A Q It's recent. A recent one? My

634 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Q Yeah. It was being designed for a long time. I
remember when it was being designed. What's the proximity to the groundwater at that site? A Q than 50. A Q waste. I would assume that it is. You said it was for low-level radioactive In terms of the applicable DOE orders, that I don't know exactly. Right. It's Ohio. It's less
It's not 460 feet.
means that waste from 2,000 to 10,000 picocuries, P-I-C-O-C-U-R-I-E-S, that it may be -- it's likely, because most people aren't experts in the DOE orders, but that sounds about the right range? don't know? A All I know is that it includes low-level You
radioactive waste. Q For those purposes, that's 2,000 to 10,
but you don't know that -A Q I don't know. -- and I can't testify, so the -- do you
know what the picocurie level is here from the documents? A No.

635 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q If I told you it was in the 640 range,
you would say that's roughly a third of the lowest level of the other range that I just described. A If I take your word for what you are
saying, sure. Q Again, President Clinton would be happy Let's move on from that.
with my arithmetic.
You talked about single-walled pipe and said that we ought to have double-walled. questions there. You are aware that that system, under the operations plan I referenced, is inspected daily. If there was a leak in the interior pipe, you can see it, you can inspect it. So wouldn't it be A couple
superior to the double-walled, given that the single-walled in the design in the operations plan is in a lined trench? So if you've got inspection
daily that says, okay, if we've got a leak in that pipe and we can see it and we can deal with it and it is contained in a lined trench, wouldn't that be better than a double-walled where you wouldn't see it? A I don't think so. I mean, are you
talking about visual inspection? Q Yeah.

636 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you. A Yeah. I mean, visual inspection can And what I was talking So
certainly miss things.
about is a double-walled in a lined trenched. it's the same situation you would have with a
double liner, which would be superior to a single liner. Q Okay. We have already talked about the
other mills and you certainly conceded that -well, we will talk about it when we get to costs. You mentioned Oregon and California law requires a leak detection system underneath the liners. Do you know in what context that is? Is
it a hazardous waste, solid waste? A In Oregon -- I know a little more about But the
the Oregon one and I can look that up.
Oregon one is for cyanide solutions but not only for cyanide solutions, also for what they call toxic solutions, other toxic solutions. Q A Q Okay. We don't have that with us.
I have it on my computer. Well, so you don't have it in front of That's okay. We'll leave that. Are you
Let's move on to the berms.
aware of how big and thick these berms are? A You know, I had a hard time finding a

637 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 have it. MR. SPAANSTRA: Yeah. See, this is That's my bad. MR. STILLS: Where is this taken from? MR. SPAANSTRA: Where is it taken -That's all right. look at that? MR. SPAANSTRA: I'm sorry, Travis. cross-section through those impoundments, but... Q Actually -- I'm just going to represent
to you that Frank's looking because he actually knows the facility very well. The way I read this is that, essentially, those berms are, at the base, 140 feet wide and at the center -MR. STILLS: Could we have a quick
it is from the design, I think in Volume 3. MR. FILAS: design, approximately. Volume 2, tailings cells
That's a nominal drawing. If you have it, can we
MR. STILLS:
take a second and actually look at it? THE HEARING OFFICER: I assume I
why we needed hard copies of everything, Your Honor. THE HEARING OFFICER: Yeah, and a

638 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 truck. MR. SPAANSTRA: MR. STILLS: as a hypothetical -MR. SPAANSTRA: it as a hypothetical. Q (By Mr. Spaanstra) So let's assume that, I Yeah, I will offer And a truck.
If you want to offer it
essentially, this is the design of the berm. guess we are pretty confident it's not a hypothetical. I just testified, but...
So I think your testimony was it should be -- that these cells should be totally underground, but the berms could be breached in some sort of meteorological event. A Q Yes. Do you have some sense of the magnitude
of such an event that would breach 140-by-20-foot berm? A When you say 140 feet thick, that is the
horizontal? Q A Q A Q Yes. And the... 20 feet vertical. 20 feet above ground? Let's assume --

639 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A before. 20 feet, I remember you saying that 20 feet above ground and 60 feet wide. When I talk about a breach, I'm not talking about a complete breach. You know, if you
had erosion of the sides, if you had some of that material brought up into wind, there are many different meteorological conditions that could cause the release of the tailings that were not in the middle of that impoundment and not covered. Q A Such as? A strong windstorm, a rainstorm that was,
you know, in the hundred-year or higher occurrence interval. And my understanding is that the
tailings beaches are not going to be covered with bird balls and they are not going to be covered with water. So during operation, at least before they're covered, the berm sands could be subjected to release, either off the sides of the berm or into wind. I'm not a meteorologist. I don't know
how to talk about these particular events, but that's what my concern is. Q Okay. Thank you. Let's move on to --
you appropriately acknowledged that -- the slide where you were describing the cost of remediation

640 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 at historic mills, you certainly acknowledged that I would say that's unfair, you know, these don't have double HDPE with a GCL underneath, and that's true. I would say it's unfair, but you said, hey,
you know, if this stuff escapes into the environment, this is how it's cleaned up. Later on, when asked the question, I think, do we have empirical evidence that even the new technology would work, you said, no, we don't have evidence, empirical evidence, that it would work. So if you take from that that we should -- that's another dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. I mean, are you saying we shouldn't
implement this increased technology that you acknowledge would likely mitigate environmental exposure because we don't have empirical evidence that it will work? A I definitely wasn't saying that. And I
don't think it's another example of damned if you do, damned if you don't. Q Thank you. THE HEARING OFFICER: MR. GOAD: Mr. Goad. Thank you.
No questions.
Dr. Grossman.

641 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DR. GROSSMAN: MR. SPAANSTRA: I have a few. Your Honor, there
was a question about where the tailings cell design was in the record. I just want to, for the record,
say it is in Volume 2, Drawing 6. THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DR. ANN MAEST BY DR. GROSSMAN: Q I would just like to -- hi. I would just like to talk to you just a little bit about your statements about adaptive management. A Q Okay. And the fact that you get the best
scientific and technical information that you can get concerning a particular process or operation like this mill and you sit down and you try to figure out the kind of things that could go wrong. A Q That's right. And you have already engineered it to go Now you have to go back
right to make a profit.
and look at the things that could go wrong that would take away from that profit if they went wrong -A That's one way to --

642 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q -- and try to adapt to that or at least
get a handle on it, so when it happens, you have some rough idea of either the consequences that would take away from your profit or the mitigations which would help keep your profit line going; is that -A That's one way to look at it, is from the
profit side, yes. Q So I guess my query here is: In your
estimation, in this adaptive management scheme, would you take into account what we know as black swans? If you were here at my opening statement, I
talked about black swans; in other words, those things that happen at the tails of a distribution, your 100-year thunderstorm. And I might add that
there is a local maximum of thunderstorms right in this area forced by the La Sal Mountain range over here. Would that include the analysis of black swans, in your estimation of adaptive management, the way you understand it? A Yes, it definitely would, to the extent
that you'd know about those so-called black swans at the time. It would also allow, as time goes
on -- and I'm involved right now, actually, for a

643 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 mine in Washington state where the thing that happened wasn't imagined. Even though they have a
pretty good adaptive management plan, there was a hydrologic event that happened that they didn't plan for, and now they can put that into the adaptive management plan. you move along. But to the extent that you can, you want to think -- know the meteorology, know the site, characterize it as well as you can, and think about the things that could go wrong and plan for how to address them. Q question. It's a little confusing to this citizen how this has been set up. But the way I understand Thank you. I'm going to ask another So things can change as
it, we are dealing here with a radionuclides license. And over on the other side, in limbo
right now, equally important to the vetting of the "okay" to this mill, is an air dispersion report, and for all I know -- I mean permit. And for all I
know, there are other permits out there I'm not aware of. But in dealing just with the radionuclides, this has to do with the tailings

644 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 piles that you are talking about and the fact that these piles have -- 20 percent of their area is above grade. Are we talking about the same thing, radionuclide pathways and their -- you have talked about their potential dispersion into the groundwater. But there is another pathway, and
that's into the atmosphere; is that correct? A That's correct. You can have wind-blown
tailings, and that's happened certainly at a lot of other uranium -Q license? A And that pertains to this radionuclide Because you are blowing off... You know, I don't know. I'm sorry. I
haven't focused on that. Q tailings? A There can be, right, especially the ones Are there radionuclides coming off of the
that are not covered with water. Q tailings? And what else can come off of the It sounds like you have all these, I
don't know, chelates or these heavy metal compounds that are also -- have been either precipitated out of the raffinate or something so that they are in this tailings pile. I'm really naive at this, so

645 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I'm just flying by the seat of my pants right now. A I think you are talking about the salts
that could be precipitated as the raffinate evaporates, and those could become airborne, but... Q So in addition to the radiation, you
could have these sort of other toxic materials that are coming out of the processing. the tailings; is that correct? A Yes, a number of the constituents of They are also in
concern are just metals; they are not radioactive. Q storms. All right. We talked about these dust
And do you know -- in your experience, do
you know of any studies that have discussed or investigated the chemical interaction of dust with tailings? A I guess I don't know what you mean by --
are you talking about dust from the tailings? Q No. I'm talking about dust that's blown
into the area that comes in contact with the tailings pile for any period of time and then is then ejected from the tailings pile, having had some kind of chemical interaction with the chemicals and metals and various things that are in the tailings pile. A Okay. So you are talking about dust

646 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that. MR. SPAANSTRA: So you can ask all anything. done? MR. SPAANSTRA: You haven't done falling on the tailings and then taking up some of the contaminants and then being blown off. Q A That's right. It sounds like a pathway, but I have not
read any studies on that. Q In all of your experience. So this is an
unknown possible pathway? A That's right. But don't forget that I'm
not an air person. Q Yeah. But you are a chemistry person. I
will take care of the air and other colleagues can take care of the air. What I'm interested in -Dr. Grossman. Yes. What have I
MR. SPAANSTRA: DR. GROSSMAN:
She has said, both to me and to you, And so at this
that her expertise is not in air.
juncture -- you are going to have an opportunity to testify, so we are kind of back to where this shouldn't be an opportunity to testify. DR. GROSSMAN: Okay. I understand
these hypotheticals, but in effect, what you are

647 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 doing is testifying. So with that, I'm not --
that's not an objection, but that's just the way it works. And if you keep sort of doing hypotheticals
and saying, could that possibly be true, then I probably will object, okay, related to air. DR. GROSSMAN: stop the air in just a second. Q (By Dr. Grossman) That's my point. My Okay. I'm going to
point was that I'm more interested in your expertise in letting me and other people know what happens on the tailing pile before anything happens in the air. When that dust hits the tailings pile,
I'm interested in what the chemical reaction is with that piece of geology that's coming in via the air but lands on the tailings pile. Is there any studies of that kind of chemical interaction? A I am not aware of any specifically with
tailings impoundments or these types of waste containment facilities. But there are certainly
tons of studies on interaction of dust particles with solutions and, you know... Q Well, I just bring this up as a potential We can take the
pathway into the atmosphere.
atmosphere later on, but I'm just thinking that if

648 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 no. there is any kind of chemical interaction between these dust particles, that they take up any percentage of these toxic materials, including the radiation, the radionuclides, then that's a pathway that needs to be looked at. A Okay. DR. GROSSMAN: MR. SPAANSTRA: How did I do? You did great. Mr. Sandler.
THE HEARING OFFICER: MR. SANDLER: Nothing.
I'm going to
break a rule and ask a couple of questions. If you have a tailings pile with liquid on top of the tailings pile, you said -- you testified it becomes more concentrated as it evaporates. DR. MAEST: Yes. Does the
THE HEARING OFFICER: evaporation process change the pH? DR. MAEST:
It can, but generally
I mean, what happens is you are evaporating
pure water, and what's left behind is more concentrated. And generally, contaminants that are
in the water will increase in concentrations unless you hit what's called a solubility point, where

649 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 them, yes. THE HEARING OFFICER: Next question: they precipitate out a solution. form a salt that would be -THE HEARING OFFICER: So at some So then you might
point, the metals fall out -- at some point in that evaporation process? DR. MAEST: Some of them, not all of
Are there general studies that you're aware of of these -- I have never seen a site with mesh over a tailings pile. Are there general studies of the
effects of meshes over tailings piles? DR. MAEST: I'm not aware of any. I
think the thinking -- and this was even -actually, the first time I heard about this was in a letter from Kim Morrison that was from November 2nd, 2012. And she admitted in that letter that
decreasing the mesh size would decrease the evaporation rate. I'm not personally aware of any
of those studies, but I think the idea is that you would have more shading, because you have more solid and less holes, fewer holes. But I don't
know of any studies specifically on tailings impoundment that looked at, let's say, the variety of mesh sizes and how that affects --

650 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE HEARING OFFICER: Well, even on
just a water pool, I mean, are you aware of any studies, in general, about the effects of an evaporation rate of mesh over the top? DR. MAEST: I am not. They very
well might exist, but I'm not aware of that. THE HEARING OFFICER: question I have is: And the last
From your reading of the plans
in the tailings impoundment, does it specify the tailings level or the water level that -- I'm talking about your berm argument. DR. MAEST: Right. I don't know.
I really have no idea what the answer is. DR. MAEST: My understanding is that
there are sands that are around the perimeter, and those are coarser tailings material. size of sand. They are the
And then there are slimes that are
in the middle that have a finer grain size. I believe the requirement is to keep the slimes covered with water because they have higher radon emission rates, higher concentrations of all constituents, really. But the sands, which are
around the edges, do not have to be covered with water and also do not have to be covered with bird

651 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 yes, sir. balls. that. THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. But as I'm sure Mr. Filas knows a lot more about
you read this, is there a maximum elevation that the sands are allowed to get to? DR. MAEST: That I don't know. That's all.
THE HEARING OFFICER: Those are just generic question.
Does anybody --
does that give rise to any more cross from anybody? Does it give rise for redirect or do you have redirect? MR. SPAANSTRA: I will point out
that Ms. Morrison will be here on Tuesday, so you might ask her about her report then. THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. I just
have never seen it, so I didn't know if there was -- I have seen a lot of tailings piles, but I have never seen one with a mesh over it. DR. MAEST: I believe that the mesh
would go over the evaporation ponds, and the bird balls would go over the tailings. THE HEARING OFFICER: witness to be released? MR. PARSONS: She can be released, Okay. Is this

652 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A BY MR. PARSONS: Q Good morning, Ms. Travers. Can you tell us your occupation. Yes, I'm an environmental consultant and full name. MS. TRAVERS: Constance Travers. T-R-A-V-E-R-S? coming. THE HEARING OFFICER: Thanks for
"Released" means you don't have to stick
around and listen to us anymore. Who's next? with the next person? Or do you want to go ahead I assume you do. Let's keep it moving.
MR. PARSONS:
We call Constance Travers to the stand. (Witness sworn.) THE HEARING OFFICER: State your
THE HEARING OFFICER: MS. TRAVERS:
That's right.
CONSTANCE TRAVERS, being first duly sworn in the above cause, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION
I'm a hydrogeologist. Q A Q And who's your employer? Stratus Consulting. And what's your position at Stratus

653 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A does? A Yes. So a hydrogeologist is involved Consulting? A Q I'm a principal. Can you tell us what a hydrogeologist
with groundwater, with movement of water in the subsurface, movement of contaminants in the subsurface, the interaction between groundwater and surface water, generally. Q Can you summarize some of your relevant
professional experience dealing with mining or milling projects? A education. Q Let's start with your education, sure. Can you briefly describe your education. So I have a bachelor's of science in Sure. Maybe I will start with my
geology from Stanford University and a master's of science in applied hydrogeology, also from Stanford University. I started working in groundwater as I was getting my master's degree. I was on -- I had an
NSF grant to do my thesis work and I did not have very much money. I was living in an expensive part
of the country, so I decided I needed to get an

654 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 environmental consulting job. So I went to work for a company called Aqua Terra Consultants in Mountain View, and they do modeling work looking at groundwater flow and contaminant transport in the environment, also surface water modeling work. So I worked for them up until 1990, and then I went to work for a company called PTI Environmental Services, and there I was also working in hydrogeology. problems. I worked on groundwater
I worked mostly on mining-related
projects, and I worked for both the mining industry and for state and federal agencies. I was working on permitting of mines, looking at the technical components of that, the impacts of mines and mill sites on groundwater quantity, groundwater quality, surface water quantity, quality. And so I was looking at waste
drop facilities, tailings impoundments, dewatering operations, water supply operations, various other kinds of releases and contaminants to the environment, primarily subsurface and water-related. So I worked there until 2002 and then I took a job with Stratus Consulting and have worked

655 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 as a hydrogeologist for them for the last over ten years and continue to work on mining-related and other kinds of groundwater-related projects for mines that were going to be permitted, mines that were abandoned, mines that were in suspension. that's my general background. Q Can you give us some -- maybe some So
examples of some of the projects you have worked on or some of the specific hydrogeological work you have done in context? A Sure. So I have evaluated the
environmental impacts of leakage from tailings impoundments on groundwater. waste seepage to groundwater. I have looked at I have looked at
pumping for water supply and for dewatering of open pits. I have worked on a variety of different I have worked at a uranium mine
kinds of mines.
and mill site in Washington called the Midnight Mine. There's a mill there called the Dawn Mill
that has tailings from uranium processing, and there is groundwater contamination at that site. It's an older facility. So a variety of different
kinds of mining projects, mostly in the western United States and some in South America and Indonesia.

656 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q And, again, you have worked for --
employed by or contracted with -- by both the mining industry as well as government as well as public interest groups, I guess. A That's right. So I have worked for the
mining industry, Newmont Gold Company, Round Mountain. I've worked for Echo Bay, BHP. And I I'm
have also worked for the Forest Service.
working for the justice department at a mine up in South Dakota right now as an expert. That's a
Superfund cost recovery case of about $200 million of remediation costs at that mine site. So I have
worked both for federal agencies and for the mining industry. Q And at what -- obviously, the life of a
mining project has stages, kind of the development, the implementation, you know, the closure, maybe the cleanup or if something happens, the remediation. Can you give me a sense of where you worked in respect to that kind of chronology? A Well, I have worked on permitting of
proposed mines, actually re-initiation of mining in districts that are historic, the Robinson district outside of Ely, Nevada where they were going to

657 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 re-initiate copper mining and they were proposing to continue to mine. There are several open pits
there now full of water, and they were going to build a tailings impoundment on the other side of the wash there. So I've worked on the permitting side, the EIS side. I have also worked on quite a few I have looked at tailings in the
abandoned mines.
Clark Fork River system up in Butte, Montana, water quality problems in Clear Creek in Colorado. worked both sides of that process. Q Have you done or been recruited or So I
otherwise employed to provide instruction or lead courses in -- related to hydrogeology? A Yes. Actually, Dr. Maest and I taught a
class for EPA a few years ago on methods for predicting water quality impacts in hard rock mining. And I did the hydrology and hydrogeology
sections of that, talking about contaminants and water quality impacts from mining. That was a
four-day course we taught in Sacramento. Q Are you a member of any professional
organizations? A I am a member of the American Geophysical
Union, the National Groundwater Association, and

658 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the American Water Resource Association, also Phi Beta Kappa association. MR. PARSONS: With that, I would
proffer this witness as qualified as an expert in the field of hydrogeology. THE HEARING OFFICER: MS. LUCAS: Voir dire?
Just a few questions.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION OF CONSTANCE TRAVERS BY MS. LUCAS: Q Good morning. I'm Olivia Lucas. You
I just had a couple of questions. were talking about working on permitting of proposed mines.
Did you analyze the water supply
for those mines in your role in working on permitting for them? A You know, I looked more at impacts of
dewatering. Q Let's see. And are you -- do you do any
consulting work on water rights in Colorado? A Q A No, I don't do much on water rights, no. Okay. I'm aware of water rights and it feeds
into projects that we work on. Q And, finally, with your work at Stratus,
you said you've been there for about ten years; is

659 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Mr. Sandler? MR. SANDLER: DR. GROSSMAN: None. None. Fine. The that right? A Q That's correct. During that time, have you worked with
the industry clients you mentioned? A Not on mining-related projects. I have
worked with industry clients related to other groundwater contamination issues. I worked at a
Superfund site in Virginia that has groundwater contamination and fractured bedrock, and that was for an industry client. But Stratus mostly works
for government agencies, so no. Q Thank you. MS. LUCAS: MR. GOAD: No objection. No objection. Dr. Grossman,
Court will acknowledge the witness' expertise. MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Your Honor.
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF CONSTANCE TRAVERS CONTINUED BY MR. PARSONS: Q As part of your consultation for Sheep
Mountain Alliance, did you prepare or aid or help

660 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and participate in the preparation of written testimony associated with the Pinon Ridge Uranium Mill? A If by that you mean the two reports that
we wrote, yes. Q I do, thank you. And does that written testimony accurately describe your experience? A Q Yes. Do they accurately describe your opinions
with respect to the conclusions you have reached after review of materials in this case -pertaining to the mill, rather? A Yes. There are opinions in those reports
that Dr. Maest talked about earlier, and those are not my opinions. So the report reflects the
opinions of -- not every opinion in that report is my opinion. aspects. Q I see. Do any of your opinions My opinions relate to the hydrogeology
contradict what's presented in that report? A Q No. And what kind of documents did you review
in preparation for your testimony, both written and here today?

661 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A I reviewed the 15 volumes of the license I did not read every word, but I I reviewed supplemental reports
application.
reviewed those.
that were provided to me, written by Energy Fuels, groundwater monitoring reports, surface water monitoring reports. report. was. I reviewed the confidential
I reviewed -- I forget what else there
I'm probably missing a few things that I have
reviewed. Q A Q That's a fair amount of information. Yes. It's probably tough to keep in mind a
complete list. A Q materials. A Q A Yes. Did you review -The environmental report and the Yes. So you reviewed the application
environmental impact assessment, I reviewed those. Q And you reviewed the responses to the
information -- the responses that were produced by Energy Fuels in response to the Department of Health's, I guess, request for additional information?

662 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Q I did review those. And you reviewed a rebuttal report that
was prepared in the last week or so -A Yes, I received a report by Kim Morrison
last Friday, November 2nd, so I reviewed that rebuttal report. Q And I want to start with some questions Now, Ms. Lucas asked you a
regarding water supply.
moment ago if you had experience in Colorado water rights or water supply for mines, and you said maybe not directly. But I want to ask: With respect to
groundwater, does your work experience include reviewing estimates or making estimates for the extent or the amount of groundwater that would be available or otherwise in existence in various aquifers and what those pumping rates or what might be some constraints on an aquifer? A Yes, it does. Also looking at the
impacts of pumping on the groundwater system and its surface water, perennial surface water. Q And based on your review of the relevant
documents, are you familiar with the groundwater supply plan proposed for this mill? A Yes.

663 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 yes. Q Do you know the time horizon for the Q A Can you summarize that plan. I reviewed reports prepared by Golder on
behalf of Energy Fuels and also Kleinfelder, who prepared a geologic report. of the license application. These were in Volume 5 The plan that Golder
proposed in those reports was that they would be able to pump 100 to 175 gallons per minute sustainably from the aquifer; and that if they weren't able to pump that amount, that there would be trucking of water from Naturita, withdrawn from the San Miguel River and trucked to the site. Q Is it your understanding that the primary
source of water they'd rely on is from the groundwater pumping? A That is what is presented in the reports,
operation of the mill that they will need to have that water? A Well, the mill life is 40 years, and then And there
there would be a period of closure.
would be -- I didn't see specifications of what water requirements would be needed as they closed the mill site. Q With regard to the groundwater pumping

664 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 plan, generally would you consider that plan realistic, optimistic? How would you characterize
the groundwater pumping plan? A Q Optimistic. Let's talk about why you'd think that or Can you maybe begin
that would be your conclusion.
to give me some -- or why do you think it's optimistic? A Well, I reviewed the information that was
prepared by Golder and Kleinfelder in their reports that were used to determine -- by them to determine the amount of groundwater they anticipated they could pump from the aquifer. What my understanding is that they did is they drilled exploration boreholes and they conducted testing, short-term testing, in some of the boreholes -- ones that had water in them. of them did not have sufficient water. Some
And then
they selected three locations along the range front where they thought they would be able -- they were the most promising for groundwater supply. the locations were not. Many of
And they installed three PW-1,
production wells in along that range front: PW-2, and PW-3. Q
I'm going to pull up a slide and maybe it

665 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q from you. MR. SPAANSTRA: Yeah, right, Jeff. will help give some perspective on -- if I can manage it -- just to give us a little framework. Now, you were here yesterday and you listened to the testimony of Mr. Filas, so this is -- for the folks at home, to borrow James' phrasing -MR. PARSONS: I'm learning a lot
(By Mr. Parsons) This is a slide from the And it's -- you know, there But this one, do
environmental report.
are lots of slides and pictures. you recognize this slide? A I do.
This is from the water supply It's a slide
evaluation, Golder 2008, I believe. from their appendix. Q
And you were talking about PW-1 and 2.
just wanted to try to give visual representations. Are those the wells that you were referring to? A Yes, the wells that are in the pink
triangles are the three production wells that were installed. Q And those -- based on the map, those are,
again, near the -- kind of the -- where the mesa starts to rise out of the valley. Mr. Filas talked

666 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 yesterday about how there is water on that portion, and I think he talked about the depth. Do you
remember -- from your review, do you know how deep that production water is? A So these wells were screened -- the
interval of the well that it's extracting water were screened 300 to 400 feet down. These wells
are designed to intersect the Chinle-Moenkopi formation contact, which is where the water was identified along this -- in that zone of the site. Q So just, again, the lawyer joke about us
not understanding everything, but when you say "a screened well," that just means that's the -- you will drill a well down, but the screened portion is where you are sort of sensing -- can you explain what you mean by "screened"? A interval. Yeah. So with a well, you have an open
And when you pump from that well, you So you
are pulling water from that open interval.
may have a part of the well that is closed to the system, closed off, cased. And then you have an
open interval where you have -- sometimes it can be an open borehole or it can be a screen, and that is where you are pulling the water in, at that elevation or at that depth. So these wells are

667 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 pulling water from 300 to 400 feet down, below the ground. Q And do you remember the rate -- you may
have mentioned it, but do you remember the rate at which they would need to get their water from the aquifer, they would need to pump the aquifer in order to sustain the mill? A From my review of the documents, for a
500-ton-per-day facility, they are estimating they will need 141 gallons per minute of non-potable water and 3 gallons per minute of potable water. So they would need to be able to pump that amount of water from the groundwater system, 141 gallons per minute, to supply the mill and the process for 500 tons per day. Obviously, a larger mill, 1,000
tons per day, would require substantially more water. Q So there is -- is there a range they
identified that they might be able to pull from this aquifer, or did they peg it? A aquifer. Well, what they did was they tested the They tested these three wells in the
aquifer, doing something called a pumping test where you pump the aquifer and you look at water levels in wells away from your pumping well, also

668 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in the pumping well. And you can estimate You can
properties of the aquifer by doing that.
estimate how transmissive the aquifer is and you -Q A Could you explain what that... Transmissiveness of the aquifer is how
easily the water can be transmitted by the aquifer. We have terms like hydraulic conductivity, how conductive is the aquifer to water. So that's
important for understanding how much water you can extract from the aquifer. There is another property of the aquifer that's important, which is the storage, the storage in the aquifer. And that is how much water the For every
aquifer will release when you pump it.
foot you bring the water level down, how much water you will get out of that aquifer. So they
conducted these pumping tests to estimate those properties of the aquifer that are relevant to understanding how much water you can pump, how fast you can deliver water to the well. Q Do you recall, generally, the results of
the pump test between the wells PW-1, PW-2, and PW-3? A Yes, I do. So all of these wells were
relatively transmissive, but they did not have very

669 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 much storage of water in the aquifer that was indicated. Wells PW-1 and PW-2 have very limited
storage, and well PW-3 had still very low storage. Q A What does that mean if it has -It means that there is not going to be a
lot of water released from the aquifer when you pump it. So it's the water that's stored in the And when you draw the
pore space of the aquifer.
aquifer down -- in the case of PW-3, when you are drawing the aquifer down, you will release .01. That's the storage coefficient for that aquifer. That's how much water you would release per foot of draw-dawn of the aquifer. So the storativity The storage at
was -- storage at PW-3 was low. PW-2 and PW-1 was very low. Q
What did that mean as a practical matter
for water availability in those wells? A It meant that there was not very much
water to be mined out of the storage of the aquifer. So Golder then did an analysis of And for wells PW-1
pumping, sustainable pumping.
and PW-2, they estimated they could get 2 gallons a minute out of storage for those two wells, each of those wells, so very, very low pumping rate. Two
gallons a minute from both PW-1 and PW-2, a total

670 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 was? A Well, I have to explain the analysis that So what they did, from my of 4 gallons a minute. PW-3, they estimated that
they could get a higher pumping rate out of that well. Q But they -Do you remember what the range of that
they did a little bit.
understanding of reading the report, is they assumed that they would have three wells in that area: PW-3, which is pink in the figure, and then
they would install two other production wells very close to PW-3: installed yet. wells. And they also looked at the extent of the aquifer, so that's another important part of this. And the extent of the aquifer, the productive part of this aquifer, is uncertain right now. They know PW-4 and PW-5. They have not been
And they would pump all of those
that there is a fault system, which is shown in green on this map, and that is a boundary to the northeast of the pumping wells. The purple line, as shown on this map, is a boundary to the southwest, which was a fault system that they identified under the ridge of Davis Mesa. And then the line to the south, which

671 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is shown in orange, is a division between the low productivity part of the aquifer, PW-1 and PW-2, and the higher productivity part of the aquifer, PW-3. So what they did was estimate how much water could they remove from storage pumping PW-3, PW-4, and PW-5 over five years. at a five-year analysis. They only looked
And they said they could
pump, with these bounded conditions to the aquifer -- you know, these two bounds, the orange, the green, and the purple line -- they estimated 60 gallons a minute from those three wells, 20 gallons a minute per well could be extracted from storage. And they looked at that for five years. And that
was -- what they found would be sustainable for that five-year period. Q Now, when you say 60 gallons per minute
from storage, is there another source of water that they can draw from if they are pumping from that aquifer? A Yes. So there are two places that water There is storage in
can come from at this site.
the aquifer, which you are essentially mining down. You are drawing down and you are removing that storage. And then there is recharge that can come

672 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to the aquifer from precipitation into the aquifer system. So they also looked at recharge estimates.
And they used -- they don't measure recharge directly; they estimated it based on literature as 5 percent of precipitation. And they assumed that
over all of this area of pumping, they could get an additional 40 gallons a minute from recharge. used a constant rate through time, 40 gallons a minute. Q So I have some questions about those Let me just make sure I'm following They
assumptions. you.
They assumed a constant -- let's start with You just said they assumed a
the first one.
constant rate of recharge from precipitation. A Q That's right. What does that mean? What would that
mean in the real world to assume a constant rate of recharge from precipitation? A Well, there is variability in the amount
of precipitation that this site receives, and you can look at that in the historic record from the meteorological data at Uravan or anywhere else. you don't get the same amount of precipitation every single year. There is variability. And some So
years, if you don't have a lot of precipitation,

673 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you will have less recharge. Recharge is also a somewhat uncertain parameter, because you can't -- it's difficult to directly measure. So it's -- you know, there's a
range usually that people will look at and they will say, well, I don't know the recharge exactly, but maybe it will be 2 percent of precipitation, maybe it will be as much as 7 percent, maybe it will be 8 percent. range. In this case, they said, it will be 5 percent of precipitation and they used an annual precipitation and it was constant over time. So You know, people look at a
it's always 40 gallons a minute every year that those wells would intercept and extract, in their assumptions. Q In your experience and your expert
opinion, is that kind of assumption, pegging it at 5 percent, justified? A It's an uncertain parameter. Recharge is
uncertain, and so you don't -- you can't say it's going to be 5 percent of the precipitation every year. And, in fact, because precipitation itself
varies, the recharge is going to vary year to year. Q Has there been some water -- I mean,

674 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 these wells were drilled -- do you know the general time frame these wells were drilled? A or 2008. Q So has there been some data collected Yeah, they were drilled in, I think, 2007
with regard to these wells since then? A Yeah, they have been monitoring water
levels in the wells and sampling them, water quality samples. Q Was that data presented in the materials
you reviewed? A Q It was. Did you prepare any analysis of those
water levels? A Q I did. I'm going to bring up a demonstrative
exhibit, which is -- is this the graph you prepared? A Q Yes. Now, is this -- does this represent -- I
know you prepared it and it hasn't been -- it is not being admitted as an exhibit, but it demonstrates -- it shows the data that has been collected over those years? A Yeah. So this graph shows the water

675 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this. level data that Energy Fuels has provided in their monitoring reports. And this shows the elevations PW-3 in green, And that's
of water in PW-3, PW-2, and PW-1.
PW-2 in orange, and PW-1 is in pink.
relative to total precipitation, annual precipitation, measured at Uravan, I believe. MS. LUCAS: I have a question about
Is this graph just a graphical
representation of the opinions you expressed in your reports? MS. TRAVERS: Yes. This goes to the
issues about the water supply.
And what I was
going to say about this is that the water levels have been dropping in these wells, so the analysis that was done by Golder that looked at the pumping that was going to be available from that PW-3, PW-4, PW-5 cluster and the PW-1 and PW-2 -- but that's such small pumping rates, I'm not talking about those here. The thickness of water, the
saturated thickness, has dropped in that aquifer for the last few years. So this is just an example of variability in precipitation and how that has affected the groundwater system and the saturated thickness of the aquifer. It's dropped about 14 feet in PW-3.

676 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 That was the latest data that I had available. And, you know, there is going to be variability in the precipitation over time, so you will have variability and recharge to the system. Q (By Mr. Parsons) So how does this
correlate to -- in your experience, how does data like this correlate to making an assumption of 5 percent recharge over a long term? A What this shows is that the recharge is
going to be variable over time, and there will be years where recharge will be less and years where recharge will be greater. And at times when the
recharge is less, there will be the aquifer saturated thickness will decrease, which means there will be less water available in storage and there will be -- there is less recharge available for water supply. So to assume that you always
have 40 gallons a minute every year is not considering the variability that you see in recharge. And we see it here. That's why the There's less
water levels are dropping in PW-3. recharge to the system. Q Thank you.
With respect to the -- you
mentioned that the way they acquire this information essentially is through the pump test.

677 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 You mentioned a pump test? A Q A Yes. How long was that pump test conducted? It was two days. I just wanted to This
clarify the -- it's not this information.
information is coming from measuring water levels in the wells. The information they obtained from
the pumping test is the properties of the aquifer itself, the transmissivity and the storage in the aquifer. Q Understood. Thank you for that. I
appreciate it. Now, with respect to that two-day pumping test, would that be the -- how would you -- in your experience, is a two-day pumping test typical? that what you'd expect? A You know, certainly people conduct You know, if you pump the Is
two-day pumping tests.
aquifer for two days, you are not going to be extending the drawdown cone, which is the cone of depression that comes from pumping. You are only
going to extend that a little ways away from the well. The longer you pump, the more you have a
cone of depression extending away from the pumping well.

678 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q How is that relevant to the geologic
hydrologic conditions at this site? A So the boundaries that they have drawn
here -- the green boundary, which is the fault boundary and the purple boundary, which is another fault boundary -- the pumping tests that they conducted did not extend -- the influence of the pumping did not extend out to those boundaries, so they weren't really able to evaluate those boundaries from a two-day pumping test. Now, if you were to pump those wells for 40 years, then you would have a much better understanding of the geometry of the aquifer, because as you continue to pump, the drawdown cone moves out away from the well. Q Would it require you to pump them for 40
years to -- I mean, obviously, a 40-year test sounds a little extreme. A No, you wouldn't have to do that, but,
you know, a longer term pumping test would allow you to get a better understanding of what boundaries you are hitting as you are drawing down the aquifer. Q So given the hydrogeologic limitations, I
guess, with respect to those faults, would you --

679 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 based on your experience, would you expect a pump test or those tests to be conducted in a way so as to evaluate those limitations? A Well, ideally they would be. But you
also -- you know, there is a limitation to how long you want to conduct the test. Without conducting
them for the amount of time that you would need to hit those boundaries or to field those boundaries, essentially, in the test, then you don't know about those boundaries. So, you know, there are -- you have to make assumptions about them. And Golder assumed
that they were -- there was no flow across them, that they were impermeable boundaries, which feeds into their analysis of the amount of water you can extract from that area of the aquifer. Q So you mentioned that the analysis they
did was aimed at assessing a sustainable rate of pumping. And I thought I heard you say that they
pegged the sustainability number at five years. A That's correct. The analysis that they They did
conducted was for five years of pumping.
not look at what pumping rate they could sustain after five years of pumping. It was a five-year
analysis, and the mill life is 40.

680 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q So how would you characterize that
difference? A That they should have evaluated the
sustainable pumping rate for 40 years, for the 40-year mill life, because they are assuming that they can pump 100 to 175 gallons a minute and they're relying on that groundwater for the mill process. They're relying on it for keeping the
tailings covered with water and all of their processing. So that analysis should have been
conducted for the full 40-year mill life. Q In your professional experience, if you
have a 40-year horizon for needing this water, would it be defensible to rely on a five-year analysis? A No. You should assess the sustainability
for 40 years. Q years. So we have got the question about the What did you -- did you evaluate the
volume, the maximum volume, that you thought would be available from these aquifers? A Yes, I did. So what I did was I
estimated the volume of water that is in storage in this aquifer using the boundaries that Golder Associates put together. So I said if you have an

681 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 aquifer and it's bounded to the northeast, a no-flow boundary to the south by the orange line -the division between the low productivity part of the aquifer and the higher productivity -- and by this fault underneath Davis Mesa, I looked at how much water is actually in storage in that aquifer using the storage number that came out of the pumping test for PW-3, which is .01. So how much water could that aquifer release, the total volume? And at the pumping
rates that they are planning to pump, how much of the water that's in storage would be available at those pumping rates and for how long? And it's a
very simplified calculation, in that I'm just looking at the volume of the water that's in that system based on their aquifer testing that can be released from storage. And when I do that calculation, I determined that the aquifer will be depleted of storage in five to six years. There just isn't So the
that much water in storage in this aquifer.
sustainability analysis that was done by Golder where they look at pumping 60 gallons a minute for five years and then it stops after five years, if I look at 60 gallons a minute being pumped out of

682 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that aquifer for five years, that pretty much depletes the storage available in the aquifer. Q As an aquifer is drawn down, does that
present any complications with yield? A Yeah. You -- sort of the rule of thumb
is you don't want to draw an aquifer down below about two-thirds of the saturated thickness of the aquifer because it becomes very inefficient to extract the water when you only have down at the bottom of the aquifer the amount of water left. So
if the saturated thickness decreases, you have less water available to pull. Q So how would you characterize the
assumption or the characterization that was made in terms of the long-term sustainability of the water for operation of the mill, from the aquifer? A From the storage perspective -- so there There is
are two sources of water in the analysis. the water in storage and the recharge.
I would
characterize the storage as being very limited and that they will be mining that water from storage because their recharge won't balance the amount of water they're pumping out of storage. And over
time, they will deplete the storage in the aquifer, and I estimate that's five to six years before

683 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 storage in that portion of the aquifer, the productive part of the aquifer, is depleted. They also will have recharge entering the wells to the extent it's captured by those pumping wells, and that recharge will be variable over time, depending on precipitation. of factors that go into recharge. There are a lot But I would say
there's not enough storage in the aquifer for 40 years of pumping for this mill. Q Now, you mentioned that their assumptions So is that --
were no flow across those faults.
would that be a conservative assumption on their part? A Yeah, I think the fault on the northwest
side, that's a structural feature where the aquifer basically is absent. The Chinle-Moenkopi part of
this aquifer is absent beyond that green line to the northeast. So assuming that that's the limit
of the aquifer is a very reasonable assumption in terms of the boundary there. the mesa is not known. The boundary under
Kleinfelder also agreed Golder They
that that would be a no-flow boundary.
modeled it as potentially a no-flow boundary. also assessed it as a flow boundary.
But given that there is no information

684 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 about that boundary, it would be -- and you are relying on this water supply, it would be reasonable to assume that -- to use a conservative assumption and assume that you won't get a lot of water into the aquifer from the southwest side. Q And if you were expecting more water,
would you anticipate -- or in your experience, would you anticipate one would conduct additional tests to pin that down, so to speak? A Yeah. I mean, if you are relying on that
water supply, you know, a longer term pumping test so that you know what's happening with the boundaries would be an advisable thing to do. Q What about the -- we have heard about the
geology here is somewhat fractured, at least in places. Would there be water to contribute from
those fractures or faults? A Well, I mean, the behavior of the faults
is not known because the testing didn't extend out to the faults. In general, these faults, in terms
of water supply, are being looked at as no flow or no water transmitting across these faults. So they
may provide pathways for contaminants to move. They could, if there were releases at the site. But in terms of water coming across the faults or

685 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 from the faults, that doesn't seem likely. Q So was there any analysis that you saw
beyond the five-year sustainability number that they used? A Q I did not. Given the assumptions and issues you have
identified, would you consider this methodology sufficient to make the assumption of the availability of the water that they have assumed? A Q No. What additional data or information --
and maybe you've covered a little of this, but just to have some clarity, what additional data would you expect or information would you expect in a report like this? A I would expect discussion of the I would
uncertainty associated with the recharge.
not expect to see that presented as 40 gallons a minute every year. I would expect to see that
maybe bracketed and a range of potential recharge that could be extracted by these pumping wells I presented. I would expect an acknowledgment that as you continue to pump a well at a rate that exceeds the recharge rates, you continue to expand the

686 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 break? MR. PARSONS: Well, I can keep going drawdown cone, and the drawdown cone gets deeper and it gets wider over time and you are removing more and more water from storage. And if you are planning to pump the well or the well field, in this case, for 40 years, you should look at how that drawdown is going to propagate for 40 years rather than five. And you
should look at the sustainable pumping rate based on a 40-year time period rather than a five-year time period. MR. PARSONS: So, Your Honor, I'm I notice it's
about to go into a new subject. about five until noon.
You want to
if you prefer, but I've got a substantial -- I mean, not -THE HEARING OFFICER: If you think
this is a rational time, let's take lunch. MR. PARSONS: It is a rational time. About an hour.
(Lunch recess, 11:57 to 1:05.) THE HEARING OFFICER: Mr. Parsons, your witness. On the record.

687 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Your Honor.
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF CONSTANCE TRAVERS CONTINUED BY MR. PARSONS: Q Ms. Travers, when we left off, we were
about to -- we had just moved through kind of the water supply issues. I wanted to address --
although Dr. Maest discussed this a little bit, I wanted to address with you, with your expertise, some of the issues related to waste containment. From your review of the application materials, do those materials address potential pathways to groundwater or surface water from spills or leaks from the raffinate and tailings impoundment facilities? A In general, the pathway to the
groundwater is considered de minimus by Energy Fuels, so they don't address groundwater leaks, per se. Q Do you recall why they -- why Energy
Fuels -- and I assume -- are you talking about also the analysis and -- I'm sorry -- the environmental impact analysis as well? A Yes. As we heard from Mr. Filas, he
stated many times that groundwater is absent under most of the site and so there isn't a pathway to

688 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 groundwater in that part of the site, according to Energy Fuels. Q In your review of the materials, do you
concur with that characterization that there's no -- with respect to groundwater at the site? A I believe that there should be monitoring
of the shallow -- what we referred to as the vadose zone, the unsaturated zone, above the regional water table, the groundwater table. And I do not
think that the monitoring at the site is adequate in the vadose zone. Q What data or information leads you to
believe that that information in the materials is not adequate with respect to potential groundwater in the vadose zone? A Well, maybe we could pull up a picture of
the monitoring plan. Q Okay. I'm pulling up a figure from It's labeled
Energy Fuels' application materials. Figure 5-1.
Do you recognize -- this is from the Do Do
application materials, Volume 12, Figure 5.1. you recognize -- did you review this figure? you recognize this figure? A Q Yes.
Is this the figure you -- monitoring plan

689 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 shallow. you were talking about? A Yes. This is a picture of their
locations for groundwater monitoring. Q A What do you see in this? So the green squares on this figure are
existing monitoring wells and the pink squares, as I understood it, are proposed monitoring locations. And when I first looked at this figure, I thought why are there so few monitoring wells on the northern part of the facility. There's only MW-1,
MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4, are the only monitoring wells that they have in that northern part of the facility. Those wells are screened relatively Remember we talked about the screen as
being the zone from which the wells are monitoring water. The wells MW-2 and MW-3 have had water in
them intermittently since they have been monitored by Energy Fuels. They don't have water in them all
the time, but they have water in them intermittently, usually several feet of water. that indicates perching of water, infiltrating water, along lower permeability -- in other words, lower transmissivity layers like clays or other units and water in the shallow system perching on And

690 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 those layers. So out of the four wells that they
are monitoring, there has been water present in those wells. Q So let me get this straight. We have
been hearing from Energy Fuels, at least yesterday, that there are -- that there is no groundwater in that area of the mill site and your interpretation is different. A My interpretation is that, at times,
there is shallow perched groundwater in the shallow system in the area of the evaporation ponds and the tailings ponds. Q What is the basis for that
interpretation? A The basis is the presence of water
measured in those wells on certain dates and at certain times by Energy Fuels. Q Was there data that you observed in the
application materials that leads you to believe that? A Yes. They prepared tables of
measurements of depth of water in the wells over time, and on several dates, there was water present in MW-2 and MW-3 on the site. Q I'm pulling up a table from the

691 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 here. Q A I'll fix that. But the heading that has depth of water application materials. This is -- comes from --
this is from the license application, Volume 5, Table 6, and what do you see on this table that leads you to believe that there is -- there is indeed groundwater in the areas where it's been claimed there is not? A Well, the column headings are cut off
is a measurement of the depth to the bottom of the well, the amount of water that was present in the well, so it's the depth of the water measured down in the well. And they have also calculated the
height of the water column in the well in the next column. And on several occasions in MW-2, you can see that there was 2.3 feet of water on, you know, October 16, 2007; there was almost a foot of water on April 29, 2008. Down at MW-3, which is a deeper
well located on the southwest side of the facility, 3.4 feet on October 16, 2007 and a couple of feet in 2008 as well. So there's been water present all
the time when they measure, but there's perched water present in those wells at certain times.

692 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and 3? Q And just so we are clear -THE HEARING OFFICER: I'm sorry. What's your 2
I can't read this from here. This is MW-2, and it's
MS. TRAVERS:
monitoring a depth of 10 to 20 feet below the ground; and this is MW-3, and it's monitoring a depth of 75 to 95 feet below the ground. Q (By Mr. Parsons) So MW-2 is on the
northeast quadrant, I suppose, of the mill site property. MW-3 would be on the western -- kind of
the middle of the western side of the facility. A Q Southwest of the evaporation ponds. Thank you. And those two wells -- you
are saying those do indeed show -A Q Presence of water. Okay. So how do you -- how does that
square with the testimony and the representations made in the application? A Well, the shallow -- the vadose zone,
which is the zone above the water table, the regional water table, occasionally contains perched water, and if there were releases from the evaporation ponds or the tailings ponds, water could move in that shallow system -- raffinate, tailings pore water could move in the shallow

693 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 system and migrate on these layers in the shallow system. Q Just to help us understand the dynamic
here, you have a demonstrative exhibit I would like to put up that helps us kind of understand the concept here. my delay. Maybe you can just explain it for us on how this works in terms of if you were to take a cross-section of the earth at that site and how you can have this data -- how this data might be represented. A Okay. So I think that when Energy Fuels I would like to put that up. Excuse
says there is no groundwater under most of the facility, they are talking about a deep regional groundwater system, and they did drilling on the north side of that fault and they did not encounter deep groundwater when they were doing the drilling in, say, MW-1, that they actually drilled the drill hole down to 600 feet. But in terms of a pathway analysis, in terms of monitoring potential releases to the environment, the vadose zone is a potential pathway for migration for fluids from the facilities. And
we have evidence that even with precipitation and

694 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 infiltrating water, we have perching conditions and water migrating along lower permeability layers in the vadose zone, because we see water in these shallow wells periodically. If you have a release from the facility, from the ponds, or from the tailings impoundment, that water is going to migrate down and it will also encounter these same low permeability layers that we're seeing water perching on at MW-2 and MW-3 and -- let's say MW-2 -- and can move laterally. That fluid can move laterally and it
can discharge to arroyos or to surface water features. So there is a pathway in the shallow
surface, subsurface, that is different than the regional groundwater. Q And looking at this data, these water
table measurements, can you remind me what is the depth to this shallow, as you call it, perched groundwater? A Well, MW-2 is monitoring 10 to 20 feet
below the ground, so it's very shallow. Q And we see that the -- you know, it seems
that -- some fluctuation there; that is to say, there's data at one time and then it's -- there is data at one measuring time and then it goes dry and

695 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 then there is water again. A Q A Uh-huh. What's happening? So this is, of course, under the
condition that the facility has not been built and we are looking at response to natural infiltration events. So precipitation falls on the site. It
migrates down through the vadose zone.
It finds a
low permeability layer and it accumulates there, and so then you see water present in the well for a period of time, and then it migrates off from that layer, so then you see a dry well. Q A So it's not -- is it evaporating? Not at these depths. It's 10 to 20 feet
below the ground, so it wouldn't be evaporating. It flows in the subsurface off of the low permeability layers, and it flows in the direction of those low permeability layers, how they're oriented -- the clay layers are oriented in the ground. Q I see. So in this graph, what we have --
do you recall seeing the characteristics of that -the lower aquifer, which direction or how it flows? A Yes. So they measure the water levels in
the Chinle-Moenkopi aquifer, which is on the south

696 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 side of the yellow dashed line there that's running through the facility. Q areas? A Yes. The general flow direction in that Is that kind of represented by the blue
aquifer is basically towards the valley, and then there is some turning towards the northwest because of the fault. But this unit is at 300 to 400 feet So the colors on this map -- the
below the ground.
blue is meant to represent up-gradient flow directions for this regional aquifer, and the yellow is meant to represent down gradient of the facilities in the regional aquifer. colors they used on this map. Q Would that same flow direction That's the
necessarily correlate to the -- also correlate to the shallow groundwater? A No. The shallow groundwater -- when you
have either infiltrating precipitation that's moving on these low permeability layers or in the case of leakage from a facility, the migration of that fluid would be along the geometry of these low permeability layers that are in the vadose zone. So they would not necessarily have anything to do with the flow directions in the regional

697 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 groundwater system that's at greater depth. Q So do you know which direction the
shallow groundwater might be flowing? A Q I do not. Did you see any information presented in
the application materials or the environmental impact analysis that would indicate how or what direction those shallow groundwaters are flowing? A Q No. In your professional experience and
expertise, when confronted with data showing shallow groundwater like that, is that an aspect that you would investigate further? A Yes. And I would consider it in the
exposure pathway analysis as a pathway for -potentially for fluids released from the ponds and the tailings impoundments to migrate away from the facility and potentially to daylight in an arroyo or other area. Q So that shallow groundwater could
actually surface at some point, potentially? A It potentially could. I mean, we have
water at MW-2, 10 to 20 feet down on a low permeability layer. We don't know where that
layer -- how that water migrates on that layer.

698 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 But there are incised channels and arroyos at the site, and if the water migrates laterally to one of those, it could daylight. Q I notice that from your testimony and
from the data, there is shallow groundwater, at least at times, in MW-2 and MW-3. I don't see any
other -- or did you, in your review of the application, see any other shallow or any investigatory wells, for lack of a better word -lawyer speak, I guess -- to analyze whether there's these same sorts of shallow groundwater occurrences directly below the tailings and raffinate ponds? A I don't believe there have been any
groundwater wells installed beneath the evaporation ponds or the tailings cells. My understanding is
this is the monitoring network that they're using to monitor for baseline conditions of the groundwater right now and their proposed monitoring on the west side of the tailings cells there. Q And in your professional experience and
in your professional opinion, when confronted with data like that, would you expect to see additional -- any additional sampling or other efforts to identify the extent of those shallow groundwater occurrences?

699 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A I would expect to see more shallow wells
installed and I would expect to see more shallow monitoring proposed during the mill life to help monitor for releases from the evaporation pond and the tailings disposal facilities. Q A Again, why does this matter? Well, this matters because the sooner you And we have heard
can detect a leak, the better.
testimony from Dr. Maest that liners can fail, and I also agree with that. And the purpose of the
monitoring plan is to detect any leaks as quickly as possible. So if you have wells that are installed in the shallow -- in the vadose zone near these facilities and you detect fluids in them, then you will be quickly detecting a release. At this
point, the proposal, I believe, is to monitor MW-1 and then potentially MW-2, if it has water in it, and that's all the monitoring in that entire section of the facility for where the evaporation ponds are. Q In your professional opinion, is that an
adequate monitoring plan for a facility like this, given the data you observed? A No, it's not a sufficient number of

700 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 shallow monitoring points, especially given the size of the facility they are monitoring. Q And are you aware of any guidance or
other best practices that would give some help in developing such a plan, NRC or otherwise? A Well, the NRC guidance -- and I don't
have it in front of me -- basically says you should attempt to detect the leak as close to the source of the leakage as possible. So having shallow
wells in that area would allow detection close to the facility. It wouldn't allow it to migrate as It would allow for a And that would be
far in the environmental. response to the release.
consistent with NRC guidance. Q In your professional opinion, to the
extent that such a plan would be developed, at what stage in the permitting or application process would you expect to see such a plan put forward? A I think that the monitoring plan should
be part of the license application, and also baseline data should be collected right now in the areas where there is potentially shallow pathways. And my understanding is they are not even analyzing the water that is in MW-2 present at some times. So we need to be collecting baseline data, and that

701 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 should start -- that should have started with the license application as well. Q Let me make sure I'm clear. You are
talking about water quality data.
We have seen
some data that shows depth and sort of demonstrates the existence of water. A Q Yes. And so you are talking about water
quality sampling? A Yes. So as part of the baseline
conditions, understanding the baseline water quality at the site, Energy Fuels is collecting samples of the groundwater. And I believe they
should be doing that in MW-2 when the water is present in all of the wells at the site. And if
there were additional monitoring wells proposed and installed, they could also be collecting data in those locations too: Water level data, water
presence data, and water quality data. Q A Why is that important? It's important to understand the baseline
condition, the condition before the mill is constructed so that you can understand changes in water presence, fluid presence, and water quality after operations begin.

702 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q And, again, you were here yesterday to Do you remember him
hear Mr. Filas' testimony.
testifying about that there are some elevated -- in portions, there are elevated constituents in the baseline and that is necessary for the agency to be able to determine cleanup standards? A Q Yes. I do remember that testimony.
And so how does that -- does that feed
into your professional analysis on why this sort of plan is needed? A Yes. So you need to, again, collect
baseline data so that you understand the water quality conditions before the mill is built, and one of the reasons for doing that is so that the State can set criteria based on the conditions of groundwater prior to the mill. Q And did you see any of that data
presented in either the application materials or the environmental impact analysis? A Not for the wells down to the north of
the facility. Q Did you see any indication from any of
the materials you reviewed that there was any suggestion that a monitoring plan for the site will be -- still to be developed or needed?

703 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 plan. Q A I reviewed the rebuttal report from Kim
Morrison that was sent last Friday, November 2, 2012; and in that, she stated that they planned to develop a more extensive monitoring report. haven't seen that report. developed. Q When you say a more extensive monitoring I
I assume it will be
report, do you mean a monitoring plan? A Yeah. I'm sorry. I mean a monitoring
I misspoke. It happens to me all the time. And, again, is that something that you
would expect to see coming in at the end of a permitting process or at the beginning of a permitting process? A It would be a part of the license
application at the beginning of the permitting process. Q And why does -- you know, so there's an
indication that such a plan might be developed. Does it matter how that plan is put in place? mean, you know, a well here or there. matter? A Do the details matter? The details matter. It is important to, Does it I
in reviewing the monitoring plan, to understand how

704 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they intend to monitor, where they intend to monitor, what analytes will be monitored for so that you can assess the quality of that monitoring plan to protect human health and the environment on a very kind of broad level. Q And what type of methodology, in your
expert opinion, would be employed in the development of such a plan? A Well, they would have monitoring systems
for the shallow vadose zone around the evaporation ponds, tailings facility, and the, you know, the pipes, any potential sources of leaks to the environment. There would be more comprehensive It could be wells. There
monitoring of the vadose zone.
There are other techniques that can be used.
are suction cup lysimeters, which extract water from the unsaturated zone. There are a variety of
kinds of monitoring techniques, but it would be more than what is listed here, which are two wells to the north of the facility. Q A So does the number of wells matter? Yes, it absolutely does, because you are You are trying to monitor
covering space.
migration in a variety of potential directions, and so you need to have a sufficient coverage of wells.

705 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q A Q matter? A Q Yes. And are there other -- I guess just a Are there other components And does the depth of those wells matter? Yes. Does the frequency of the monitoring
sort of a catchall.
that are critical to such a development of such a plan? A Other things that would be included would
be the analytes that you are going to monitor for, presence or absence of fluid; water, in this case. It could be fluid if there was a leak. I think
that would be -- those are most of the parameters. Q This kind of monitoring plan, does that
feed in in any way to an analysis of what impacts this mill might have -- what impacts -- let me start over. Does the development and the details of such a plan feed into or help one determine, with the data that's produced, what kind of impacts one might expect from a mill facility such as this? A Well, the monitoring plan should reflect It should be
the potential exposure pathways.
designed to monitor a potential -- in this case, a

706 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q potential release to the environment; you know, something that you try to design your systems to avoid. But you need to develop monitoring systems
to catch a release if it happens to occur. So the monitoring system should reflect what you think are the important pathways for migration from the facility. So it's a reflection You are trying
of the exposure pathway assessment.
to monitor those pathways where you could have risk of exposure to the environment. Q In the absence of that data, is it
possible to comprehensively analyze the potential impacts from this facility, in your expert opinion? A In the absence of the data on the vadose
zone, it is difficult to understand potential impacts of this facility to the vadose zone. I'm not sure I'm answering your question. Are you aware of other holes that have
been drilled, apart from those monitoring wells at the site? A Q Yes. I'm going to pull up a graph and see -I hope it's not too small.
or another figure.
So this is another table -- or another figure, rather, from the application materials.

707 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Thank you. Q (By Mr. Parsons) Well, I should say, I This is found in Volume 5, Figure 4. It actually
comes from the water supply plan, but do you recognize this? A Q I do. Let me give you a better view and then we
can zoom back in just to make sure. A Yes. So it's titled, Location of
Boreholes for Groundwater Exploration and Characterization. Q And do you see any wells in the area
that -- any additional wells in the areas we are talking about; that is to say, north of the fault that would be the cutoff, as we discussed earlier, for the lower aquifer? A You know, the fault isn't on this, so it There might be
is a little bit difficult to tell.
a couple of boreholes that are on the north side of the fault. But generally in the area where the evaporation ponds and the northern tailings cells are going to be placed, there are only these four monitoring wells: MW-1 through MW-4. No further questions.
MR. PARSONS:

708 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 suppose: Is there anything you would like to add
or anything I missed that you would like to... A We don't have that figure, do we? MR. PARSONS: If you will give me a
moment, Your honor, I'm attempting to pull up a demonstrative exhibit. THE HEARING OFFICER: Sure.
(Discussion off the record.) THE HEARING OFFICER: While they are
looking for that, those of you in the back of the room who anticipate making an oral public comment this afternoon, there's some sign-up sheets over by the door and I would appreciate having your name and a brief set of information. on a sheet. Six people can go And
Let's get that process started.
if those of you in the room will remind me, I will ask if anybody on the telephone has comments they wish to make. No one has yelled out at me, but I It hasn't been my focus.
will try to remember.
(Discussion off the record.) MR. PARSONS: for the discombobulation. THE HEARING OFFICER: Is this the I've found it. Sorry
witness' exhibit or something that was in the report or...

709 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q MS. TRAVERS: Yeah.
(By Mr. Parsons) Ms. Travers, do you
recognize this exhibit? A Yes. So I made this exhibit as a
demonstrative exhibit just to show -- to help with the concept of the vadose zone migration as different than the regional groundwater system. So this isn't supposed to represent your tailings impoundment. It's not perfectly drawn.
But it just shows an example of leakage from a liner in a tailings impoundment or it could be an evaporation pond, migration down to a lower permeability layer, of which there are many in the alluvial material at this site, if you look at the boreholes, and then migration along that clay layer. So a shallow well, as I draw here, would intersect migration along with a shallow perched layer. And this whole zone here -- this is the This is all above the regional But the point is that you
vadose zone.
groundwater flow system.
could have migration along a shallow system here, and it could migrate to one of these incised channels, these arroyos, that are present at the site and migrate to the surface. And this is

710 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not -- this has happened at other sites where there has been migration in alluvium underneath tailings facilities. Q A couple of questions about it. Would you need to have a perched aquifer -- perched shallow water at the time of the leak in order for this kind of flow pattern to emerge? A You would not. You would not have to
have shallow water perched on the clay at the time of the migration because the release is a fluid as well, so the release will migrate down and then migrate along the layer itself because it's also a fluid. Q Would there be other scenarios
potentially where the leak or the material could flow along a less permeable layer and then drop or go other directions? A Is that possible?
Yes, it is, and it could make its way
eventually down to the regional groundwater system. But the point of this is that there is a shallow pathway for migration of leachate, raffinate, or tailings pore water. Q And in your review of the materials, this
contingency was essentially in the information

711 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that's presently in the materials and the environmental impact analysis is not accounted for; is that correct? A It was considered a de minimis pathway,
so it was not analyzed. Q Based on the data and the information you
reviewed, do you consider it de minimis, in your expert opinion? A No, I do not. I consider it a pathway
that should be considered and monitored. MR. PARSONS: MS. LUCAS: for a copy of that? MR. PARSONS: You bet. Thank you. Your Honor, can we ask
(Discussion off the record.) THE HEARING OFFICER: at it 50 minutes. We have been
Let's take a break and then
we'll do the cross-examination, unless you anticipate it's going to be really, really short. MS. LUCAS: It's pretty short. Go ahead.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF CONSTANCE TRAVERS BY MS. LUCAS: Q Just a few questions to start out. You were discussing off of some reports

712 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that you provided for Sheep Mountain Alliance in the past. What were the dates of those reports
that you were basing your opinions on? A Q A The reports that we wrote? Yes. They were 2010. I believe one was
September 2010 and the other was December 2010. Q So these were before the original license
issuance in January 2011? A Q Yes. So CDPHE had your comments and those were
part of the record before CDPHE would have made its initial licensing decision in 2011? A I would assume if they were given the
reports that we wrote, then they had our comments. I don't know what happened to those reports after we sent them to Sheep Mountain Alliance. Q They were given to CDPHE and are part of
the administrative record. First about some of the monitoring issues you raised. You said you had reviewed Ms.
Morrison's report of November 2, 2012? A Q Yes. And in that report, she notes that CDPHE
intends to add additional offsite surface water

713 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 supply. A Q monitoring points and on-site groundwater monitoring wells, both deep and shallow, to the monitoring plan. Do you recall that? Yes. And this revised plan is expected to be
incorporated into the license? A Q I read that. And she will be here on Tuesday, I
believe, so she can talk about that more. Some questions quickly about water Are you aware that Sheep Mountain Alliance
recently stipulated to the entry of a water rights decree regarding the Energy Fuels wells PW-1, PW-2, and then the well field encompassing PW-3 that you discussed? A Q Stipulated. What do you mean by that?
They agreed to a water rights decree from
the water court regarding that water supply. A Q I wasn't aware of that. I will take that as a no. So I guess
that you did not consult with them on the entry of that decree? A Q No, I did not. So then you did not know that the case

714 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Mr. Sander? MR. SANDLER: Nothing. Any redirect? grants a conditional water right for 175 gallons per minute withdrawal from PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 in that well field? A I have not seen that document. I'm
reviewing the information from the license application as presented there. Q Understood. Well, I was asking because
the decree has a legal conclusion that states -and I'm citing from the decree -- that Energy Fuels has shown that water, under these water rights, can and will be diverted, stored, and/or otherwise captured, possessed, and controlled and will be beneficially used and the appropriation can and will be completed with diligence within a reasonable time. And SMA stipulated to that entry,
that conclusion of law. However, apparently you cannot talk about it, so I will stop talking about it myself. all I have. THE HEARING OFFICER: MR. GOAD: Mr. Goad. That's
No questions. Dr. Grossman?

715 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 assumption. THE HEARING OFFICER: That's all I assumption. question. MR. PARSONS: No, Your Honor. I have a
The clay layers you're talking about,
they're alluvial? MS. TRAVERS: Yes. So deposited
presumptively parallel to the surface of the ground as it existed at the time they were deposited? MS. TRAVERS: Yes. They are
deposited by water that's coming off of the mesa, basically, and forming that alluvial fan and moving out into the mesa. So they tend to -- they tend to
have somewhat of a slope, actually, towards the -if they were going to have any slope, it would be towards the valley. THE HEARING OFFICER: I just -MS. TRAVERS: It's a good That was my
have, unless that brings up more questions. Can this witness be released? MR. PARSONS: She can. Now, is it a
THE HEARING OFFICER: rational time to take a brief break?

716 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 morning? A Yes, very much. I haven't been in this BY MR. STILLS: Q Good afternoon, Dr. Power. I appreciate Michael Power. THE HEARING OFFICER: DR. POWER: Yes. P-O-W-E-R? full name. DR. POWER: My name is Thomas (Recess taken, 1:54 to 2:18 p.m.) (Witness sworn.) THE HEARING OFFICER: State your
DR. THOMAS POWER, being first duly sworn in the above cause, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION
your coming in from Missoula, Montana to explain the important social and economic dimensions of this project proposal. Did you enjoy the drive over this
particular part of Colorado and I have been staying out at Paradox Inn, so I've had several beautiful trips, including this morning watching herds of elk and lots of deer trying to take out the car. Q Can you describe the elk herd you saw.

717 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in. Q So I have a few questions for your work site? A Q A Yeah. Nice rainbow as well. That's right. The rainbow followed us A Yeah. That was spectacular. It was
about 40 elk.
Something had spooked them and they Fortunately,
were charging towards the highway. they were quite a ways away.
But it was like It was
something in the African Serengeti. spectacular. Q
And do you know about how many elk you
saw and where they were? A Not where they were. It was past Bedrock
somewhere, and there was 40 or more. Q Somewhere after Bedrock and before the
as a resource economist and other relevant experience as get going in a few minutes. But
first, you've come today to present and answer questions regarding your opinions on professionally accepted methodology and your analysis of the environmental report and the environment impact analysis. A Yes.

718 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q So could you please describe the degrees
you have earned. A I got my undergraduate degree from an
engineering school, Lehigh University, in physics. I then changed courses and went to Princeton University where I got both my master's and Ph.D. in economics. Q positions. A Yes. Currently, I'm a research professor Could you please describe your current
and professor emeritus at the University of Montana economics department and am also a principal in Power Consulting. Q And how long did you serve on the faculty
of the University of Montana? A Q A For 40 years. In any elevated capacities? Yes, I was chairman of the economics
department for the last 30 of those 40 years. Q A Q And when did you begin Power Consulting? In 1975. Could you please describe your fields of
particular specialization? A I label it resource economics and The resource economics refers
regional economics.

719 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to a broad range of natural resources from uranium or coal or timber marketed commodities but also includes environmental resources: Clean air, clean
water, scenic vistas, qualities of life associated with the social as well as the natural environment. So natural resource economics covers both marketed resources as well as noncommercial resources, and the regional economics deals with the forces that lead economies to develop and change. Q A Q reports? A Over two dozen book chapters, a dozen And have you published any books? Yes, I've published six books. And book chapters, journal articles,
refereed journal articles, and literally dozens of monographs, reports, and other papers. Q And have any of these publications
focused on the social or economic impact of mining? A Yes, quite a few of them did. My
second-to-last book was entitled "Post-Cowboy Economics: Pay and Prosperity in the New American West," which did deal with the transition from a natural-resource-based economy to, as the title indicates, the new western economy. The book previous to that, "Lost

720 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Landscapes and Failed Economies: The Search for a Value of Place," focused explicitly on -- several chapters on mining, chapters on logging forest products, chapters on agriculture, and several of the articles I've published have dealt specifically with interesting economic questions associated with mining and mining-dependent communities. Q Have these published works addressed the
accepted methodologies in these fields? A Yes. One of my books that was published
in 1995, '96 was entitled "Environmental Protection and Economic Well-Being: The Economic Pursuit of Quality," but it laid out how to go about analyzing the determinants of local economic well-being. Partly as a basis of that, I then also prepared a manual for EPA dealing with how to analyze the economic impacts values and costs associated with one type of natural resource; namely, wetlands. Q And so these works have included the
measurement and analysis of economic prosperity and social well-being? A Q Yes. And have your published works addressed
the misuse of accepted methodologies to overstate potential economic benefits of mining?

721 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Yes. That actually was in some ways the It was to
driving force behind writing the books.
try to move away from what I believe was a very unprofessional folk economics, popular economics, that had little to do with how professional economists look at the economy. And most of my
writing has been aimed at trying to correct some of those misunderstandings. Q So using analysis instead of methodology
to understand economics and social well-being? A Q Yes. Have any of these works addressed uranium
production? A Yes. I worked on uranium issues in New
Mexico, here in Colorado, and in the state of Washington. Q And in your work at Power Consulting,
have your clients included nongovernmental organizations, governments, and corporations? A Yes, all three of them. On the
government side, I worked for Attorney Generals in different states, for public service commissions in different states, for various cities around the country, for the federal government, different agencies of the federal government.

722 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 On the nonprofit side, I have worked with low-income organizations on a variety of issues as well as environmental organizations and just straight public interest organizations. And I
worked with commercial companies, primarily private utilities. I was a founding member of an energy
planning technical committee for the Montana Power Company and served with it until it went bankrupt, not my fault, and fulfill that same role with the utility that now operates in its place: Northwestern Energy in the state of Montana. Q And before we get to your opinion, I
would like to get some background information on what you have reviewed, how that's related to the opinions you are going to give. Did you review the environmental report prepared by Energy Fuels? A Q Yes, I did. Did you review the environmental impact
analysis by CDPHE? A Q Yes. Did you rely on your professional
training and experience to review the methodology used in those reports? A Yes.

723 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Did you rely on your professional
training and experience to review whether these reports provide a reliable basis for making decisions involving social, economic, and environmental criteria? A Q Yes. Did you rely on your professional
training and experience to determine whether these reports provide a reliable basis for the public and decision-makers to understand the likely social and economic impact of Energy Fuels' proposal? A Yes. MR. STILLS: I would like to offer
Dr. Power as an expert in social and economic methodologies and analysis and, in particular, with mineral development projects. Expertise is
demonstrated by doctoral work at Princeton, experience of over 40 years at the University of Montana, and has worked with Power Consulting since 1975. I believe his testimony will help us
understand some very significant problems, some issues, and how they were presented in a way that is not very helpful to the public or the decision-makers, so if there's any voir dire, I'll stand down.

724 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 area? A Colorado. It's not the first time I visited I taught for several years at the VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION OF DR. THOMAS POWER BY MR. MOORE: Q My name is Curtis Moore, and I'm in-house I just have a couple of
counsel for Energy Fuels. questions.
I'm going to give our other attorneys a
break here on this. Have you ever in the past ten years represented any clients in the natural resources industry, other than you said you represented a -consulted for utilities. A Q No, I have not. I wasn't sure if I heard you correctly in
your introduction when you were driving down and saw the elk -- I actually lived in Western Colorado myself for a long time. totally agree with you. It's a wonderful place. I have seen those elk. I
Is this your first time visiting the
Colorado Outward Bound School, both their Marble base and they had a mobile base in the San Juans. We have close family friends that live in Grand Junction. Q That's where I lived.

725 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A My son was a competitive skier, so until
he got old enough, or said he was old enough, to travel to the competitions on his own, we spent quite a bit of time in Colorado and Utah. Q Naturita? A Yes. MR. MOORE: him being an expert. MR. GOAD: No objections. None. No objections. We will We have no objections to But this is your first time in Nucla and
DR. GROSSMAN: MR. SANDLER:
THE HEARING OFFICER: recognize his expertise. MR. STILLS:
You're going to use a
PowerPoint to help illustrate some of the points. THE HEARING OFFICER: in the exhibits you gave me? MR. STILLS: I can print a copy -THE HEARING OFFICER: MR. MOORE: That's fine. It's a demonstrative. Do I have this
Actually, could I get a
copy of the notes and copy of the presentation that he's working with? DR. POWER: What I have here is my

726 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 afterwards. DIRECT EXAMINATION OF DR. THOMAS POWER CONTINUED BY MR. STILLS: Q So I guess go to slide -- to the next expert disclosure in case you had questions about that and then my airline reservations. MR. STILLS: MR. MOORE: I will make a copy. You can just make a copy
slide and start, and you can walk through your explanation of key elements of a professional approach to a socioeconomic impact analysis for a mineral development proposal. So I'll let you go ahead and move through the next few slides and explain. A I want to sort of provide an example of
what I thought was a recent Colorado-connected and actually uranium-connected to an example of a reasonably well-done, professional socioeconomic impact analysis. It's not that I agree with
everything that was done in the socioeconomic analysis that was done for the proposal to accept Maywood radioactive waste material at the Cotter Mill over in Canon City, but it has most of the things that I think are important. One is that when you are doing the impact

727 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 analysis, you are doing the impact on something, on some community, or some specific geographic area. And if you don't specify what that community or that geographic area is, you can get very different numbers, very different results, both in terms of numbers of jobs, in terms of the intensity of the impact. So you have to say what the geographic
area or community is that is the subject of your attention, where the impact is, the area you care about or are focused on. People use different
geographic areas, they are going to get different answers, and people may not understand why they are different. The other important point in terms of how these impact models are applied -- and by impact models, that may sound somewhat mysterious, but with the invention of desktop and laptop computers, there was a proliferation of economic models, local economic impact models, complex mathematical models, that to most people may seem to be just black boxes, but they're carefully designed models with hundreds of equations in them. But one has to
be careful how they are used, or you can end up double or triple or quadruple counting the supposed impacts.

728 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The other thing that I think is crucial, especially in dealing with mineral development, is to take into account the actual expected performance over a long period of time as opposed to what the developer wishes the performance would be. In this particular case, do you project 40
years of operation at full employment at the proposed mill or do you take a look at how the uranium industry and uranium mills have actually behaved over the previous 40 years or 60 years. The third point that I think is crucial in indicating that a professional approach is being taken is that one focuses on the whole economy. Most of us, whether we know it or not, learn a lot of economics at the sides of our grandparents and our kindergarten teachers and from our local newspapers that focus on the most obvious visual indications of what the economy is all about, so that in western Montana, it's forests; in mining areas, it's mineral production or mineral refining; in Iowa, it's corn; in Pittsburgh, it's supposedly steel; and in Milwaukee, where I was bread and buttered, it's a drunken German waving a stein of beer. People want to see some indication of

729 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 what it is that allows people to inhabit particular areas, and those tend to be export-oriented activities. What did we do when European-Americans
first arrived in this area that allowed them to stay in this area? The problem with that is that
it ignores the vast majority of the sources of jobs and income in our local communities. And so if you
are focused on those export-oriented activities, you are likely to be staring into a rearview mirror and getting a very distorted and misleading view of the overall economy. Someone wants to look at all of the sources of income being brought into the economy. Retirement/investment income are increasingly important, especially over the last 30 years; a visitor economy, tourism as well as other visitors. And something that I think is often significantly overlooked is the fact that increasingly the location of economic activity in the United States is determined by choices that individual families make and that businesses make about where they would prefer to locate. That's a significant
separate, independent force; namely, the attractiveness of the region as a place to live, work, raise a family.

730 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 This slide just underlines that in the sense that there is a very significant and rich empirical literature that economists have developed over the last half century trying to figure out why economic activity, since the end of the Second World War, has shifted the way it has within the American economy. What was the movement of people to California, for instance, all about, or the desert Southwest or the Pacific Northwest or to Florida or the remigration of people back into the deep south? What was driving that? And what economists have
increasingly emphasized is the role of site-specific, local characteristics. Positive
ones have come to be labeled amenities; negative ones we can call disamenities. When it comes to talking about radioactive materials, the word "stigma" has been used instead. But what economists have
demonstrated empirically is that one can explain the movement of people and businesses in terms of these attractive qualities that some areas have, unattractive qualities that other areas have. The
economic forces associated with that have literally transformed the economic geography of the United

731 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 States. Q Thank you. On the basis of your -- of these principles, did you prepare a report concerning this particular mill proposal, the Energy Fuels proposal. A Q Yes. And those reports are contained in the
documents we sent to the other parties in September? A Q Yes. I believe they are Exhibits 2 and 2A,
which is the last couple of pages on 2. Do these reports contain -- I'm sorry. Do these reports explain that the environmental report submitted by Energy Fuels does not contain these key aspects of a professional social and economic analysis? A Q Yes. And was this explained in detail in your
written reports? A Q Yes. And those are your reports, they are in
evidence, you stand by the analysis in those? A Yes, I do.

732 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Thank you. Now let's turn to the environmental impact analysis, if we may. Did you review the
environmental impact analysis? A Q Yes. And I will refer to it as the EIA. And
based on your review, does the EIA contain a competent analysis of social and economic impacts? A Q opinion. No, it does not. Let's move through the basis for your So I guess, first, let's discuss the
application of the key aspects of the socioeconomic principals you just described. So if we could go
through them slowly, carefully, I believe slide 7 -- yeah. A Go ahead, please. One of the disturbing things to me about
the EIA was the way it handled the socioeconomic impacts; in particular, the projections of what the job impacts are likely to be. Those of us who have
been here for the last couple days have heard some very emotional testimony from local folks very much worried about jobs. That is one of the driving
forces that's behind the project in the defense or justification for the proposed mill. In the EIA,
however, what was presented, rather than a

733 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 for a moment. socioeconomic impact -Q If we can step back, I want to ask you a
question about that previous slide. A Q Okay. Does the EIA address double counting? We
talked about that before. A Q No. Does the EIA address the geographical
extent that we discussed before? A Q No. Okay. The next slide, please. So if you
could please describe the wide variance you were starting to do on this next slide. A This is Table 32 from the EIA, although
I'm showing only subtotals and totals, so it's a condensation of that. This was EIA's summary of
the various studies that -- the socioeconomic impact studies that have been presented. It shows
that the total job impact associated with the mill could be anything from almost 1,400 jobs to 116 jobs, a factor of 12. MR. MOORE: Could I just interrupt
I just wanted to state for the
record that this is new information, these opinions on the EIA, that we have not seen up to this point.

734 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 an objection. the reports. MR. STILLS: Well, this is in the You can carry on, but I just wanted to make that objection. MR. STILLS: I think these are the
application of the principles and analysis that was all the way through and it applies to the EIA as well. I think we disclosed him as coming forward
to address those particular portions of this proceeding. MR. MOORE: These weren't in any of
record and it's in the EIA and he's offering his opinion on it. THE HEARING OFFICER: I didn't hear
Did you mean to make one? MR. MOORE: Yeah. I was making an
objection to say that this is all new information for us. His testimony -THE HEARING OFFICER: Why don't we
go through where each of these came from. MR. STILLS: This does -- and I This is
believe each of the slides is sourced.
from the environmental impact assessment produced by the CDPHE. MR. MOORE: His opinions are outside

735 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the objection. Q of the report, his expert report. THE HEARING OFFICER: Go ahead. I will note
(By Mr. Stills) So go ahead with your
discussion of your analysis as it applies now to the EIA that was released on August 6, 2012. A I should say that most of the comments
I'm going to make are contained in my earlier report, because all of the economic reports that this table summarizes were available before I did my report, and I discussed my criticism of them. The only one that wasn't available at that time is the one submitted at a -- by the Montrose Economic Development Corporation at one of the hearings in either Nucla or Montrose. Q If you could go ahead and talk about what
your views are as far as if you saw any explanations in that document for this wide variance on the number of jobs. A The disturbing thing to me was this
presentation of this huge variance with only the comment that the analysts, obviously, widely differed in their opinions as to what the impact would be, that for something as crucial in terms of the benefits claimed for the proposed mill to have

736 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 no analysis to help decision-makers or the public puzzle out how people could be coming to such different conclusions -Q So does your professional experience
provide some explanation for this wide variance? A Yes. It goes back to the point I made
before, the geographic extent of the impact area being studied. The Energy Fuels economic impact
analysis focused on Montrose County largely, although when it came to the jobs associated with mining and transportation, it indicated that those jobs might well be spread over a three-county area. So the question is: using to study the impacts? What area are we Are we going to focus
on the West End of Montrose County where the mill is going to be located? Are we going to focus, as
the Energy Fuels analysis did, on primarily Montrose County? Are we going to focus on the Mesa, Montrose,
three adjacent Colorado counties: and San Miguel?
Are we going to focus on the nine
counties that sometimes are talked about in the environmental report? Q Or one could --
If you want to hold up a second, could
this double counting and geographical vagueness mislead a person without specialized training in

737 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 economics and social analysis from either the ER or the EIA about what's really happening? A Absolutely. I think people's response to
the possibility of 1,400 jobs coming to their local community, as opposed to 100 or 85, would be dramatically different. 100 jobs that primarily
would be located in Grand Junction would have a much more minor impact than 100 jobs that were going to be located in the West End of Montrose county. So one needs to specify the area that you are focused on and then count the jobs accurately, and that's what I meant by professional analysis. If you don't do that, you can get numbers that are a factor of 12 apart. And that doesn't help
anybody make a decision, especially if nobody tries to explain why those numbers are so far apart. Q In your opinion, it doesn't help anybody
make a decision -- in your opinion, does it mislead the public and confuse folks about what's going on, even in their own communities? A Certainly. If they are told there is
going to be potentially 1,400 jobs when it's more likely to be 100 jobs, that certainly could add considerable confusion.

738 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q And you were talking about what would be
required to reconcile and analyze the competing reports that you reviewed in both your report and in your analysis of the EIA. ahead. A The primary reason for the vast So if you could go
difference is that -- let me just compare the work that I did with the work that Energy Fuels did. Their analyst studied the impact of the mill studying Montrose County. Now, that might sound
perfectly reasonable if Montrose County was a flat plain where it was very easy for people to get around from the West End to the city of Montrose area. But when you have a barrier in the form of a
towering plateau that separates the county into two pieces and to get to the West End from the city of Montrose area, you have to travel through two other counties before you come back into Montrose County, the economics are totally different. By analyzing Montrose County, the assumption -- the economic assumption that was implicitly made was that Montrose was sitting right near the proposed Pinon Ridge uranium mill and that it could provide workers, people could go shopping for supplies, the mill could go shopping for

739 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 supplies in the city of Montrose, when that economically simply isn't the case. Sitting out
here, it's highly unlikely that people are going to commute to work here from the city of Montrose; and, in fact, the economic impact report that Energy Fuels produced admitted that. So in my analysis, I focused on the West End of Montrose County where the mill is going to be located, where people are thinking enthusiastically about the potential jobs associated with it. I focused there because it's
isolated from the rest of Montrose County, and I focused there because there is a large trade center to the north in the form of Grand Junction. And I
focused there because none of the -- initially anyways -- the major mines that are going to supply the uranium to the mill are located in Montrose County. They are located on the border of Mesa and
Grand or in Grand County or San Miguel. So the accurate way to analyze economic impacts is to look at the specific situation, economic situation, market situation, the mill is going to be in, define the geographic area you are looking at, and study the economic connections between that area and the rest of the regional

740 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 economy. When you do that -- and I used the same
model as Energy Fuels did, except I did it at a ZIP Code basis, the West End ZIP codes, rather than lumping the Montrose city area in -- you get dramatically different results. Q So the economy of Nucla is different than
the economy of the town of Montrose? A Yes, and it's unlikely people are going
to drive to Montrose for a convenience store or because gasoline is cheaper. Q They might drive to other places. You
need to know and do the analysis, gather the data -A That's exactly what the model tells you,
is what those economic connections are between different areas. Q I think we have got a lot of that also I think it applies out.
discussed in your report.
Let's move forward to other key aspects. And I'll ask you: Are there other key aspects of a
professional social and economic analysis that would inform the public and the decision-makers on the socioeconomic considerations? A The second one I think is vital is the
stability and reliability of the jobs and income

741 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that are projected. There's been plenty of
comments so far in this hearing, both from those who are enthusiastic supporters and wish the mill could go forward right away as well as the critics that have pointed out the obvious, and that's the uranium industry has gone through some fairly dramatic booms and busts. This is looking at U.S. domestic uranium production. This simply shows that metal mining in
Montrose County, which is mostly the West End of Montrose County, fluctuated or moved with overall U.S. uranium production. We are tied -- the mining
activities here are tied into a national and international market. We don't -- the plans of
businesses to build or mine -- build a uranium mill or mine uranium is driven by a national and international market. The impact of that boom and
bust in the West End of Montrose County -Q If I can ask you a quick question there.
So if, say, there was a tsunami and a nuclear reactor disaster in, say, Japan, that might have an effect? A Q A Absolutely. Okay. Proceed.
The impact on Montrose County shown here

742 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 just in terms of population going back to 1930 with the post-war boom followed by the bust and modest recovery in terms of population -- the interesting thing is the population now is almost identical to what it was coming out of the Great Depression. The boom passed and left the community more or less where it was. This is data from the U.S. Department of Labor's Mine Safety and Health Administration. They maintain a mine data retrieval system that shows employment by quarter in various mines and mills. This is the employment data for the White
Mesa uranium mill over outside Blanding, Utah. What's dramatic and interesting is how volatile that employment is. The blue line up at the top or
up towards the top shows what the employment would be at full capacity, and you can see that for the vast majority of time, it's not at full capacity. It's down, in terms of production workers, often close to zero. Q I use that --
Hold on one second. That's Exhibit 2A, and that's at the very
end of Tab 2. A
So please go ahead.
Comparing what the employment is supposed
to be if the mill was operating at full capacity,

743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 when it actually is, clearly indicates you probably don't want to make plans or projections based on what the employment at full capacity was. And as a
simulation, and that's all this is, I took West End employment between 1998 and 2009, so 12 years of actual fluctuations in employment in the West End of Montrose County, and then I just strung them together until I had 45 years. So it's just if employment in the West End of Montrose County fluctuated the same way it did over the last 12 years and that went on for another 30 years or so and we added in, then, the projected Energy Fuels employment impact of 320 jobs, then this is what employment would look like. It would be significantly higher. The fluctuations
over 12 years would not be all that extreme, you know, plus or minus 100 across the years. But if -- instead of employment being what's shown here, perfectly steady for 40 years at 320 jobs, if instead those 320 jobs fluctuated the way jobs at the White Mesa Mill actually fluctuated, then when we add that to the actual employment over the last 12 years in the West End, one gets an altogether different view of what life and the economy in the West End would be like. One

744 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 would have major fluctuations all over the place, the community regularly being disrupted. Now, my point isn't that this is what's going to happen. It's that in a mineral industry,
to project -- to do your economic projections assuming perfectly smooth, full employment and ignoring a century of history that Colorado and the rest of the United States has had with mineral development is simply misleading. economic analysis. It's not good
You are making a You are making an
counter-factual assumption.
assumption that you know is not going to be true. Q So if I may, what was presented in the
reports that you looked at and analyzed just kind of lifted the chart up and pretended as if you add 300 in, it's all the same. But what you are
testifying to is that's not the case; you have to look at how an industry performs and then figure that into what you project forward -A Q Right. -- to be able to have some understanding Is that what you just
of what's going to happen. testified to? A Yes.
If you want a realistic view of
what the community will experience, you have to

745 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 look at what the industry regularly has experienced. And the EIA commented on that,
actually, and said -- and this is completely a paraphrase, but I think accurate -- that that fluctuation in the uranium industry is just like the fluctuation in the construction industry or in agriculture or in finance or tourism, that they are all the same, that our economy fluctuates. just the character of a market economy. That's
And we
certainly know, given what we have been through the last four years, that the economy does fluctuate. What's important to point out, though, is that the fluctuations in those other industries are never the scale of what one finds in the mineral industry. Agriculture -- and I'm just looking at Agriculture is almost perfectly
employment here. flat.
Even the fluctuations in real estate going
from -- and this is an index -- but going from three to two and a half is a sixth. We were
talking about a decline of one-sixth, 18 percent or something. The same with tourism -- and notice They are not There's a
most of these are sloping upward. jumping and often headed downward.
positive drift, even when there are fluctuations. Q And if I may, as you're testifying, the

746 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 farm and ranch economy -- in your opinion, the farm and ranch economy has much less volatility -A Q In employment, yes. -- in employment. And to model or look at a steady line in the context of mining would not be acceptable in your field; is that correct? A Right. These sorts of fluctuations along
a trend that are relatively modest ought to be taken into account, but they're nothing like the size of the fluctuations in metal mining where, for instance, in 1981 this is -- metal mining in Colorado went from something -- it's an index -something over two down to something around .5, so 75 to 80 percent is what one got, and it's not an upward trend built into it. If we add oil and gas into it -- and the reason these other two end is the federal government in 2000 changed the way they kept the data. It no longer records metal mining as a It lumps it in with gravel
separate industry.
mining and other things. In any case, I think most people talk about mining as a boom-and-bust industry. They
talk -- it's part of the romantic legacy of the

747 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 West, the mining ghost towns, et cetera. People
recognize that the fluctuations in the mineral industry are significantly greater than the fluctuations in other parts of our economy. Unusual enough that economists and the general public talk about boom and bust. Economists talk about flicker; the fact that the employment in the industry is always going on and off, and that's disruptive to economic development, it's disruptive to communities, it has to be taken into account when evaluating socioeconomic impacts. Q So in your opinion, you specified that if
you don't take into account that flicker and if you take all employment as if it looked like what you had for agriculture there, you would get a very deceptive result from your analysis? A Q Absolutely. So let's move to another set of the key
aspects you talked about and apply them as far as using a professional social and economic analysis to inform the public and the decision-makers about what's going on. And if you could just go ahead
and continue with your... A All right. I already outlined the idea
that one really wants to look at the whole economy,

748 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 especially all the sources of economic activity that are bringing income into the economy. And
these slides are just intended to try and quantify that. This is looking at the mix of employment,
the mix of jobs, in the West End of Montrose County at the end of the -- using census data from 2006 to 2010. The only point is to underline, first, that natural resources is significant. source of employment. That's a
But service industries,
health care, professional, technical, services for visitors, finance, real estate, transport, public utilities is tied to the generator and coal mine outside of town, trade, manufacture and construction -- there is a broad source of fairly diversified economy providing livings for the folks in the West End of Montrose County. One of the reasons to look at all of those activities and not just the export-oriented sectors is that -- and this is Montrose County. we look at just the real income, inflation taken out, and look at the export-oriented activities -mining, agriculture, manufacturing -- it's largely been flat, while somehow, despite those export-oriented activities remaining largely flat, If

749 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the rest of the economy has expanded -- the rest of the Montrose economy in terms of real income flowing into the pockets of citizens has expanded dramatically. There's obviously forces afoot in
the rest of the economy that you don't see if you focus on the export-oriented sectors. One of those that I want to underline and just give a feeling for the quantitative importance is investment and retirement income. This area
graph is just showing labor earnings here -- and this is for Montrose County. growing. You can see it
You can see the beginnings of the impact But this
of the Great Recession as it dips down. is the labor.
The blue is the labor earnings, the
payroll or the wages and salaries people get. Added to that is investment income, retirement income, which adds significantly to labor income, and then labor income support programs. It's
Medicaid, low-income health assistance, as well as unemployment compensation, food stamps, et cetera. But most of our families' income doesn't come from export-oriented activities. doesn't come from work or jobs. of it come from other sources. All of it
Significant parts And in analyzing
the economy, one has to look at all of that.

750 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 If one asks where the growth in the Montrose County -- actually, in the three-county area was over the last two decades, one finds that most of the growth was in investment and retirement income, health and other services, state and local government. contribution. Mineral extraction was there making a Most of it was oil and gas up in It was these -- just these
Mesa County, et cetera.
sets of sources of income that were responsible for all of the growth in the tri-county region. Q And that chart, that was Table 2, I
believe, from your original report? A Right, just updated. And the previous
pie graph was also taken from just an updated version of the -Q And although we are focusing on them here
for the presentation to help with your testimony, these are all contained in the analysis and written testimony, correct? A Q Yes. So these last few things that you
discussed, how critical are those components to have a sound methodology for economic and social analysis? A I think you have to know what the sources

751 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of income growth/job growth are. You can't just
assume what they should be in some sense because this is what grandpa did. One has to look at what
the current sources of new jobs and new income are. That gives you some feeling for where the economic vitality is likely to come from in the future and, in that sense, very crucial. Q And in your opinion, did the EIA contain
the analysis of these economic components that you described? A Q No. So if you could, discuss the literature
on the sectors most impacted by what you referred to as disamenities and stigma. continue. A Okay. This is going back to the last If you could please
important point that I made in my introduction, and that's that local quality of life matters or local lack of quality of life matters and that economists have documented that, quantified it. In fact, real
estate agents were doing it long before economists did. Areas with heavy pollution, areas with high-crime rates, areas that are rundown, the infrastructure is just crumbling -- areas that have

752 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 local bad qualities end up having very low property values. People try to avoid living in them, which
is one of the reasons the demand is low and the price tumbles in that direction. So economists and
real estate professionals have been documenting the impact of disamenities or stigma for a long time. One of the biggest issues raised by the radioactive industry is that for most Americans, for a large number of Americans -- and for a large number of Coloradans, judged by survey work that's been done over the last decade -- radioactivity is considered a disamenity. stigma associated with it. What I did was simply take the Colorado Division of Local Government, the state demographic -Q And if I may, this is updated from Table There is an economic
5 of your original presentation. A analysis. Right. I simply took their economic base
They ask for each county in the state
what's the engine that's driving that economy, what industries, what economic activities are bringing money into the economy. three counties. And I have combined the
They wouldn't look much different
if they were broken apart.

753 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to ask: Retirement/investment income, which I have labeled here footloose income that flows to household -- it's footloose in the sense that it goes where people choose to live. It's social
security checks, pension checks, investment income from investments that are made on Wall Street or elsewhere. That's one big chunk of the local The visitor economy is another Then there's the fact that
economic base.
significant chunk.
Montrose and Grand Junction serve as regional trade centers that people from surrounding counties and towns come to and visit. And, finally, there is the traditional -and strangely enough, the State demography office is using the same language I do. The traditional
economic base is still important, but of all the basic economic -- of the total economic engine, it represents about a quarter of that economic engine. The reason for looking at it this way is If radioactivity is considered a
disamenity, if industrialization of the Paradox Valley is considered a disamenity, what part of this economic base might be harmed or which parts of that economic base are most vulnerable. And if
you look at it that way and simply total up the

754 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 jobs in those sectors, I come to the conclusion that almost half of those jobs could be vulnerable to the perception that there's disamenities building or being added to the area. Q A Q A Q And this is from Table 5 in your report? Right. So half of the economy -Is vulnerable. -- is vulnerable to the impacts you have
just discussed. And when you looked at the EIA, did it study these sectors? A Yes, it did. And it even spoke to
whether they would be vulnerable but only to dismiss it with anecdotal stories pointing out that, for instance, Moab still has radioactive deposits along the river, that Telluride was the center of mining activity. there was a mill. In the northern part
And uranium mines, that the
Grand Junction area had a uranium mill, and the Gateway area had a uranium mill and look how well all of them are doing. Q So all of those communities are in a
post-mining era. A Exactly.

755 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q And to compare what's happening in a
post-mining era to something that is having a huge impact coming back in is completely upside down. Would that be correct? A It is. This is just showing the collapse
in mining in Montrose, San Miguel, and Mesa County in terms of real metal mining payroll collapsing beginning in the late '70s, reviving briefly in the late '80s, and then remaining at quite a low level. I just had that up here to show the period of collapse so that it could be compared to the growth spurts in these other areas. For instance, for Mesa County, that's the blue line here, I have a line here showing when the Grand Junction mill shut down. And you will notice
that the takeoff in Grand Junction came after that shutdown. In Montrose, the Uravan mill shut It took place in
down -- Montrose is the red here.
the early '80s, and Montrose County as a whole faced significant economic growth after that. And
for San Miguel, Telluride, the mining ceased in the early '80s. And it was after that that the
recreation economy developed and Telluride began to boom. And if one looks over at Moab, I have

756 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 here the mining jobs in Grand County, the total jobs. One can see the mining boom and bust and the
close of the uranium mill and the takeoff well after they turned away from being primarily a mining area and became a recreation-oriented area. So I think the -- I mean, it's true that mining areas -- that there is life after mining in the sense that Aspen -- when I worked at the Colorado Outward Bound School, there was still mining going on in Aspen. Park City, they still
have some of the overhead rigs in the ski areas as historic artifacts. But all of those areas took on It wasn't that
a new life after the mining ceased.
they coexisted comfortably with the mining activity. Q If you could -- you need to, in a
competent analysis, really understand what the contemporary economic vitality comes from for a particular region; is that correct? A Q Yes. And is that your opinion that you've
given today? A Q Yes. And in your opinion, did you find that
kind of an analysis in the EIA or did you find it

757 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to be completely backwards from the type of analysis you would do? A It was startling. I'm not sure I have
seen an analysis of a uranium facility, a serious one, that did not take up with the stigma question. That is right in front of people. It doesn't
matter if you think that the fear of radiation is all superstition and anti-scientific. what's at issue. What's at issue is that despite the nuclear industry trying to convince and educate people that nuclear energy and uranium, et cetera, are safe, people still don't like it. And the That's not
polling that was done at the time for the Cotter Mill, using the Cotter Mill as a waste disposal site, the polling of Colorado citizens made that clear, and polling of Americans and just watching the behavior of Americans makes that clear. There
is literature out there, not only on disamenities, but there is economic empirical literature dealing with the stigma associated with radioactivity, uranium, et cetera. So we could have a very informed empirical discussion of those problems and the scale of them or the time duration of them or

758 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 whether they have to be worried about here when we are in an area that's used to radioactivity. But
the EIA doesn't refer to that literature at all. There's just no mention. Q And you define that, in your opinion,
that they relied on just some anecdotal statements and didn't rely on any kind of data or any kind of accepted methodology in doing this analysis? A Right. It was the worst of casual
empiricism. Q And if we could move on to -- getting to
the end -- your opinion of the environmental report's analysis of benefits and cost. A Economists have been doing benefit-cost
analyses since the 1930s, and I think most of the public are familiar with weighing of benefits and costs. I think and my recollection is that the environmental report, although it starts weighing the benefits and costs, it actually changes the title of it because it's not really a weighing of benefits and costs. There is no formal structure
that indicates what they decided to consider in the whole box of, you know, okay, what are the effects we should look at. Nor is there any obvious logic

759 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to what was labeled a benefit or a cost. and costs are mixed up. Wages, one of the costs of operating a facility, are treated as benefits, but the purchase of inputs to keep the facility operating are treated as costs. So some of the costs are treated Benefits
as benefits, but some of the costs remain costs, and it's unclear what they are. They treat the wage bill as a benefit, but they also treat as a benefit the full value of the uranium produced. Well, a big chunk of the
value of the uranium produced is the embodiment of the labor that went into producing it. So you are
double counting or triple counting, and so there's no logic to what they did and the results can't be used for anything. And as far as I can tell, the
environmental report didn't use them for anything. Q And I appreciate your time, so just a
couple final questions. So based on your expertise with the methodology of cost and benefit analysis or cost-benefit analysis, you don't find a sound analysis conducted in the environmental report; is that right? A Absolutely not.

760 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 questions. Q And did you find it in the environmental
impact analysis? A Q No. And we also let you know as you were
coming to testify that we anticipated that you would have rebuttal testimony to the environmental impact analysis that's not yet been presented in this proceeding by Mr. Tarlton, so I guess we are out of order here as far as things getting presented not as they seem, but I appreciate your giving us your opinion on the environmental impact analysis, the environmental report. MR. STILLS: Thank you. THE HEARING OFFICER: Before we do And I have no further
cross-examination, I need to make a disclosure that the Maywood soils issue described in the report about Cotter, Mr. Goad participated in that hearing and I sat as the hearing officer, so enough said. I don't think I need to say any more about it. It's just a fact. MR. STILLS: I believe that was
disclosed before we came down this road. THE HEARING OFFICER: I'm very
careful about trying to make sure everybody hears

761 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2011. So next, I would like to just discuss a few of the findings in your report. Let's see, it five or six times. With that, who wants to do... CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DR. THOMAS POWER BY MR. MOORE: Q Well, thank you, Dr. Power. Again, I'm
Curtis Moore, in-house counsel for Energy Fuels Resources, and I just had a couple of quick questions here for you, if I could. take too long, I don't think. I think you mentioned a few times that our analysis should take -- you mentioned that your analysis should be taken into account by the State. When did you prepare your original report? A Q This has a date on it of December 2010. Do you know -- are you aware of when the It shouldn't
final license was issued? A Q No, I'm not. I can inform you it was March 7th of
your report finds that about 116 jobs will be created from the Pinon Ridge project; is that correct? A 116 jobs will be filled by people in the

762 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 West End of Montrose County. Q Okay. Now, you only examined the West
End for these jobs, for -A Q Right, for the impact. For the impact. Okay.
I mean, do you recognize that Energy Fuels might have contractors or consultants from outside the area? A Certainly, and they will have miners and But as your socioeconomic
truck drivers too.
impact analysis indicated, they are likely to come from the surrounding five-county area. So if
you -- you can get a bigger number if you go to the five-county area, but then you have Grand Junction sitting there, and the percentage of those jobs may take the number of jobs up to 300. But now you
have a metropolitan area that is going to dilute the impact of those jobs. Q Did I just hear you say that it might
create 300 jobs in the entire five-county region? A Right. In my analysis, we confirmed the
Louis Berger Associates analysis that if you do the analysis for Montrose County as a unified economy, you get numbers similar to what they got. But
mining and truck driving jobs would not only not be

763 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in Montrose -- not be in the West End, not be in Montrose County, but would be in surrounding counties or in Utah. Q Those five counties you mentioned a
minute ago, are those all in the state of Colorado? A No. There's three in the state of
Colorado and then Grand and San Juan in Utah. Q Okay. Let's see here. I just wanted
to -- let me ask one more question on that. Did you interview anybody in the area about their commuting habits? A No. There is data on their commuting
habits that the census bureau gathers that is far more extensive than -- I mean, you would have to put a workforce the size of the census workforce to gather data of that quality. Q Let's talk briefly about the stigma
conclusions you drew there. Let's see here. You mentioned, I think,
I believe, in your original report that a revived uranium industry -- and I might be paraphrasing a little bit so correct me if I'm wrong. The
possibility of a revived uranium industry would undermine the existing sources of economic vitality in this region.

764 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Did you actually perform such an examination of this region? A I certainly did. That was one of the
points I was making, is taking apart the economy and seeing what the sources of employment and income were and looking to see what part of those were tied to footloose income, what part was tied to the visitor economy, what part was tied to in-migration, et cetera. Q Did that examine all of Montrose County
or was that just at the West End? A Both. It examined all of Montrose County
and, to a much more limited extent, the West End, because the economic data that's available on a subcounty basis is much more limited. Q Okay. Thank you.
Getting back to the environmental stigma idea, did you interview anybody in the region about the potential for environmental stigma in this region, the West End? A No. As I said, I was using work that was
done interviewing people across the state of Colorado for the Cotter Mill decision. Q Getting briefly to -- I guess it would be
the -- have you talked to any of the local economic

765 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 development professionals about their efforts to attract other industries to the region? A No. I have read some of the things they
have written, but I haven't talked to them. Q Okay. Did you examine any of the
environmental stigma that may or may not occur in Blanding, Utah as a result of the White Mesa Mill? A at no. Q Okay. Now, I guess just one or two more Well, no, I think -- let me just leave it
quick questions here. You mentioned also in your report, you say that at least as many jobs could be created by cleaning up contaminated sites in the area. A Q Yes. What was the relevance, do you think, of
that to the Pinon Ridge proposal? A I think it's very relevant. The primary
case being made for -- the primary public interest case that's being made for the Pinon Ridge proposal is that it will provide jobs and that jobs are badly needed here. The primary concern about that
is in creating those jobs, there is a potential for creating a significant additional environmental hazard. But the proponents think the jobs justify

766 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 whatever that hazard might be. If what's primarily driving the decision is going to be jobs, one can get into a win-win job using similar workers, similar skills, and put people to work while improving the environment and actually reducing the disamenities or stigma that may be associated with it. So from a business point of view, it has nothing to do with it. But we are in a public
setting here, and from an economist point of view, we are in this public setting because -- not because you want to do business, you know -- and usually in our economy, you know, that's up to you. It's that you want to use public resources, public or environmental resources, in the process. And so
the public gets involved to try and protect their interests. And so to the extent that one can pursue the job benefit that the public wants without adding the threat of environmental stigma and disamenity that has negative economic consequences, if one could combine the skills of miners, material handlers, truckers, et cetera, removing the disamenity and creating the jobs, there you would be better off.

767 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q From a purely jobs standpoint, is there
any reason to not try to do both? A Yes. If -- and I'm not the environmental
expert here, although I have looked at the poll data and the literature on stigma, et cetera. there is this negative economic characteristic associated with the radioactive industry, just as there is with feedlots or landfills, if there is that negative impact, one has to take that negative impact into account. And if you have an If
alternative, if you can put people to work without damaging the environment or without adding to the stigma, why wouldn't you stay on that course? sounds more sustainable. fraught with risks. Q Thank you for that. Let's see here. It
It sounds like it's less
Are you aware of the findings of a 2011 report by George Mason University examining the economic impacts of uranium mining and milling in four counties: In San Juan County, Utah; Montrose
County, Colorado; Sweetwater County, Wyoming; and Carnes County, Texas? A Q I happen to be carrying it with me, yes. Okay. Thank you.
Are you aware of the findings of a report

768 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 by -A Q Well -That's all right. I was just asking a
yes or no question. A Q A Q Right. Okay. I'm aware of it.
I'm not going to go into details. Okay. Are you aware of the findings of a report
by Chmura Economics and Analytics of Richmond, Virginia and the RTI International Research Triangle Park in North Carolina evaluating the economic impacts associated with the potential stigma of the Coals Hill uranium mine and processing facility in Virginia? A Q A Absolutely. Thank you. You mentioned --
You are being selective in the Virginia
reports you are citing. Q Thank you. You did mention that you were aware of the 2003 report by RPI Consultants of Durango. A Q Right. Thank you. Finally, you mentioned that one time you I'm just asking if you're aware of it.

769 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 be mining. said there's -- when you were referring to Telluride, there's life after mining. A Q Yes. What do you think happened here in Nucla Mining -- what do you think happened
and Naturita?
here after mining went away in the '80s? A It's like northern Miguel County moved
back to where it had been previously or moved back several decades, and I think the isolation associated with the area has served as a drawback in terms of developing the same thing that has developed. on anyone. And I would not wish Moab or Telluride There's lots of economic vitality and
growth across the West that isn't destination resort-based. So, to me, the new West or the new
economic vitality is not necessarily tied to destination resorts. But I think one of the problems is the isolation of the place, which is one of the spectacularly beautiful characteristics of it. The
other is that mining towns and company towns have a difficult time making transitions unless some source of energy comes into it. There is a town -- and it doesn't have to It can be an agriculture or lumber town

770 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Honor. CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DR. THOMAS POWER BY MR. GOAD: Q Good afternoon, Mr. Powers. My name is are so used to obtaining their livelihoods in a particular way that they can't imagine that there is another way that they can provide themselves with a livelihood. And it takes entrepreneurial
spirit, it takes confidence, it takes independence to strike out in a different pattern. bound to happen here. I think it's
I mean, the assets -- the
natural assets of the place, the hard-scrabble folks here, et cetera. happen. Q A I think it's going to
It's like a good part of eastern Montana. But it hasn't for 30 years. That's true. But I think there's a
significant possibility that it will happen, and I have doubts that a uranium mill and uranium mine will bring a renaissance of sorts. I think it will
just commit it to trying to do things as they used to be done. More of the same is not an economic
development strategy; diversification is. MR. MOORE: nothing further. MR. GOAD: A few questions, Your Thank you. I have

771 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Jerry Goad. I'm with the Colorado Attorney
General's Office and I represent the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. A Q Good afternoon. You mentioned two reports. I think
Mr. Stills referred to them as Exhibits 2 and 2A. A Q Yes. And I believe you gave Mr. Moore the date
of 2010, December 2010? A Q A Right. For 2, it was December 2010.
What's the date of the other one? I have no idea. It would have been at
the time the expert witness -- just before the expert witness statements were due. there's got to be a date. come up with the date. Q A Q I'll figure that out later. So it was October, September. That's all right. Would you turn to the chart that you got out of the EIA that showed the different estimates of jobs early in your presentation. do that on your PowerPoint, please. A Q Okay. Yes. There you go. If you could So that was --
Somebody will have to

772 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Now, when you were testifying about this chart and related issues, you mentioned an estimate of 1,400 jobs being created. A Q A Q Yes. Did that come from this chart? Yes. That actually came from the Montrose
Economic Development Council? A Q Yes. That number did not come from the
Department of Health. A Q A Health. Q That's correct. But the number of 1,400 No, it says it came -That's a yes-or-no question. This table came from the Department of
jobs being created did not come from the Department of Health. A No, it didn't. It says exactly where it
came from, yes. Q In your research on stigma, are
Superfunds sites -- do they have a stigma issue? A Q Yes. Have you done any research about stigma
in places like Grand Junction, Colorado?

773 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Q Not specifically Grand Junction. You are aware that there used to be a
very large uranium mill in Grand Junction? A Q Yes. Are you aware that there are hundreds of
properties in Grand Junction that have not been remediated? A No. I don't know anything about what
happened with that Superfund site. Q It's not a Superfund site. Are you aware that there are approximately 300,000 tons of contaminated tailings underneath the city of Grand Junction? A No, I'm not. I don't know anything about
what remediation or lack of remediation has been going on there. Q When you used Grand Junction on some of
your charts here, did you find any stigma associated with those tailings with the city of Grand Junction? A No. The stigma I was referring to was
the radioactive industry, not -- the same point you are making could be made about Moab, that there's radioactive deposits there, and yet the recreational visitors/second home economy has

774 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 bloomed, nonetheless. Q That was actually my next question. You
apparently don't see any stigma associated with the gigantic mill outside of Moab. A I'm not -- let me make it clear.
Economists -- it's not that economists have a personal belief in stigma. was in physics. My undergraduate degree
My father was a nuclear physicist.
I'm not afraid of nuclear materials, but the stigma issue is tied to how people actually behave, empirically based studies of how people behave with respect to things like crime in the streets. It's
not shocking that economists have found people try to avoid it. And it's the same with airplanes
landing over neighborhoods. I could go on and on with different types of things that have disamenity or stigma attached to them, and we study how people behave. to avoid them. They try They
They have an adverse impact.
reduce property values. economists.
That's not opinions of
That's what the data on people's
behavior indicates. Now, what you are telling me doesn't surprise me, that with the passage of time -- for instance, some of the toxic waste left behind by

775 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the dozen lumber mills that were in my hometown of Missoula, a lot of that -- if the EPA wasn't still digging around, there have been proposals for subdivisions that go right on top of that land. And I'm sure that people would have been able to sell those homes, because at some point the stigma fades. Q Are you aware of any stigma associated
with the Atlas tailings outside of Moab, Utah? A No. I think it's clear that the
recreation -- I haven't seen an empirical study there that would -- or an empirical study of alternate mountain bike meccas that might or might not indicate that some people stay away from Moab because of the radioactive tailings. possible. I haven't seen a study. But as with polluted sites at our lumber mills, stigma -- and that's an important part of the literature and if you'd looked at these different studies, you would know that, that stigma fades with time, if it's not an ongoing thing. So It's
landfills that get covered up can become parks that are important to neighborhoods and subdivisions, so it wouldn't surprise me that with time and distance, the negative impact would decline.

776 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 That's part of the literature. MR. GOAD: further questions. CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DR. THOMAS POWER BY DR. GROSSMAN: Q Dr. Power, I'm Bob Grossman. I just have Thank you, Mr. Power. No
one question, and it's something I have been sort of interested in in this whole -- my involvement in this, and that is the cost-benefit. It's kind of
interesting that in my opening statement, I was looking at a balance and the size of the balance and saying that the balance, when it's real small like right here in Nucla and Naturita, the balance of good and bad is quite different than if you made the balance bigger and took it out to Telluride or on to Cortez and included a bigger area, both north, south and east, west. with your expanding circles. And I was just trying to point out in my opening statement, which was not as empirical as the kind of analyses, actual analyses, that you have done. Mine was more seat-of-the-pants, just It kind of goes along
what I've been reading and feeling about the area over the years, that the balance really changes from heavily positive for the mill right here to

777 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 negative as you go further out. cost-benefit. right? A That potential is there. The geographic It's, you It's always And that's
That's what we are looking at,
definition can significantly change. know, a boundary condition problem. true. Q I mean... Right.
We are on the same page.
In
meteorology we have boundary conditions for different scales. So I'm going to come back to
something I have been interested in, and that's the tails of the distribution of anything. And these
tails, as I tried to present in my presentation -I gave a little quick seminar on risk management and actually how you can calculate risk. number. And when you get out to the tails of the distribution -- in this case, I was using dispersion of toxic and radioactive materials. If Risk is a
something really terrible happens, the cost of that remediation or whatever goes way up, even though the probability of it goes way down. We see that The
in New York City and the East Coast right now. probability of that kind of storm, very, very small --

778 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q THE HEARING OFFICER: try to ask a question, would you. DR. GROSSMAN: I'm setting it up. Dr. Grossman,
(By Dr. Grossman) Do you include in these
cost-benefit analyses the expense of the possibility of black swans? risk? Do you look at that
Do you calculate risk so that the public and
others can use those numbers to assess whether this is good or bad or what? A Well, I think we should have a I think the problem
conversation by phone on that.
is that the black swans -- the low probability, very high catastrophic costs -- that those situations aren't handled well by economics or most technological, computational-type things, because I think catastrophic events like that cross a moral line or an ethical line where, in some sense, benefit-cost analysis is not appropriate. I try to tell my student economists that the realm in which economics can be safely used is a realm where trade-offs are considered appropriate and ethical. So as soon as you get into, for
instance, for some people, selling organs; for almost everybody, selling children; for some people, selling sex, you know, buying religious

779 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 favors. There are areas where trade-offs and
commercial exchange, dollar calculations, just are offensive, are ethically offensive. And in that
setting, economics is not much use, because economics is a science if you want trade-offs. And so I think when you get into that hot-button area of catastrophic outcomes, low probability catastrophic outcomes, that ethical dialogue about who has a right to be threatening people at that level or, you know, what we owe each other in that sort of setting come into play far more than benefit-cost analysis. it at that. DR. GROSSMAN: Thank you. Questions? Do I'll just leave
THE HEARING OFFICER: I have any more cross? Go ahead.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION OF DR. THOMAS POWER BY MR. STILLS: Q Did you have anything you wanted to say
about those four reports that were raised? A Just as a matter of disclosure, I
participated in picking some of the contractors for some of the reports and have looked at them all and have been asked -- a consulting firm has been asked to review some of them.

780 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 What was selective was the two I was asked about dismiss stigma and use as examples of uranium mills and mines two in-situ leach operations, which is an altogether different technology with altogether different problems than in Pennsylvania or the proposed mill and mines here. I was just smiling. If I were on the other
side, I would have used the other two because they go into some detail on the stigma issue. Q Your testimony -- let's get to the
questions of stigma, I believe, Mr. Goad asked. Your testimony is not that you necessarily have been asked by Sheep Mountain Alliance, a local nonprofit group, membership around the region, you weren't hired to do a review of stigma as it applies to all of these areas; is that correct? A Q Yes. Your testimony was that to have a
competent professional analysis, Energy Fuels' consultants and the CDPHE, who is charged by statute with analyzing the impacts, would need to apply these methodologies; is that correct? is your opinion? A Right. All I was saying is that you That
cannot do a discussion of impacts of the

781 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 radioactive industry without summarizing, digesting, and using the stigma literature that's out there. That doesn't mean you will conclude
it's relevant. Q But you didn't come here to make that
conclusion -A All I'm saying is it should have been
done, and it wasn't. Q And if CDPHE, who has responsibilities in
Grand Junction and these other areas, and their counterpart in Utah were to apply this methodology, you would be able to go look up that report and see what the stigma is as it plays out empirically in these places. A Q Yes. And as far as relevance that was raised, Is that your opinion also?
I believe it was part of your expert opinion that for the public to not be misled and for the public to understand social, economic cost-benefits as they weigh against environmental, the public needs to have this kind of professionally done analysis put forward in a competent document. opinion? A Absolutely. Jobs is a hot button, moral I mean, Was that your
and political, ethical and economic issue.

782 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 people are worried. And I think one has to
carefully analyze that in a way that helps people understand how this particular proposal would actually fit into the community and what it actually might contribute in some sort of honest, objective way. Q Another question as it goes to the We discussed
relevance issues that were raised:
the need for the person making the ultimate decision -- and I know we are having some arguments among counsel, so I'll just stay in the generic. In order for the decision-maker, the relevant decision-maker, to make a decision -let's assume for a second that Colorado allows denial of this permit based solely on social and economic considerations. In your opinion given
here today, could the professional analysis you described support denial of this permit based on the conclusions that one might get for applying it to this region? A Q That's a hypothetical, I take it? Yes. I'm not asking you to answer the I'm asking you if a reasonable
legal portion.
decision-maker could come to that conclusion if the methodology you put forward today here on stigma

783 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and the other aspects were applied in a careful way? A Is that your opinion? Yes. Otherwise, I don't know why we do
the socioeconomic impact analysis, why people are -- decision-makers and agencies are required to do this weighing. We want to do both very
carefully, the economic side and the environmental side, because that ultimately is what ends up getting weighed. And so it has to be done as
professionally, as carefully, as well as we can. And hopefully it could change decisions. Otherwise, why are we doing it? MR. STILLS: nothing further. THE HEARING OFFICER: Can this witness be released? MR. STILLS: Yes, Your Honor. I need five or Anybody else? Thank you. I have
ten minutes, folks, before we do the public comments. I'm kind of worn out from sitting here.
For those of you in the room that want to make public comments, there are sign-up sheets over there by the door. I need your name and a very Six of you can get on
small amount of information. one sheet.
For those people on the phone, if

784 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it. anybody on the phone wants to make an oral public comment, we'll afford you an opportunity to do that after we hear from the people that are sitting in the room. MR. PARSONS: Your Honor, we have Mr. Sandler has to I
one sort of housekeeping issue.
go back home to tend to some family issues.
would like to, at this time, enter an appearance on behalf of the wildlife groups to maintain their presence in this hearing. Mr. Sandler is likely to
join by phone, but in order to keep some continuity, I would like to put that on the record. THE HEARING OFFICER: I appreciate
I will give you an opportunity to If not... I
cross-examine if you're on the phone. MR. SANDLER: should be on the phone.
I appreciate that.
(Recess taken, 4:07 to 4:20 p.m.) THE HEARING OFFICER: I have the
sign-up sheets, and I'm going to mispronounce your names badly. Plan on it. That's the way it works.
Sherry Craig, Elizabeth Gick, Linda Miller, Art Goodtimes, Chris Myers, Bob Saunders. Is there
anybody else in the room that wanted to make oral public comments this afternoon?

785 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Craig. here. question. AUDIENCE MEMBER: I do have a
Will you be taking comments on Monday? THE HEARING OFFICER: Yeah, starting
at 8:30 in the morning. AUDIENCE MEMBER: I have a comment I could
from someone who listened the other day. not hear the public comments via the phone conference the other day.
It was really cut out.
So I guess I'd ask that we either ask the commentators to step closer so the people on the phone can hear or... (Discussion off the record.) THE HEARING OFFICER: All of the
people whose names I read, stand up and raise your right hands. (Participants sworn.) THE HEARING OFFICER: SHERRY CRAIG: I live in Nucla. Ms. Craig.
My name is Sherry
I was born and raised
While I was growing up, my whole family My grandparents,
worked in the uranium industry.
my parents, and all of the family in some way worked in uranium mining/milling. I know that there's lots of regulations, rules, and things to protect the environment out

786 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 there. I know those are all needed and necessary,
but I have -- I'm very confident that the agencies that went over these permits and things studied and made informed decisions on what they were doing. I'm sure that the regulations that are in place are sufficient to protect the people and the population. I really feel that it's not only an issue for our area but for our whole country that we revive industry. We have kind of chomped down on We If
industry and have sent everything overseas.
need to bring those back to the United States.
we are going to be energy independent and not rely on imports from other countries, we have to have industry in the United States. We can consider -- you know, anything we do affects the environment. It doesn't matter. So that's an
Just living affects the environment.
issue to consider, but also we need to be able to live. And people that live here want to be able to
live here, have a job, be able to stay in this area, and this would be an economic boost to the area. But it's also -- like I said, I feel like
it's important to the whole United States to have industry that can support our needs of our nation.

787 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Gick. THE HEARING OFFICER: Elizabeth
Am I pronouncing your name right? ELIZABETH GICK: Yes, you are. Your
Honor, thank you for this opportunity to speak up and to be heard. My name is Elizabeth Gick. I
have lived in Telluride for 33 years.
I'm speaking
here as a mother, as hopefully a grandmother one of these days, an environmentalist, an elder, but mostly as a planetary citizen. It has been stated that the Pinon Ridge Mill would be the first uranium processing mill to be built in a generation. to me. That is a key statement
I believe there are good reasons why no They
other such mill has been built for 30 years.
are dinosaurs that we don't need to bring back. The hazards to our health, our children's health are just too great. I don't think anybody doubts that the people of Fukushima were told the plants are absolutely safe. As it turned out, they weren't.
And I just don't believe that safety standards we're applying now are sufficient, certainly not in relation to the half life of uranium, 800,000 years. Plastic liners, really? Native Americans
admonish us to think of the well-being of the

788 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 seventh generation in all our decisions, but what are seven generations compared to 800,000 years? The application for this mill is based on rules and regulations that are in effect now and assume that uranium can safely be mined, milled, transported, used, and the waste safely be stored. Tragic experiences from around the world have shown this is not so. terrorism happen. Natural disasters, accidents, and And if they happen, the water
and the wind do not know boundaries, and that's why I feel I have a right to speak to this, even if this is mostly a Nucla-Naturita decision. will blow it over. I'm close enough. The wind
However, my heart truly goes out to the people of Paradox, Naturita, and Nucla who are desperate for a job, even a job that potentially is life-threatening. There must be alternatives: An
alternative in tourism, the area is fantastic for hiking, climbing, horseback riding, just to name a few. There is also fishing, hunting, many more. I thought And
There might be alternatives in farming.
the area used to be famous for its orchards.
if there is enough water for a uranium processing mill, there must be enough water for farming and growing some yummy vegetables. There might be jobs

789 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in reclamation and there might be jobs in alternative, that is, renewable energy. I would also like to mention that the Telluride Foundation started a Paradox Community Development Initiative a few years ago that offers low-interest loans and technical assistance to people who want to start up a business who need some consulting on business ideas. In closing, I would like to stress again, radiation is forever, radiation from uranium is forever, and it is deadly. Let's please scratch
this outdated idea for the sake of our children and for the sake of the planet. I thank you very much. Linda Miller.
THE HEARING OFFICER: LINDA MILLER:
Linda Miller, and I Thank
do live in Telluride for the last 35 years.
you for this opportunity to, once again, express my concern regarding the proposed Pinon Ridge Mill. My issues are whether Energy Fuels has the ability to respond to accidents and their ability to remediate once they are finished with the site. I base my concern on the history of
remediation in San Miguel County and Montrose County. One example is the Newmeyer vanadium mill

790 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 site on Highway 145 six miles west of Telluride. The mill was originally developed in 1908 encompassing approximately 15 acres consisting of the former mill area, tailing disposal area, and other facilities used to support the milling operation. It operated from 1920 to the early
1950s when the local ore was depleted. Not until 1998, when it was sold to Cyprus Amax, was there an agreement mandating remedial activities. At that time, the
Environmental Protection Agency and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment conducted a site assessment and determined subsurface residual radioactivity existed on two sides of Highway 145. Historical photos show that
the highway had been built right through the mill site; more important, the lower side was in the San Miguel River floodplain. The cleanup was completed
60 years after the mill had closed. Today the public is told that mining operations have vastly improved, state of the art, best operating procedures are in place. has come of age. Technology
The industry is well-prepared, They
and then the BP Deepwater Horizon blew out.
gave lie to the state of the art and investment and

791 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 their ability to remediate. There will be accidents. Just last
October 1st, 2012, a rollover involving a tanker illustrated the vulnerabilities in the system now in place. The accident occurred at Mile 24, The truck was
Highway 141, not far from here. carrying liquid asphalt.
The trucking company was
responsible and contacted a company called Storage Tank Technology, Inc. The cleanup operations
required a permit from the Colorado Department of Transportation, as it was in their right-of-way. The Colorado State Patrol responded to the scene, but they oversee the cleanup and are not responsible for it. They needed a cleanup permit
from CDOT, a permit was issued on October 9th, but they were not aware it was liquid asphalt. were not aware it was an emergency. To complicate matters further, the spill site was archeologically rich, so teams from the Bureau of Land Management had to do an assessment to make sure no artifacts would be destroyed by bulldozers used in the cleanup. The spill only They
came to the attention of all of the authorities when the San Miguel sheriff, on his day off, was riding his motorcycle in the area and saw the mess.

792 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Granted, the casualties were only birds caught in the sticky mess, not humans. I describe this sequence of errors only to illustrate that emergency responses do not run smoothly. Before you is an application for a
uranium mill that must not be approved without the surety that accidents can be dealt with expediently, thoroughly, responses without bureaucratic road blocks. Remediation must be Energy Fuels must
absolutely timely and complete.
demonstrate it has the ability to enter into this venture with the financial wherewith all to meet all potential pitfalls. less. Although an exact cost for responding to an accident or eventual remediation will be difficult to name, we know Cotter cleanup already is at 43 million. It is interesting to note that Citizens cannot settle for
in the San Miguel watershed, we have a Superfund site at the headwaters and a Superfund site at the end. Please don't let the whole watershed be a Thank you. Mr. Goodtimes. May I
disaster area for all of us.
THE HEARING OFFICER: ART GOODTIMES: use the chair, Your Honor?
Thank you.

793 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE HEARING OFFICER: ART GOODTIMES: Sure.
I'm Art Goodtimes, I'm the
representing the Colorado Green Party.
state co-chair for the Green Party in Colorado. I'm not speaking as an elected official. My party, the Green Party, is opposed to nuclear power, not just the U.S. Green Party but all 80-plus Green Parties around the world. The
Green Party believes that nuclear power shouldn't be part of our future. And for that reason, the
Green Party would like to go on record as opposed to the licensing of this proposed mill. And let me explain why. First, the mill
licensing poses a bit of a challenge to the Green Party. other: It pits two of our key values against each Grass roots democracy versus future focus. You know, we don't blame the citizens of the West End for supporting this mill. Uranium
mining and milling brought prosperity to this region from the '40s through the '70s. It was a
bit boom and bust, as I think Dr. Powers showed us. But nevertheless, it did bring prosperity. And
quite frankly, having come in 1979, I saw how the West End was devastated by the collapse of the domestic uranium industry after Three Mile Island.

794 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 So we really understand why West End residents are welcoming this Pinon Ridge Mill. It
holds the promise of good jobs, familiar jobs, not without their risks, but with significant economic benefits. Further, both the Democratic Party and
Republican Party support our domestic uranium industry. Part of the major parties' solution to climate change and the issues that are raised there -- the carbon release into the environment -they see nuclear power as a way to solve that. They want to see nuclear power used to wean the nation off of carbon-polluting energy sources. President Obama, his Energy Secretary Chu, Democratic Senators Udall and Bennett, Representative U.S. House Member Scott Tipton, politicians on both sides of the aisle support our domestic uranium industry. Given that state and
national support, it's completely understandable that the West End citizens in Montrose County support the Pinon Ridge Mill. As a Green, grass-roots democracy is our first key value, and the overwhelming grass-roots support for the Pinon Ridge Mill by West End residents plays hugely in our understanding of this

795 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 licensing process. But also, as you've seen from
some of the testimony from citizens in San Miguel County, there is also opposition, grass-roots opposition as well as grass-roots support. And I have to raise the other key issue, one of the other key values that Greens have, and that's future focus. In considering the long-term,
seven-generation span of this application, the Colorado Green Party urges the Colorado Department of Health and Environment to deny this application. Let me share some of my own personal experiences on this issue of the domestic uranium industry. I was conceived in war but born in
peace, shortly after we dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Growing up, I remember my
first television set at about age seven, and I also remember my first image, and it was the atomic bomb blast, the test blast, at Pekini. I realized that uranium was a powerful and potentially very dangerous substance, but also growing up in the '50s, I was a comic book addict, and I remember asking my parents to subscribe to a new superhero comic book series called Atomic Mouse. Atomic Mouse took UT-35 pills and suddenly And so I was thinking
inherited superhuman powers.

796 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that, well, uranium may be dangerous and scary, but it's also powerful and may be a miracle cure. Further, as I grew up and watched television, I watched science programs in which I learned that uranium was going to be the energy fuel of my future, that it was going to be too cheap to meter. And so as a young man, I had some But as I got older
good feelings towards uranium.
and I went to college, I began to learn of some of the problems associated with the uranium industry; particularly the waste problem, a problem that was supposedly going to be solved and still has not been solved. Still we have no repository on the
national level here in this country. I experienced the mothballing of the nuclear reactor at Humboldt, because it was not economical back in the '70s in California. And I
also experienced the black swan events we've seen of Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and most recently, Fukushima. But I have to say what really opened my
eyes to the dangers and the problem with uranium was reading the history of how we came to choose uranium as our source of nuclear fuel. As many of you may know, back in Oak Ridge in the '40s and '50s when they were

797 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 experimenting with nuclear power, they built two test reactors: One was a uranium reactor and the Both reactors worked.
other was a thorium reactor.
But the U.S. Government chose, during the Cold War, to go with uranium. Why? Well, uranium created
plutonium and we needed plutonium to build our bombs to protect ourselves under this mutually assured destruction strategy that we employed during the Cold War. Thorium, as some of you may know, is highly radioactive for about 200 years, after which its radioactivity decreases to almost negligible. That's as opposed to uranium, which has a half life, as we have heard, of hundreds of thousands of years. If we are looking at a future focus, quite
clearly, if we are going to have to use nuclear for our future, why would we use a substance that is dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years as opposed to a substance we could isolate and keep safe for 200 years? Right now, China and India are both moving quickly towards thorium. We made the We
decision to move in the direction of uranium. built an industry.
We are the largest industrial
makers of nuclear reactors in the country.

798 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Companies like General Atomics have put their future, like Energy Fuels has, on uranium. But,
quite frankly, I think this is a huge mistake. I think the world, if we have to move towards nuclear energy -- and, quite frankly, as a Green Party member and as the Green Party, we are not convinced that that's necessary or needed or right, but many scientists are and most of our politicians are. They believe that our nuclear
industry is very important for the future of reducing our carbon footprint. If we have to move
in that direction, I think thorium is our future, not uranium. By licensing the Pinon Ridge Mill, we are locking this region not only into fluctuating minerals markets of boom-bust, but a technology that is neither sustainable nor wise for our future as a region or as a nation. this country. We have thorium in
It's not like we would be without
resources to move into a nuclear cycle of thorium. But by taking this uranium industry, building an infrastructure here, we are really condemning this area to a backwards, bankrupt system. I respect the local West End grass-roots support for the Pinon Ridge Mill, but in

799 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 process. Richard Dana. maintaining a future focus, the Colorado Green Party opposes the permitting of this application. Thank you. THE HEARING OFFICER: CHRIS MYERS: Mr. Myers.
May I also sit? Absolutely.
THE HEARING OFFICER: CHRIS MYERS:
Thank you, Judge I am
My name is Chris Myers.
currently serving on the Telluride Town Council, although I'm here today to speak as a 27-year resident of Western Colorado and a United States citizen. I'm grateful for this reset of the CDPHE Sheep Mountain Alliance, the Town of
Ophir and the Town of Telluride were instrumental in having a reset of that process. There was
something lacking in the approval process that CDPHE employed in the first round of making the approval of the permit. result of that. This being the first uranium mill to be approved in 25 years in the United States, it's not a process that is clearly defined as this is the new appropriate protocol for approving a uranium mill. And I think the fact that we are having this This hearing is a de facto

800 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 new hearing is an example of that shortcoming and not understanding exactly what we need to look at and the information we need to gather. So I think
it's particularly important that we look at this process and scrutinize it heavily. The Department of Energy has a term for some -- for many of the toxic cleanup sites around the United States as legacy sites. Legacy sites And
are supposed to be a gift from an ancestor. these legacy sites are essentially -- while
monuments to historic elements of our culture, many of them are invariably toxic and Montrose County is home to two of them, and I would like to see it not become home to a third. It's been a difficult process, because even by this process, I have seen the people of Paradox Valley pit against the citizens of Nucla. Some of the farmers in Paradox, they don't want this. The citizens of Nucla do. There are even
neighbors and family members within Nucla that have -- some have been silenced because they are not allowed to speak up and share their concerns because of the heavy pressure to accept the jobs in the area. Completely understandable. But it's
been a really difficult process.

801 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 As an elected official in the Town of Telluride, I never realized that those stories I read about in the newspaper where some big event is happening in a part of the country where there's going to be -- where there's a huge public outcry, I never realized that it might be in my own backyard, in my own neighborhood of Southwestern Colorado. And it's been really interesting to
experience that firsthand and just see the challenges of how does one examine this and come to a justifiable decision. As an elected official, I do have a lot of empathy for the citizens of this community. desire to have jobs and a good livelihood is completely understandable. And I hope that in some The
of my comments today, you will be able to help gain some access that will help you with your findings of fact and conclusion of law. Some of the issues I do have -- and my comments are a little bit random. I was hoping to
speak on Monday, but I've been called out of town, so I made a special effort to come up today. One of the shortcomings, it had something to do with a 50-mile radius of influence in terms of having hearings and being able to have -- I

802 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 believe it's a party of status. And I think -- as
a resident of Telluride, we never had a hearing in Telluride. And I'm happy to have come down here,
but because of that limitation -- I think that's a shortcoming that we are limited in a geographical range for people to comment. As a public servant,
I do feel, though, we have an obligation to make the process better, and that's why I'm here today, and hopefully we can see some more improvements to the CDPHE process. I have some photographs here. I'm an
armature photographer, so -- actually, I didn't even take them because I'm the guy in the photo. took one of the photos. In 2009, I just happened to be at one of my client's houses, and that's their glass table that was on their patio. And that was immediately I
after the dust event -- and I'm not sure how familiar you are with the dust events that have been occurring in the last -- becoming more frequent in the last decade, particularly in Colorado. And on a table about this size, I was So
able to collect about two tablespoons of dust. the discussion and phenomena of dust events is a serious issue.

803 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 transport. I studied geology. I understand aeolian
I no longer practice in the field of
geology, but I can understand -- and that table that day was demonstrative of the impact and the ability to have dust that supposedly was coming from the red sandstone areas of Utah all the way over to Telluride, well beyond a 50-mile wind transport range. That's the first photo. The
second photo simply shows a finger stripe to show you the depth of deposition on that table. And I
will e-mail you these photos when I submit my written comments by Monday. I wanted you to be
clear that the dust event phenomena is legitimate. And Telluride, without the help of CDPHE, we have had to undertake, at our own expense, the creation of baseline data to look at our groundwater supplies and also to sample the air to see what sort of current radionuclide presence there might be in particulate transport that is getting to Telluride 56 miles downwind from here. It is our communities -- the Town of Telluride, the Town of Ophir, San Miguel County -- that have had to undertake this expense. In order to protect our
own health and welfare, we have had to undertake that cost.

804 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 We have also had to expend funds to bring suit against CDPHE to have a reset of this hearing, so we have already felt an economic impact in order to protect our own health and environment and have been expending the taxpayer funds to protect their health and welfare. And there's something that
doesn't seem right about that. I feel that -- again, these are my comments as a citizen and as a public servant, but we recently signed a settlement agreement with Energy Fuels. And I think part of our motivation
to do that, or at least my motivation as a citizen to do that settlement, was that we hadn't felt that CDPHE had gone far enough to protect the health and welfare of the region. In that settlement agreement, we were able to get a greater bond from Energy Fuels. In
that settlement agreement, we were able to ensure testing and long-term testing and shared financing of that testing from Energy Fuels. As a public
servant, I felt this was a landmark decision for a municipality to actually step forward, and I thanked Energy Fuels for their willingness to come to the table. We took it a step further, but maybe
there need to be more steps, and that's something

805 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that perhaps you'll decide, given the testimony you have heard here today. It was my understanding that this mill may ultimately use 75 million gallons of water a year. Is uranium the new gold of the West, or is I question whether
water the new gold of the West?
or not this is the best and most appropriate use of 75 million gallons of water a year. In an arid
climate, I think that is a legitimate concern. I'd like to turn a little bit to the economic issues. I completely and wholeheartedly
understand the desire for jobs in this part of the county. What we are already experiencing at this
very moment is what this community will experience if this mill is built. Because of the depressed
price of uranium, the supposed created 83 jobs or 150 jobs or 300 jobs in a five-county region or whatever, those people will likely be laid off in market conditions just as this. This is part of
that cycle of economic vitality and economic distress. So we are currently experiencing what would happen in a downturn in an economic cycle. Those layoffs will lead to foreclosures, will lead to social disruption, cultural issues. To rely

806 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 picture. exclusively on one market sector as a silver bullet for the community is not a sustainable view. I would like to offer a different I came to some of the previous hearings
that were held in Montrose, and I felt that there was some criticism of the idea of farmers as being a valuable contributor to the economy of this region. Well, in fact, the United States feeds a I think it's only in the last
lot of the world.
year that we became a net agricultural importer. But it's not just growing organic vegetables. This is huge, the opportunity. I had
an opportunity to meet with the owner of the Four Seasons Nursery in Cortez. Three years ago, he
became aware of the opportunity of growing organic produce and not just selling trees, shrubs and flowering ornamentals. sunflower seed sprouts. now for Cortez. So he started growing He's an economic engine
He buys the sunflower seeds from
farmers in Dolores and Dove Creek, and he's now growing 30,000 pounds of sunflower sprouts year-round. those sales. At $8 a pound, he's making $240,000 in He's growing 15 tons of sunflower
seeds, and this is in his third year. He's now in his second year of growing

807 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 tomatoes. Again, he gets $8 a pound for those. He
started last year with 400 to 500 pounds of tomatoes. This year, he's going to harvest 6,000 There's no
pounds, and he's going to make $48,000. middleman for his tomatoes.
He's making $48,000.
I'm not saying that this is the silver bullet either, but this is one possibility that I think could be explored in this region. If we took 75 million gallons of water that is the annual use for the proposed mill, if that were to take 20 gallons of water per pound of tomatoes, that would mean that we could grow about $30 million worth of tomatoes a year. Not bad. A
different use, a different way of looking at things. One of the previous speakers mentioned the Newmeyer mine. It took 50 years to clean up That
the vanadium mill site outside of Telluride. third photograph is a photograph of one of the
waste trucks carting off the mill residue as I was trying to get by it at the Blue Mesa Reservoir. You'll note that there are two little circles on there. That was the extent to the marking of It was one
radioactive materials on the truck.
small placard about a foot across on one of the

808 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 mudflaps and one small placard on the side of the truck. Using best management practices, it was covered simply with a tarp on top. I didn't see
plumes of dust cascading off that truck, but I have got to believe there are better management practices and better public awareness for labeling of trucks, which is something else that the Town of Telluride, San Miguel County negotiated in their settlement agreement. In closing, I would like to think that this process needs to have a broader scope. The
biggest issue that I don't feel has been addressed by the CDPHE process -- because I feel they have been limited -- is that if this mine is to be allowed in the West End of Montrose County, what about the additional environmentally impact and socioeconomic impact of having hundreds of current mines that are sitting inactive and idle, having them reopen? Some of these mines are still sitting
around from the 1950s with no cleanup. To me, there is a definite correlation between the opening of a new facility and the existing ore suppliers that may supply this mill, and that perhaps is the greatest shortcoming that I

809 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Saunders. see, is that this review process hasn't look broadly at the implications of what this will mean for the broader region. I hope you will find some basis in my comments today, and I truly appreciate the opportunity to be heard by an impartial hearing officer. Thank you. THE HEARING OFFICER: BOB SAUNDERS: opportunity to sit as well. Thank you, Judge Dana. My name is Bob Mr. Saunders.
I will take the
Also as Chris Myers, I'm a member of the
Telluride Town Council, but I am here speaking as a private citizen and none of my remarks are for the Council but only for myself. I'm a 22-year resident in Telluride. not old enough to remember uranium mouse, I'm afraid. Art has a few years on me. But I did grow I'm
up in Peekskill, New York, which is just a few miles from the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant, which has been there -- I went as a cub scout and toured the plant. I must have been ten years old,
so it has been at least 50 years that this plant has been in operation. I don't know what the life So
expectancy is on these, but it's not 50 years.

810 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a lot of what we have in the uranium industry in this country are power plants that are outdated and possibly getting dangerous. The expert witness that I heard when I came in this afternoon was -- had some terms that I hadn't heard before, like disamenity. And one of
his comments said that almost 50 percent of the regional economy could be at risk from stigmas and disamenities related to the uranium industry. And I had another example of that. I
don't know if you remember -- I can't remember how many years ago it was we had that hantavirus scare in this area. time. And I was living in Telluride at the
I had friends who were living in Durango who
had business in Durango and the impact of that, just the threat of this possible virus, had a great impact on the economy of this region. a virus that came and went in a year. And that was Uranium is So the
going to be here a lot longer than that. impacts of those stigmas, I think, are considerable.
My business in Telluride is -- I have a glider business. I take people for guider rides And I have
around the mountains around Telluride.
an interesting perspective on the dust and how dust

811 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 gets transported. What gliders use, in order to
stay aloft for hours and travel for miles, are thermals, which is a rising column of warm air. It's convection. Flying over the Paradox Valley, which I do from time to time, there are dust devils that come off the ground there. And if you have ever
seen a dust devil, they go around and around and around and they go up and up and up. Those
thermals can go to 18,000 feet or even higher, and they carry dust aloft with them. I have driven through the Paradox Valley in the springtime, and there were times when I couldn't see across the valley because of all the dust that had come from the winds that we get in the spring. When those winds happen, Telluride is
immediately, not immediately, but downwind of that dust. And Chris Myers was talking about these dust
events that we get, and the snow turns brown or red from the dust that comes from this end of the valley. So all that dust, whether it has
radionuclides in it or not, is getting there. There's a great possibility that there will be when the mines open up again and more dust is created and some of that dust gets up into the air.

812 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 region. You are very familiar, I think, with the Cotter Mill and the cleanup there and the problems they've been having. It has been ongoing for
30-plus years, I guess, and they expect another ten years before it's finally done. There are other mines and mills in the One mine that I found out about -- which
is very hard to find information about it anymore; it seems to have vanished from the news -- is the Schwarzwalder Mine which is in Jefferson county. It has been leaking a thousand times the allowable amount of radiation into the groundwater, which feeds Ralston Creek which feeds Ralston Reservoir which is the reservoir for Denver. CDPHE seems to be incapable of stopping this and making the owners of this mine clean it up, the same way they have been with Cotter. not real clear in the title, but I assume the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment is charged with protecting the public health and environment. And I don't see that they Between It's
are really working very hard to do that.
the Cotter Mill, the Schwarzwalder Mine, and other things that the CDPHE is charged with protecting, I don't see that they are doing the best for the

813 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 citizens of Colorado, and I don't think they should be allowed to give this mineral license to Energy Fuels when they are not capable of protecting the public health and environment in the process. The uranium industry has been irresponsible in environmental protection and protection of the public health. and time again. We see this time
Whether it's here, whether it's on
the Indian reservation, whether it's, you know, anyplace, there seems to be mines and mills any time uranium is being processed. The government standard for allowable exposure to radionuclides has been constantly lowered over the years. keep going. I assume it's going to
They keep finding out that less and
less exposure becomes more and more of a problem, so these numbers are probably going to continue to go down. As far as the cleanup costs and the bond that -- the 11-million-dollar bond that CDPHE gave to Energy Fuels, it cost over $100 million to clear up Uravan, as far as I know. And I can't imagine
that a cleanup for this mill is going to be anywhere close to $11 million. This, to me, is an
opportunity for Energy Fuels to say, well, you got

814 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 our $11 million, see ya. And then the taxpayers
are saddled with cleaning up the rest. It seems to me the CDPHE should be an advocate for the public health and environment of our state, not an advocate for the applicant. And
if employment is part of this, I think there's -that should not be CDPHE's consideration. There's
got to be some other bureau or department in the state that worries about people getting jobs, and they should be taking care of that, not the CDPHE. A few short-term jobs shouldn't outweigh the long-term health of the citizens and of the environment. Thank you. THE HEARING OFFICER: cramping hands up here. I've got some We're going
Bear with us.
off the record for a minute. (Proceedings adjourned at 5:05 p.m.)

815 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ________________________ Candice F. Flowers, CSR 216 - 16th Street, Suite 650 Denver, Colorado 80202 COUNTY OF MESA STATE OF COLORADO) )ss. ) REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
I, Candice F. Flowers, do hereby certify that I am a Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within the State of Colorado. I further certify that these proceedings were taken in shorthand by me at the time and place herein set forth, that it was thereafter reduced to typewritten form, and that the foregoing constitutes a true and correct transcript. I further certify that I am not related to, employed by, nor counsel for any of the parties or attorneys herein, nor otherwise interested in the result of the within action. In witness whereof, I have affixed my signature this 30th day of November, 2012. My commission expires February 14, 2016.

A abandoned 569:19 655:5 657:8 ability 601:13 789:20,21 791:1 792:11 803:5 able 594:9 663:7,9 664:20 667:12,19 678:9 702:6 744:21 775:5 781:12 786:19,20,21 801:16,25 802:23 804:17,18 above-entitled 561:17 above-grade 610:24 absence 705:12 706:11 706:14 absent 683:16,17 687:24 absolutely 592:18 704:22 737:3 741:23 747:17 759:25 768:15 781:24 787:20 792:10 799:6 Academy 570:4,9 accept 623:10,11 726:21 800:23 acceptable 746:6 accepted 598:23 717:22 720:9,24 758:8 access 801:17 accident 791:5 792:16 accidents 605:17 788:8 789:20 791:2 792:7 account 603:7,8 619:9 642:11 728:3 746:10 747:11,13 761:12 767:10 accounted 711:2 accumulates 695:9 accurate 590:9 739:20 745:4 accurately 574:23 575:1 660:8,10 737:12 acid 577:11,11 599:3,5 acidic 577:18,24 595:2 596:2,7,11,25 597:12 598:8,11 619:17 621:17 acidity 597:25 acknowledge 640:16 659:20 acknowledged 632:14 639:24 640:1 acknowledgment 602:15 685:23
acquire 676:24 acres 790:3 action 562:5 615:15,16 615:24 616:3 815:15 active 569:18 actively 629:19 activities 729:3,8 741:13 748:19,22,25 749:22 752:22 790:10 activity 587:11 729:19 730:5 748:1 754:18 756:15 actual 728:3 743:6,22 776:21 adapt 642:1 adaptive 573:22 613:9,10 614:1,4,9 616:15 618:25 621:22,24 641:11 642:10,20 643:3,6 add 642:15 708:1 712:25 737:24 743:22 744:15 746:17 added 579:25 594:8 627:24 743:12 749:16 754:4 addict 795:21 adding 577:24 766:20 767:12 addition 588:8 645:5 additional 583:15 587:20 595:19 605:15 661:24 672:7 684:8 685:11,13 698:23,23 701:16 707:11 712:25 765:24 808:17 address 584:23 643:12 687:6,8,11,17 733:5,8 734:7 addressed 611:10 720:8 720:23 721:12 808:13 adds 749:17 adequate 688:10,14 699:23 adequately 612:23 adjacent 736:19 adjourned 814:18 Administration 742:9 administrative 575:7 585:25 712:19 admit 584:11 admits 602:11
admitted 564:19 586:17 649:17 674:22 739:6 admonish 787:25 adopted 598:25 advance 632:16 advantage 595:20 adverse 774:19 adversely 596:6 advisable 684:13 advocate 814:4,5 advocating 632:3,10 aeolian 803:1 Affairs 562:13 affixed 815:16 afford 784:2 afoot 749:4 afraid 774:9 809:18 Africa 569:21 African 717:5 afternoon 708:12 716:14 770:25 771:4 784:25 810:5 age 790:23 795:16 agencies 654:13 656:13 659:11 721:25 783:5 786:2 agency 569:8 583:23 702:5 790:11 agents 751:21 ago 633:23 657:16 662:9 763:5 789:5 806:14 810:12 agree 699:10 724:16 726:19 agreed 683:21 713:18 agreement 790:9 804:10 804:16,18 808:10 agricultural 806:10 agriculture 720:4 745:7 745:15,16 747:15 748:23 769:25 ahead 570:20 622:18 652:4 711:21 726:13 732:15 735:3,4,16 738:5 742:23 747:22 779:16 aid 659:25 aimed 679:18 721:7 air 571:7 625:10,16 643:20 646:9,11,12,18 647:5,7,12,15 719:3 803:17 811:3,25
airborne 645:4 airline 726:2 airplanes 774:14 aisle 794:17 Alliance 562:7 659:25 712:1,17 713:12 780:13 799:14 allow 642:24 678:20 700:10,11,12 allowable 812:11 813:12 allowed 651:5 729:4 800:22 808:16 813:2 allows 631:5 729:1 782:14 alluded 630:5 alluvial 709:14 715:4,11 alluvium 710:2 aloft 811:2,11 alteration 592:1 alternate 775:13 alternative 767:11 788:18 789:2 alternatives 788:17,21 altogether 743:24 780:4 780:5 Amax 790:9 amenities 730:15 America 569:21 655:24 American 657:24 658:1 719:21 730:7 Americans 752:8,9 757:17,18 787:24 amount 568:18 578:16 600:15 661:10 662:15 663:9 664:12 667:12 672:19,23 679:7,15 682:10,22 691:12 783:24 812:12 analyses 758:15 776:21 776:21 778:5 analysis 590:7,18,19 592:16 600:8 614:17 628:10,12,17,19 642:19 669:20 670:6 671:8 674:13 675:14 679:15 679:17,21,25 680:10,15 681:22 682:18 685:2 687:21,22 693:21 697:7 697:15 702:9,19 705:16 711:2 717:22,24 720:20 721:9 722:20 723:15
Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying Denver (303) 296-0017 Boulder (303) 443-0433 Colorado Springs (719) 635-8328 Greeley (970) 356-3306
726:11,19,21 727:1 731:18,24 732:3,4,8 734:4 735:5 736:1,9,17 737:1,13 738:4 739:7 740:12,21 744:10 747:16,20 750:18,24 751:9 752:20 756:17,25 757:2,4 758:8,13 759:21 759:22,23 760:2,7,12 761:11,12 762:11,21,22 762:23 778:18 779:12 780:19 781:21 782:17 783:4 analyst 738:9 analysts 735:22 analyte 587:24 analytes 704:2 705:11 Analytics 768:9 analyze 592:17 602:21 658:13 698:10 706:12 720:16 738:2 739:20 782:2 analyzed 586:24 612:23 629:10 711:5 744:14 analyzing 700:23 720:13 738:20 749:24 780:21 ancestor 800:9 and/or 626:21 714:11 anecdotal 754:15 758:6 Ann 564:4 565:5,9,11 570:21 572:19 574:14 622:19 641:7 annual 622:5 673:12 675:5 807:10 answer 610:7 650:14 717:20 782:22 answering 706:17 answers 727:12 anthropogenic 566:10 566:12 anticipate 684:7,8 708:11 711:19 anticipated 576:15 596:25 664:12 760:5 anti-scientific 757:8 anybody 574:11 586:14 651:8,9 708:17 737:16 737:18 763:10 764:18 783:15 784:1,24 787:18 anymore 602:13 652:3 812:8
anyplace 813:10 anyways 739:16 apart 706:19 737:15,17 752:25 764:4 apologies 585:20 apparently 585:24 586:4 714:17 774:3 appearance 784:8 APPEARANCES 562:1 563:1 Appearing 562:7,15,19 562:23 appears 590:20 appendix 615:23 665:16 applicable 634:11 applicant 814:5 application 561:5 572:8 574:19 576:14 583:7,10 583:19,25 591:21 592:1 601:2 614:18 624:8 661:2,15 663:5 687:10 688:19,21 690:19 691:1 691:2 692:18 697:6 698:8 700:17,20 701:2 702:18 703:17 706:25 714:6 732:12 734:4 788:3 792:5 795:8,10 799:2 applied 653:19 727:15 783:1 applies 608:17 734:5 735:5 740:18 780:16 apply 608:12,14,16 747:19 780:22 781:11 applying 782:19 787:22 appreciate 575:11 586:16 677:12 708:13 716:14 759:18 760:10 784:13 784:16 809:5 approach 594:4 610:17 610:21 613:14 726:11 728:12 appropriate 778:18,21 799:24 805:7 appropriately 639:24 appropriation 714:13 approval 799:17,19 approved 792:6 799:22 approving 799:24 approximately 637:17 773:12 790:3
April 691:20 Aqua 654:3 aquatic 579:18 580:20,22 aqueous 626:17,22 aquifer 662:18 663:8 664:13 667:6,6,20,22,23 667:24 668:2,3,5,6,8,10 668:11,13,14,16,18 669:1,6,8,9,10,11,13,20 670:16,17,18 671:2,3,10 671:20,23 672:1,1 675:20,25 676:13 677:8 677:10,19 678:13,23 679:16 680:24 681:1,4,6 681:9,16,19,21 682:1,2 682:3,6,8,10,16,24 683:1,2,8,15,17,19 684:5 695:23,25 696:6 696:11,13 707:14 710:6 aquifers 662:17 680:21 ARBITER 561:1 archeologically 791:19 area 567:18 569:5 607:14 629:14 642:17 644:2 645:19 670:10 672:6 679:16 690:7,11 697:19 700:10 707:10,19 724:18 727:2,4,8,9 729:4,5 736:7,12,13 737:11 738:14,17 739:23,25 740:4 749:9 750:3 754:4,20,21 756:5 756:5 758:2 762:8,12,14 762:17 763:10 765:14 769:10 776:16,23 779:7 786:9,22,23 788:18,22 790:4,4 791:25 792:22 798:23 800:24 810:13 areas 574:5 591:3 608:22 691:5 696:4 700:22 707:11 727:11 728:20 729:2 730:22,23 740:16 751:23,23,24,25 755:12 756:7,11,12 779:1 780:16 781:10 803:6 argument 650:11 arguments 782:10 arid 805:8 arithmetic 623:15 635:7 armature 802:12 arrived 729:4
arrow 591:7 arrows 590:13,25 arroyo 697:18 arroyos 592:12 613:5 694:12 698:1 709:24 arsenic 567:13 577:19 592:9 art 603:24 612:19,20 784:22 790:21,25 792:24 793:2,2 809:18 articles 719:12,15 720:5 artifacts 756:12 791:21 Asia 569:21 asked 573:25 574:2 640:7 662:8 779:24,24 780:2 780:11,13 asking 571:13 714:7 768:3,19 782:22,23 795:22 asks 750:1 aspect 612:17 615:8,9 697:12 aspects 567:16 606:5 612:2 619:9 660:19 731:17 732:12 740:19 740:20 747:19 783:1 Aspen 756:8,10 asphalt 791:7,16 assess 680:16 704:3 778:8 assessed 683:24 assessing 679:18 assessment 572:13 590:14 661:20 706:8 734:23 790:13 791:20 assets 770:7,8 assistance 749:19 789:6 associated 576:12 595:9 596:15 605:16 616:12 660:2 685:17 719:4 720:6,17 730:24 733:19 736:10 739:11 752:13 757:21 766:7 767:7 768:12 769:10 773:19 774:3 775:8 796:10 Associates 680:25 762:22 association 657:25 658:1 658:2 assume 608:4,7,18 629:25 630:3 634:9
637:20 638:7,25 652:5 672:17 676:17 684:3,4 687:20 703:5 712:14 751:2 782:14 788:5 812:18 813:14 assumed 670:9 672:5,12 672:13 679:12 685:9 assumes 613:15 assuming 680:5 683:18 744:6 assumption 673:18 676:7 682:14 683:12,19 684:4 685:8 715:17,19 738:21,21 744:11,12 assumptions 672:11 673:16 679:12 683:10 685:6 assured 797:8 Atlas 775:9 atmosphere 644:8 647:24,25 atomic 795:14,17,23,24 Atomics 798:1 attached 584:10 774:17 attempt 700:8 attempting 708:5 attention 727:9 791:23 Attorney 562:16 568:8 721:21 771:1 attorneys 724:5 815:14 attract 765:2 attractive 730:22 attractiveness 729:24 AUDIENCE 785:1,5 August 586:21 626:4 735:6 authored 576:22 authorities 791:23 availability 669:17 685:9 available 575:11 662:16 675:16 676:1,15,16 680:21 681:12 682:2,12 735:10,12 764:14 Avenue 562:3 avoid 706:3 752:2 774:14 774:19 aware 623:6 635:11 636:24 643:23 647:18 649:9,13,19 650:2,6 658:22 700:3 706:18 713:12,20 761:15
767:17,25 768:5,8,19,21 773:2,5,11 775:8 791:16 791:17 806:15 awareness 808:7 A-N-N 565:9 A-N-T-H-R-O-P-O-G-... 566:13 a.m 561:19 622:16 B B 633:2 bachelor's 653:17 back 606:25 622:15 628:7 633:12 641:21 646:20 707:6 708:10 730:11 733:2 736:6 738:18 742:1 751:16 755:3 764:17 769:8,8 777:10 784:7 786:12 787:15 796:17,24 background 565:21 655:6 722:13 backwards 757:1 798:23 backyard 801:7 bad 637:11 752:1 776:14 778:9 807:13 badly 765:22 784:21 BAKER 562:8 balance 600:11,13 631:21 632:1,6 682:22 776:11,11,12,13,15,24 balls 598:18,20 639:15 651:1,21 bankrupt 722:8 798:23 barium 594:5,8 barren 577:16 579:7 581:11,14,20 624:21,23 625:3,19 630:1 barrier 738:14 barriers 618:21 620:9 base 608:1 637:6 724:22 724:22 752:19 753:8,16 753:23,24 789:22 based 570:14 576:14 577:3 578:5,19 585:25 619:5 627:11,25 628:1 662:22 665:23 672:4 679:1 681:16 686:8 702:15 711:6 732:7 743:2 759:20 774:11 782:15,18 788:3
baseline 563:2 698:17 700:21,25 701:10,11,21 702:5,12 803:16 basic 577:24 753:17 basically 593:9 601:16 683:16 696:6 700:7 715:11 basing 712:3 basis 622:5 690:13,15 720:15 723:3,9 731:3 732:10 740:3 764:15 809:4 bats 599:19 Bay 656:7 beaches 639:14 Bear 814:16 beautiful 716:22 769:20 becoming 603:11 615:6 802:20 bedrock 659:9 717:9,11 beer 728:24 began 755:23 796:9 beginning 703:14,17 755:8 beginnings 749:12 behalf 562:7,15,19,23 663:3 784:9 behave 774:10,11,18 behaved 728:10 behavior 684:18 757:18 774:22 belabor 570:13 belief 774:7 believe 575:3,12 579:5 585:16 586:7 594:16 597:8,18 605:8,22 611:18 612:11 614:22 618:8 623:2,6,21 624:3 624:24 628:16,24 630:5 631:7 650:20 651:19 665:15 675:6 688:6,13 690:19 691:4 698:13 699:17 701:13 712:6 713:10 721:3 723:20 731:12 732:14 734:22 750:12 760:22 763:20 771:8 780:11 781:17 787:13,21 798:9 802:1 808:6 believes 593:8 793:9 below-grade 621:13
beneath 629:7 698:14 beneficially 714:13 benefit 595:8 605:1 759:1,9,10,21 766:19 benefits 595:11 720:25 735:25 758:13,16,20,22 759:1,4,7 794:5 benefit-cost 758:14 778:18 779:12 benign 588:3 Bennett 794:15 Berger 762:22 berm 614:15 638:8,18 639:18,19 650:11 berms 606:15 610:11 611:6,16,19,21,23 636:23,24 637:6 638:13 best 573:9 606:3,12,23 608:1 610:17,21 613:22 615:7 619:14 622:7 641:14 700:4 790:22 805:7 808:3 812:25 bet 711:14 Beta 658:2 better 566:11 588:6 610:16 613:17 620:10 635:21 678:12,21 698:9 699:8 707:5 766:25 802:8 808:6,7 beyond 628:6 683:17 685:3 803:7 BHP 656:7 big 636:24 753:7 759:11 801:3 bigger 762:13 776:15,16 biggest 752:7 808:13 bike 775:13 bill 623:15 759:9 Biological 562:24 biologist 570:25 630:15 biota 580:20 589:21 bird 598:18,20 599:12,19 639:15 650:25 651:20 birds 591:12 595:14 598:15,21 599:17 600:2 619:24 792:1 bit 565:20 567:25 568:2 573:19 579:11,11 580:11 582:15 589:4 593:11 597:9 598:9 606:21,25 610:9 615:21
618:7 620:14 628:4 641:11 670:7 687:7 707:16 725:4 763:22 793:14,21 801:20 805:10 black 642:11,13,19,23 727:21 778:6,12 796:18 blame 793:17 Blanding 742:13 765:7 blast 795:18,18 blew 790:24 blocks 792:9 bloomed 774:1 blow 788:13 blowing 644:13 blown 645:18 646:2 blue 696:3,10 742:15 749:14 755:14 807:21 board 571:11 Bob 776:6 784:23 809:9 809:11 bomb 795:17 bombs 795:14 797:7 bond 618:5,8 804:17 813:19,20 book 575:15 719:12,14 719:20,25 795:21,23 books 719:10,11 720:10 721:2 boom 741:17 742:2,6 747:6 755:24 756:2 793:21 booms 741:7 boom-and-bust 746:24 boom-bust 798:16 boost 786:22 border 739:18 borehole 666:23 boreholes 664:15,17 707:8,17 709:15 born 785:19 795:13 borrow 665:5 Boston 565:23 bottom 604:7 608:21 625:24 633:16 682:10 691:11 bottoms 592:10 Boulder 563:3 565:19 Boulevard 562:14 bound 724:21 756:9 770:7
boundaries 678:3,8,10 678:22 679:8,8,10,14 680:24 684:13 788:10 boundary 670:20,23 678:4,5,5,6 681:2 683:20,20,22,23,24 684:1 777:6,9 bounded 671:9 681:1 bounds 671:10 box 562:6 626:21 758:24 boxes 590:12 727:21 BP 790:24 bracketed 685:20 breach 591:10 606:2,15 638:17 639:3,4 breached 611:6 614:15 638:13 breaches 611:15 breaching 611:23 bread 728:22 break 648:12 686:15 711:17 715:25 724:6 brief 708:14 715:25 briefly 601:5 623:18 629:13 630:13 653:16 755:8 763:17 764:24 bring 591:19 647:23 668:15 674:16 770:15 786:12 787:15 793:22 804:1 bringing 605:25 748:2 752:22 brings 715:21 brittle 598:6 broad 704:5 719:1 748:15 broader 808:12 809:3 broadly 809:2 broken 752:25 brought 574:4 639:6 729:13 793:19 brown 811:19 bugs 580:23 build 657:4 741:15,15 797:6 building 754:4 798:21 built 573:5 618:14 633:23 695:5 702:13 746:16 787:12,14 790:16 797:1 797:24 805:15 bulldozers 791:22 bullet 806:1 807:6
bunch 590:12 bureau 763:13 791:20 814:8 bureaucratic 792:9 business 766:8,12 789:7 789:8 810:15,22,23 businesses 729:21 730:21 741:15 bust 741:18 742:2 747:6 756:2 793:21 busts 741:7 Butte 657:9 buttered 728:23 button 781:24 buying 778:25 buys 806:19 B1 615:23 C C 562:5 565:1 cadmium 577:20 592:9 calculate 777:15 778:7 calculated 691:14 calculation 681:14,18 calculations 779:2 California 609:15 636:10 730:9 796:17 call 565:4 581:17 636:17 652:7 694:18 730:16 called 570:9 581:19,20 598:19 607:9 614:21 615:15 648:25 654:2,8 655:18,19 667:23 791:8 795:23 801:21 Candice 561:21 815:4,21 Canon 726:23 capable 813:3 capacities 573:8 718:17 capacity 573:7 742:17,18 742:25 743:3 captured 683:4 714:12 car 716:24 carbon 794:10 798:11 carbon-polluting 794:13 care 646:11,12 727:9 748:11 814:10 careful 727:23 760:25 783:1 carefully 727:21 732:14 782:2 783:7,10 Carnes 767:22
Carolina 768:11 carry 734:1 811:11 carrying 767:23 791:7 carting 807:20 cascading 808:5 case 585:25 589:14 610:14 616:7 656:11 660:12 669:9 673:11 686:5 696:21 705:12,25 713:25 726:1 728:6 739:2 744:17 746:23 765:19,20 777:18 cased 666:21 casual 758:9 casualties 792:1 catastrophic 778:13,16 779:7,8 catch 706:4 catchall 705:7 caught 599:18 792:1 cause 565:12 639:8 652:15 716:10 Cavira 568:21 609:3 CDOT 791:15 CDPHE 586:7 590:14 712:11,12,18,24 722:20 734:24 780:20 781:9 799:13,18 802:10 803:14 804:2,14 808:14 812:15,24 813:20 814:3 814:10 CDPHE's 814:7 ceased 755:21 756:13 cell 601:8 615:18 627:6 641:3 cells 598:20 599:4 601:7 601:9 606:9 637:16 638:12 698:15,19 707:20 census 748:6 763:13,15 center 562:10,24 637:7 739:13 754:18 centers 753:11 century 730:4 744:7 certain 615:14 690:16,17 691:25 certainly 570:16 606:20 609:2 614:12 616:9 629:20 632:15 636:2,8 640:1 644:10 647:20 677:17 737:22,24
745:10 762:9 764:3 787:22 CERTIFICATE 815:2 Certified 561:21 815:5 certify 815:4,7,12 cesium 568:7 cetera 589:21 592:10 619:25 747:1 749:20 750:8 757:12,22 764:9 766:23 767:5 770:9 chair 571:11 792:25 chairman 718:18 challenge 793:14 challenges 801:10 chance 608:9 611:8 change 600:19 613:18 614:3 631:21,23 643:6 648:19 719:9 777:5 783:11 794:9 changed 578:3 599:14 718:5 746:19 changes 620:16 701:23 758:20 776:24 changing 611:2 channels 698:1 709:24 chapters 719:12,14 720:3 720:3,4 character 745:9 characteristic 600:19 767:6 characteristics 576:12,16 576:24 584:3 588:6,7 599:21 614:24 695:22 730:14 769:20 characterization 568:9 568:11 569:9 583:23 587:17,20 588:17,18,20 627:22 682:14 688:4 707:9 characterize 577:4 643:10 664:2 680:1 682:13,20 characterizing 593:2 charged 780:20 812:20 812:24 charging 717:3 chart 627:11 744:15 750:11 771:20 772:2,5 charts 773:18 cheap 796:7 cheaper 740:10
cheapest 593:21 checks 753:5,5 chelates 644:22 chemical 572:8 576:11 576:16,24 578:7 588:7 593:12 599:21 645:14 645:22 647:13,17 648:1 chemicals 645:23 chemistry 646:10 Chernobyl 796:19 chief 567:11 children 778:24 789:12 children's 787:16 China 797:21 Chinle-Moenkopi 666:8 683:16 695:25 chloride 594:5,8 Chmura 768:9 choices 729:20 chomped 786:10 choose 753:4 796:22 chose 797:4 Chris 784:23 799:5,7,8 809:12 811:18 chronology 656:21 Chu 794:14 chunk 753:7,9 759:11 circles 776:18 807:22 cite 576:5 cited 633:13 cities 721:23 citing 714:9 768:18 citizen 643:15 787:9 799:12 804:9,12 809:14 citizens 749:3 757:16 792:13 793:17 794:20 795:2 800:17,19 801:13 813:1 814:12 city 726:23 738:13,16 739:1,4 740:4 756:10 773:13,19 777:23 claimed 691:6 735:25 clarification 622:24 clarify 570:24 582:2 617:25 677:5 clarity 685:13 Clark 657:9 class 657:16 clay 601:16 603:3,5 604:15 695:19 709:15 710:10 715:3
clays 689:24 clean 596:11 719:3,3 807:17 812:16 cleaned 640:6 cleaning 596:12,16 765:14 814:2 cleanup 656:18 702:6 790:18 791:9,13,14,22 792:17 800:7 808:21 812:2 813:19,23 clear 602:2 626:9 657:10 692:1 701:3 757:17,18 774:5 775:10 803:13 812:18 813:21 clearly 743:1 797:16 799:23 clears 625:21 client 659:10 clients 659:4,6 721:18 724:8 client's 802:16 climate 611:3,4 794:9 805:9 climbing 788:19 Clinton 623:16 635:6 close 579:3 612:16 632:23 670:12 700:8,10 724:23 742:20 756:3 788:13 813:24 closed 663:23 666:20,21 790:19 closer 785:10 close-by 604:8 closing 789:9 808:11 closure 656:17 663:21 cluster 675:17 coal 719:2 748:13 Coalition 562:25 Coals 768:13 coarser 650:17 Coast 777:23 cobalt 568:7 Code 740:3 codes 740:3 coefficient 669:11 coexisted 756:14 Cold 797:4,9 collapse 755:5,11 793:24 collapsing 755:7 colleagues 646:11 collect 702:11 802:23
collected 583:16 585:3 674:5,24 700:21 collecting 700:25 701:12 701:17 collection 601:18 603:1 603:16 604:3,22 605:12 605:20,21 607:8 608:19 609:14 615:13,20 621:10 626:21 college 796:9 Coloradans 752:10 Colorado 561:20,25 562:4,6,11,14,18,19,23 562:24 563:3 565:19 571:10 574:18 657:10 658:19 662:9 716:21 721:15 724:14,20,21 725:4 736:19 744:7 746:13 752:14 756:9 757:16 763:5,7 764:23 767:21 771:1,2 772:25 782:14 790:11 791:10 791:12 793:3,4 795:9,9 799:1,11 801:8 802:22 812:19 813:1 815:1,6,22 Colorado-connected 726:16 colors 696:9,14 column 580:3,14,20 627:24 691:7,15,16 811:3 columns 617:13 combine 766:22 combined 752:23 come 571:15 573:10 611:1 613:23 622:15 628:7 630:16 644:20 671:22,25 717:20 730:15 738:18 749:22 749:23,24 751:6 753:12 754:1 762:11 771:16 772:5,10,17 777:10 779:11 781:5 782:24 790:23 793:23 801:10 801:22 802:3 804:23 811:7,15 comes 625:3 645:19 677:21 691:1 707:2 730:17 756:18 769:23 811:20 comfortably 756:14
comic 795:21,23 coming 586:10 612:16 622:11 644:16 645:7 647:14 652:2 677:6 684:25 703:13 715:10 716:15 734:6 736:2 737:4 742:5 755:3 760:5 803:5 commencing 561:19 comment 708:11 735:22 784:2 785:5 802:6 commentators 785:10 commented 745:2 comments 564:16 566:24 708:17 712:11,15 735:7 741:2 783:20,22 784:25 785:2,7 801:16,20 803:12 804:9 809:5 810:7 commercial 588:12 722:5 779:2 commission 815:18 commissions 721:22 commit 770:16 committee 570:9 722:7 committees 570:1,5,8 commodities 719:2 common 603:11 615:6 Communications 562:13 communities 720:7 729:7 737:21 747:10 754:23 803:21 community 727:2,3,8 737:5 742:6 744:2,25 782:4 789:4 801:13 805:14 806:2 commute 739:4 commuting 763:11,12 companies 569:22 722:5 798:1 company 654:2,8 656:6 722:8 769:21 791:7,8 compare 579:14 738:7 755:1 compared 755:11 788:2 compares 579:21 597:6 comparing 569:12,14 742:24 compatibility 596:24 compensation 749:20
competent 619:2 732:8 756:17 780:19 781:22 competing 738:2 competitions 725:3 competitive 725:1 complaints 627:20 complete 621:12 639:4 661:13 792:10 completed 714:14 790:18 completely 745:3 755:3 757:1 794:19 800:24 801:15 805:11 complex 727:19 complicate 791:18 complications 682:4 component 600:21 616:16 619:2 621:23 components 654:15 705:7 750:22 751:9 compounds 568:5 644:22 comprehensive 606:7 704:13 comprehensively 706:12 computational-type 778:15 computer 636:20 computers 727:17 conceded 636:8 concedes 602:17 conceived 795:13 concentrated 648:15,23 concentration 580:5,24 619:18 concentrations 577:18 577:21 578:2,12,15 579:14 580:4 582:17,17 582:22 587:8,14 588:16 593:17 594:3,18 595:2 595:17 604:11 621:20 623:19 648:24 650:22 concept 589:5 693:6 709:6 conceptual 589:12 concern 578:18 610:25 612:13 639:22 645:10 765:22 789:18,22 805:9 concerned 592:6 concerning 641:16 731:4
concerns 800:22 conclude 781:3 conclusion 580:16 609:19 610:2 664:6 714:8,16 754:1 781:6 782:24 801:18 conclusions 660:11 736:3 763:18 782:19 concur 688:4 condemning 798:22 condensation 733:16 condition 695:5 701:22 701:22 777:6 conditional 714:1 conditions 598:2 639:7 671:9 678:2 694:1 698:17 701:11 702:13 702:15 777:9 805:19 conduct 677:17 679:6 684:8 conducted 568:4 569:11 664:16 668:17 677:3 678:7 679:2,22 680:11 759:23 790:13 conducting 679:6 conductive 668:8 conductivity 668:7 cone 677:20,20,24 678:14 686:1,1 conference 785:8 confidence 770:5 confident 638:9 786:2 confidential 661:6 confirmed 762:21 confronted 697:11 698:21 confuse 737:20 confused 628:8 confusing 643:15 confusion 625:22 737:25 connections 739:24 740:15 Connie 591:17 607:17 629:4,14,16 consequence 610:23 consequences 605:3 642:3 766:21 CONSERVATION 562:2 conservative 683:12 684:3
consider 589:9 612:18 615:7,9 619:2,6 631:10 664:1 685:7 697:14 711:7,9 758:23 786:16 786:19 considerable 737:25 810:21 consideration 814:7 considerations 740:23 782:16 considered 586:5 592:13 594:13,16 598:25 603:24 687:16 711:4,10 752:12 753:20,22 778:21 considering 591:6 676:19 795:7 consistent 700:14 consisting 790:3 Constance 564:8 652:7 652:11,14 658:8 659:22 687:2 711:22 constant 672:8,12,14,17 673:13 constantly 813:13 constituents 576:16 578:3,9,13 580:18,24 581:1,7 582:24 587:6,13 592:7 593:13 594:2 645:9 650:23 702:4 constitutes 815:11 constraints 662:18 constructed 701:23 construction 745:6 748:15 consult 713:22 consultant 567:17 569:7 652:21 consultants 577:4 654:3 762:7 768:22 780:20 consultation 659:24 consulted 724:10 consulting 565:19 652:24 653:1 654:1,25 658:19 718:13,20 721:17 723:19 779:24 789:8 contact 596:4 630:16 645:19 666:9 contacted 791:8 contain 731:14,16 732:7
751:8 contained 635:20 731:8 735:8 750:18 containment 600:25 601:3,10 606:6 628:5 632:13 647:20 687:9 contains 692:21 contaminant 589:5,22,24 592:3 605:24 606:6 612:24 613:22 654:5 contaminants 566:10,14 567:8 578:18 588:24 589:13,25 591:11 595:19 611:24 612:10 613:3 628:19 646:2 648:23 653:7 654:21 657:19 684:23 contaminated 568:18 569:2 765:14 773:12 contamination 567:13 568:25 596:13 602:23 608:10 655:21 659:7,9 contemporary 756:18 context 631:9 636:12 655:10 746:6 contingency 611:10 614:8 710:25 continue 655:2 657:2 678:14 685:24,25 747:23 751:15 813:17 continued 563:1 574:14 659:22 687:2 726:6 continuity 784:12 contracted 656:2 contractors 762:7 779:22 contradict 660:21 contribute 684:16 782:5 contribution 750:7 contributor 806:7 control 572:14 584:9 controlled 616:16 714:12 controls 630:20 631:9 controversy 602:12 Cont'd 564:6,9,10,13 convection 811:4 convenience 740:9 conversation 629:16 778:11 convince 757:11 convinced 798:7 copied 591:25
copies 575:8,25 586:7 637:23 copper 657:1 copy 584:8,19 586:16 711:13 725:20,23,23 726:3,4 core 588:11 corn 728:21 Corporation 562:15 735:14 corporations 721:19 correct 571:8 574:20 592:2 625:10,12 627:13 627:14 628:2 631:2 633:3,9 644:8,9 645:8 659:2 679:21 711:3 721:7 746:7 750:19 755:4 756:19 761:24 763:22 772:16 780:16 780:22 815:11 correctly 724:12 correlate 676:6,7 696:16 696:16 correlation 808:22 Cortez 776:16 806:14,19 cost 596:15 617:18,21 639:25 656:11 758:13 759:1,21 777:20 792:15 803:25 813:21 costly 617:24 costs 596:22 616:10,12,16 616:21,24 617:4 618:1,4 636:9 656:12 720:17 758:17,20,22 759:2,3,6 759:6,7,7 778:13 813:19 cost-benefit 759:22 776:9 777:2 778:5 cost-benefits 781:19 Cotter 726:22 757:14,15 760:18 764:23 792:17 812:2,17,23 Council 566:6 772:8 799:9 809:13,15 counsel 584:8 724:4 761:6 782:11 815:13 count 737:12 counterpart 781:11 counter-factual 744:11 counties 736:19,21 738:18 752:24 753:11 763:3,4 767:20
counting 727:24 733:5 736:24 759:14,14 countries 786:14 country 609:22 617:12 632:22 653:25 721:24 786:9 796:14 797:25 798:19 801:4 810:2 county 736:9,15,18 737:10 738:10,11,15,18 738:20 739:8,12,18,19 741:10,11,18,25 743:7 743:10 748:5,17,20 749:11 750:2,8 752:20 755:6,13,19 756:1 762:1 762:23 763:2 764:10,12 767:20,21,21,22 769:7 789:23,24 794:20 795:3 800:12 803:22 805:13 808:9,16 812:10 815:3 couple 588:19 604:14 622:23,24 635:9 648:12 658:11 691:22 707:17 710:4 724:4 731:13 732:20 759:19 761:7 course 618:12 657:21 695:4 767:13 courses 657:14 718:5 court 659:20 713:19 coverage 704:25 covered 639:9,14,15,18 644:19 650:21,24,25 680:9 685:12 775:22 808:4 covering 704:23 covers 719:6 co-chair 793:4 crack 598:7 Craig 784:22 785:17,18 785:19 cramping 814:16 create 762:20 created 577:15 584:1 593:25 599:3 620:17 761:23 765:13 772:3,17 797:5 805:16 811:24 creating 765:23,24 766:24 creation 803:16 Creek 657:10 806:20 812:13 crime 774:12
criteria 702:15 723:5 critical 705:8 750:22 criticism 735:11 806:6 critics 741:4 cross 651:9 778:16 779:16 cross-examination 564:6,7,10,13,14,14 622:19 641:7 711:18,22 760:16 761:3 770:23 776:4 cross-examine 784:15 cross-section 637:1 693:10 crucial 728:1,11 735:24 751:7 crumbling 751:25 CSR 815:21 cub 809:21 cubic 617:18 cue 566:23 cultural 805:25 culture 800:11 cup 704:16 cure 796:2 current 718:8 751:4 803:18 808:18 currently 718:10 799:9 805:22 Curtis 562:12 724:3 761:6 cut 598:21 691:7 785:8 cutoff 707:13 cyanide 609:11,11 636:16,17 cycle 798:20 805:20,23 Cyprus 790:9 D D 562:9 565:1 daily 635:12,18 Dakota 656:10 damaging 767:12 dammed 640:13,13 damned 632:8,8 640:20 640:21 Dana 561:18 799:8 809:11 dangerous 795:20 796:1 797:18 810:3 dangers 796:21
DANIELS 562:8 dashed 696:1 data 597:2 672:22 674:5 674:10,23 675:1 676:1,6 685:11,13 688:12 690:18 693:11,11 694:16,24,25 697:11 698:5,22 699:24 700:21 700:25 701:4,5,17,18,19 701:19 702:12,17 705:21 706:11,14 711:6 740:13 742:8,10,12 746:20 748:6 758:7 763:12,16 764:14 767:5 774:21 803:16 date 586:5,18,20 761:14 771:8,11,15,16 dated 623:1 dates 690:16,23 712:2 Davis 670:25 681:5 Dawn 655:19 day 667:15,16 785:6,8 791:24 803:4 815:17 daylight 697:18 698:3 days 597:11 677:4,19 732:20 787:8 de 687:16 711:4,7 799:19 deadly 789:11 deal 614:4 635:19 719:22 dealing 643:17,24 653:11 720:16 728:2 757:20 deals 590:16 719:8 dealt 616:5 720:5 792:7 decade 752:11 802:21 decades 750:3 769:9 December 575:20,21,23 623:1 712:7 761:14 771:9,10 deceptive 747:16 decide 805:1 decided 594:17 606:21 653:25 758:23 decision 623:7 712:13 737:16,19 764:23 766:2 782:10,13 788:12 797:23 801:11 804:21 decisions 723:4 783:11 786:4 788:1 decision-maker 782:12 782:13,24 decision-makers 723:10
723:24 736:1 740:22 747:21 783:5 decline 745:20 775:25 decrease 594:3 600:7 601:20 631:20 649:18 676:14 decreases 578:17 616:21 630:24 631:4 682:11 797:12 decreasing 649:18 decree 713:14,18,23 714:8,9 deep 629:9 666:3 693:15 693:18 713:2 730:11 deeper 686:1 691:20 Deepwater 790:24 deer 716:24 defense 567:14 732:23 defensible 680:14 define 739:23 758:5 defined 799:23 definite 808:22 definitely 571:1 578:24 595:7 600:7 603:23 606:13,23 610:21 612:20 616:21 620:8 622:6 632:9,18 640:19 642:22 definition 607:18 777:5 degradation 597:17 degree 565:22,25 573:17 573:17 653:22 718:3 774:7 degrees 718:1 delay 693:7 deliver 668:20 demand 752:3 democracy 793:16 794:22 Democratic 794:5,15 demographic 752:16 demography 753:14 demonstrate 620:21 792:11 demonstrated 723:17 730:20 demonstrates 674:23 701:5 demonstrative 580:1 603:18 674:16 693:4 708:6 709:5 725:19
803:4 denial 602:10 782:15,18 Denver 562:11,18,23 812:14 815:22 deny 795:10 department 562:19 566:1 656:9 661:23 718:12,19 742:8 771:3 772:11,14,17 790:12 791:10 795:9 800:6 812:19 814:8 depending 594:22 683:6 depiction 590:9 deplete 682:24 depleted 626:17 681:19 683:2 790:7 depletes 682:2 deposited 715:6,8,10 deposition 803:10 deposits 754:17 773:24 depressed 805:15 depression 677:21,24 742:5 depth 666:2,25 690:22 691:10,11,13 692:5,7 694:18 697:1 701:5 705:1 803:10 depths 695:14 describe 566:3 567:3 572:6 589:8 590:24 601:5 613:13 617:9 621:5 653:16 660:8,10 716:25 718:1,8,22 733:12 792:3 described 635:3 732:13 751:10 760:17 782:18 describing 639:25 description 570:14 desert 730:9 design 600:21 601:22 606:6 607:20,21 609:7 609:23 615:4,9 619:3,12 619:13 620:21 624:6,7 635:16 637:15,17 638:8 641:3 706:2 designed 572:23,25 582:21 599:16 603:13 619:8 634:2,3 666:8 705:25 727:21 designs 573:2 603:6 620:10,24
desire 801:14 805:12 desktop 727:17 desperate 788:16 despite 748:24 757:10 destination 769:14,17 destroyed 791:21 destruction 595:22 596:3 797:8 detail 567:22 628:6 731:20 780:9 details 622:24 703:23,24 705:19 768:6 detect 608:8,8 699:8,11 699:15 700:8 detecting 699:16 detection 602:1 605:1,11 607:2 609:8 621:11 633:6,13,14,15 636:11 700:10 determinants 720:14 determine 664:11,11 702:6 705:20 723:8 determined 681:19 729:20 790:13 determining 627:1 devastated 793:24 develop 703:4 706:3 719:9 developed 700:16 702:25 703:6,20 730:3 755:23 769:12 790:2 developer 728:5 developing 700:5 769:11 development 656:16 704:8 705:8,19 723:16 726:12 728:2 735:14 744:9 747:9 765:1 770:18 772:8 789:5 devil 811:8 devils 811:6 dewatering 654:19 655:15 658:17 diagrams 590:11 dialogue 779:9 differed 735:23 difference 590:24 596:8 596:14 597:24 620:5 680:2 738:7 different 574:1 577:6 578:4 587:1 590:20 600:15 604:6 617:12
625:9 639:7 655:16,22 690:8 694:14 709:7 721:22,23,24 727:4,5,10 727:11,13 736:3 737:6 738:19 740:5,6,16 743:24 752:24 770:6 771:21 774:16 775:20 776:14 777:10 780:4,5 806:3 807:14,14 difficult 594:13 673:3 706:15 707:16 769:22 792:17 800:15,25 digesting 781:2 digging 775:3 diligence 714:14 dilute 762:17 diluted 582:10 dimensions 716:16 dinosaurs 787:15 dips 749:13 dire 564:5,5,9,12 570:17 570:21 572:17,19 658:6 658:8 723:24 724:1 direct 564:4,6,8,9,10,12 564:13 565:14 574:14 626:5 652:17 659:22 687:2 716:12 726:6 direction 695:17,23 696:5,15 697:2,8 752:4 797:23 798:12 directions 591:1 696:11 696:25 704:24 710:18 directly 585:6 590:15 591:23,25 593:15 662:11 672:4 673:4 698:12 Director 562:13 disamenities 730:16 751:14 752:6 754:3 757:19 766:6 810:9 disamenity 752:12 753:21,22 766:21,24 774:17 810:6 disaster 741:21 792:22 disasters 788:8 discharge 578:21 694:12 disclosed 575:18 734:6 760:23 disclosure 726:1 760:16 779:21 discombobulation
708:22 discovery 586:1 discuss 732:11 751:12 761:20 discussed 619:1 629:11 645:13 687:7 707:13 713:16 733:9 735:11 740:18 750:22 754:10 782:8 discussing 711:25 discussion 629:22,23 685:16 708:8,20 711:15 735:5 757:24 780:25 785:12 802:24 dismiss 754:15 780:2 dispersion 643:20 644:6 777:19 disposal 568:14 603:19 627:6 699:5 757:15 790:4 disrupted 744:2 disruption 805:25 disruptive 747:9,10 dissertation 568:3 dissolved 577:21 623:19 distance 775:25 distorted 729:10 distress 805:21 distribution 642:14 777:12,18 district 656:24 districts 656:24 disturbing 732:16 735:20 ditch 605:21 ditches 605:20 diversification 770:18 diversified 748:16 Diversity 562:24 diverted 714:11 divided 601:8 dividing 580:4 division 580:12,15 671:1 681:3 752:15 Doctor 570:23 622:21 doctoral 723:17 document 584:15 626:6 626:13 714:4 735:18 781:22 documented 751:20 documenting 752:5
documents 584:10 625:6 634:24 660:23 662:23 667:8 731:9 DOE 634:11,14 doing 588:1 594:20 610:19 647:1,3 667:23 668:2 693:18 701:14 702:14 726:25 727:1 751:21 754:22 758:8,14 783:12 786:4 812:25 dollar 779:2 dollars 618:2,3 Dolores 806:20 domestic 741:8 793:25 794:6,18 795:12 door 708:13 783:23 double 601:10,25 603:15 604:2 608:18 609:13 632:14 636:5 640:3 727:24 733:5 736:24 759:14 double-lined 607:7 608:15 double-liner 593:6 double-walled 605:19 635:9,15,21 636:3 doubts 770:14 787:18 Dove 806:20 downturn 805:23 downward 745:23 downwind 803:20 811:17 dozen 719:14,14 775:1 dozens 719:15 Dr 564:4,7,11,14 565:5,9 565:11,16 566:13,16 570:21 571:23 572:1,3,6 572:13,19,21 574:14 582:3,5,8,11 586:22 622:9,19 640:25 641:1,7 641:8 646:13,14,22 647:6,8 648:7,17,20 649:6,13 650:5,12,15 651:6,19 657:15 659:15 659:18 660:15 687:7 699:9 714:22 716:5,8,9 716:14 723:14 724:1 725:11,25 726:6 761:3,5 770:23 776:4,5,6 778:1 778:3,4 779:14,17 793:21
drain 615:17 dramatic 578:13,14 741:7 742:14 dramatically 737:6 740:5 749:4 draw 589:11 669:8 671:19 682:6 709:17 drawback 769:10 drawdown 677:20 678:14 686:1,1,6 drawing 637:17 641:5 669:10 671:24 678:22 drawn 678:3 682:3 709:9 draw-dawn 669:13 drew 763:18 drift 745:24 drill 666:14 693:19 drilled 664:15 674:1,2,3 693:19 706:19 drilling 693:16,18 drinking 579:17 580:21 581:12 drive 716:18 740:9,11 driven 741:16 811:12 drivers 762:10 driving 721:2 724:13 730:12 732:22 752:21 762:25 766:2 drop 654:19 710:17 dropped 578:10 675:20 675:25 795:14 dropping 675:14 676:21 drunken 728:23 dry 694:25 695:12 due 771:14 duly 565:12 652:15 716:10 dumb 566:18 580:11 Durango 562:4 768:22 810:14,15 duration 757:25 dust 645:11,14,17,18,25 647:12,21 648:2 802:18 802:19,23,24 803:5,13 808:5 810:25,25 811:6,8 811:11,15,18,18,20,21 811:24,25 Dwyer 576:23 583:11 584:17 623:22 Dwyer/Energy 586:24 dynamic 693:3
D.C 567:15 E E 565:1,1 earlier 660:15 707:13 735:8 early 589:10 755:19,22 771:22 790:6 earned 718:2 earnings 749:10,14 earth 570:10 572:7,8 693:10 easiest 593:22 easily 668:6 east 776:17 777:23 eastern 770:10 easy 604:14 738:12 Echo 656:7 ecological 591:13 592:13 594:18,21 598:13 602:22 619:24 economic 716:16 719:18 720:6,12,12,14,17,20,25 723:4,11,14 727:18,19 729:19 730:5,24,25 731:18 732:8 735:9,13 736:8 738:21 739:5,20 739:22,24 740:15,21 744:5,10 747:9,20 748:1 750:23 751:5,9 752:12 752:19,22 753:8,16,17 753:17,18,23,24 755:20 756:18 757:20 763:24 764:14,25 766:21 767:6 767:19 768:12 769:13 769:16 770:17 772:8 781:19,25 782:16 783:7 786:22 794:4 804:3 805:11,20,20,23 806:18 economical 796:17 economically 581:16 739:2 economics 718:7,12,18 718:24,25,25 719:6,8,21 721:4,4,10 728:15 737:1 738:19 768:9 778:14,20 779:4,5 economies 719:9 720:1 economist 717:18 766:10 economists 721:6 730:3 730:12,19 747:5,7
751:19,21 752:4 758:14 774:6,6,13,21 778:19 economy 719:23,24 721:6 728:13,18 729:11 729:13,16 730:7 740:1,6 740:7 743:25 745:8,9,11 746:1,2 747:4,25 748:2 748:16 749:1,2,5,25 752:21,23 753:8 754:7 755:23 762:23 764:4,8 766:13 773:25 806:7 810:8,17 edges 650:24 edification 571:2 educate 757:11 education 653:14,15,16 educational 565:21 effect 568:4,25 569:2 573:16 594:24 599:21 646:25 741:22 788:4 effective 621:3 effects 567:19 568:16,22 569:5,9,14 570:6 577:1 589:11 600:8 649:12 650:3 758:24 effort 596:15 801:22 efforts 698:24 765:1 EIA 591:24 613:2 732:6,7 732:17,24 733:5,8,14,25 734:5,12 735:6 737:2 738:4 745:2 751:8 754:11 756:25 758:3 771:21 EIA's 733:16 EIS 657:7 either 580:6 596:17 627:7 630:6 639:19 642:3 644:23 696:19 702:18 735:15 737:1 785:9 807:7 ejected 645:21 elder 787:8 elected 793:5 801:1,12 electronically 576:3 elements 726:10 800:11 elevated 702:3,4 718:17 elevation 651:4 666:25 elevations 675:2 eliminate 630:8 Elizabeth 784:22 787:1,3 787:5
elk 716:23,25 717:2,7 724:14,16 Ely 656:25 embodiment 759:12 emerge 710:8 emergency 614:20,21 791:17 792:4 emeritus 718:11 emission 650:22 emissions 625:11,11,16 emotional 732:21 empathy 801:13 emphasized 730:13 empirical 620:20 640:8 640:10,17 730:3 757:20 757:24 775:11,12 776:20 empirically 730:20 774:11 781:13 empiricism 758:10 employed 573:9 656:2 657:13 704:7 797:8 799:18 815:13 employer 652:23 employment 566:4 728:7 742:11,12,15,16 742:24 743:3,5,6,9,13 743:14,18,23 744:6 745:16 746:3,4 747:8,14 748:4,10 764:5 814:6 encompassing 713:15 790:3 encounter 595:15 621:18 693:17 694:8 ends 783:8 energy 561:5 562:2,12,15 577:3 583:21 584:1,7,8 584:23 585:1 589:24 591:25 593:3,8 594:17 602:16 604:4 605:10,21 612:22 618:8 626:3 661:4,23 663:3 675:1 687:16,19 688:2,19 689:19 690:5,17 693:13 701:12 713:14 714:9 722:6,11,17 723:11 724:4 731:5,16 736:8,17 738:8 739:6 740:2 743:13 757:12 761:6 762:6 769:23 780:19 786:13 789:2,19 792:10
794:13,14 796:5 798:2,5 800:6 804:11,17,20,23 813:2,21,25 engine 752:21 753:17,18 806:18 engineer 572:21,22 engineered 573:2,11,13 593:4 618:21 620:8,24 641:20 engineering 566:1 573:18 592:23 598:4 609:1 718:4 enjoy 716:18 ensure 804:18 ensuring 616:16 enter 784:8 792:11 entering 683:3 enthusiastic 741:3 enthusiastically 739:10 entire 585:12 606:13 610:21 699:19 762:20 entirely 606:22 entitled 719:20 720:11 entrained 627:7 entrepreneurial 770:4 entry 713:13,22 714:15 environment 562:20 566:10 567:9 568:6 573:12,17 589:18 592:4 595:16,19 596:18 597:21 606:17 608:11 611:3,25 619:15,19 620:12 640:6 654:5,22 693:23 704:4,13 706:1 706:10 717:23 719:5 766:5 767:12 771:3 785:25 786:17,18 790:12 794:10 795:10 804:4 812:20,21 813:4 814:4,13 environmental 562:25 565:18 566:1 567:14,19 568:16 569:8,12,14 572:9 573:18,21 583:22 589:11 590:4,7,13,15,18 590:19 591:23 613:2 618:20 619:22 621:2 628:11 640:16 652:21 654:1,9 655:12 661:19 661:20 665:11 687:21 697:6 700:12 702:19
711:2 717:23 719:3 720:11 722:3,16,19 723:5 731:15 732:2,4 734:23 736:22 758:12 758:19 759:17,23 760:1 760:6,11,12 764:17,19 765:6,24 766:15,20 767:3 781:20 783:7 790:11 813:6 environmentalist 787:8 environmentally 588:2 808:17 environments 567:10 EPA 569:10,25 584:1,7 584:15,15 585:1,2,24 626:4 632:21 657:16 720:16 775:2 equal 580:9 equally 643:19 equations 727:22 ER 737:1 era 754:24 755:2 erosion 639:5 errors 792:3 escapes 640:5 especially 567:20 644:18 700:1 728:2 729:15 737:16 748:1 Esq 562:2,5,9,9,12,17,21 essentially 580:13 591:25 596:24 623:25 628:9,10 632:20 637:5 638:8 671:23 676:25 679:9 710:25 800:10 established 630:14 estate 745:17 748:12 751:21 752:5 estimate 668:1,3,17 671:5 682:25 772:2 estimated 568:17 669:22 670:1 671:11 672:4 680:23 estimates 662:14,14 672:2 771:21 estimating 667:9 estimation 642:10,20 et 589:21 592:9 619:24 747:1 749:20 750:8 757:12,22 764:9 766:23 767:5 770:9 ethical 778:17,22 779:8
781:25 ethically 779:3 European-Americans 729:3 evaluate 573:4 589:24 591:8 678:9 679:3 680:19 evaluated 568:11 569:17 573:1,7 576:25 593:22 612:1 613:1,6 616:9 655:11 680:3 evaluates 591:14 evaluating 568:9,16 573:21 589:10 747:11 768:11 evaluation 592:3 606:18 665:15 evaporate 582:21 evaporated 600:5 evaporates 645:4 648:16 evaporating 648:21 695:13,15 evaporation 579:1 581:23 582:19,21,25 590:1 591:4 595:4,13 598:17 600:3,7,9,19 606:2 608:6 615:18 621:15,18 624:21 626:21 627:18 630:21 630:23,25 631:5,5,8,9 631:12,20 632:4,5,11 648:19 649:5,19 650:4 651:20 690:11 692:12 692:23 698:14 699:4,20 704:10 707:20 709:12 event 638:14,17 643:4 801:3 802:18 803:13 events 639:21 695:7 778:16 796:18 802:19 802:24 811:19 eventual 792:16 eventually 710:20 everybody 760:25 778:24 evidence 585:17 620:21 640:8,10,10,17 693:25 731:24 exact 792:15 exactly 614:16 634:6 673:6 740:14 754:25 772:19 800:2
examination 564:4,5,5,6 564:8,9,9,10,12,12,13 564:15 565:14 570:21 572:19 574:14 652:17 658:8 659:22 687:2 716:12 724:1 726:6 764:2 779:17 examine 764:10 765:5 801:10 examined 565:13 576:25 652:16 716:11 762:2 764:12 examining 767:18 example 591:4 614:15 615:10 618:21 630:8 633:14 640:20 675:22 709:10 726:15,17 789:25 800:1 810:10 examples 593:20 617:4 655:8 780:2 exceed 581:7 exceedance 580:7 627:25 exceeds 580:8 630:9 685:24 excellent 571:15 excerpt 584:6 exchange 779:2 excludes 592:19 excluding 600:2 exclusively 806:1 excuse 566:15 613:19 633:15 693:6 exercise 580:12,14 exhaustive 609:10 exhibit 564:20 575:13,17 575:19 584:12 586:17 674:17,22 693:4 708:6 708:24 709:3,4,5 742:22 exhibits 564:19 725:18 731:12 771:6 exist 612:4,6 650:6 existed 629:1 715:8 790:14 existence 662:16 701:6 existing 630:7 689:6 763:24 808:24 expand 685:25 expanded 749:1,3 expanding 776:18 expect 582:16 600:20 607:4 677:16 679:1
685:14,14,16,18,19,23 698:22 699:1,2 700:18 703:13 705:22 812:4 expectancy 809:25 expected 713:6 728:3 expecting 684:6 expediently 792:8 expend 804:1 expending 804:5 expense 778:5 803:15,23 expensive 593:24 594:14 618:24 653:24 experience 567:22 568:2 573:20 592:15 596:15 598:24 602:4 603:12 607:19 610:5 612:19 613:25 615:4 616:11 645:12 646:6 653:11 660:8 662:9,13 673:17 676:6 677:15 679:1 680:12 684:7 697:10 698:20 717:19 722:23 723:2,8,18 736:4 744:25 801:9 805:14 experienced 745:2 796:15,18 experiences 788:7 795:12 experiencing 805:13,22 experiment 587:2,25 588:1 experimental 568:4 experimenting 797:1 expert 570:16 571:23 572:1,13 598:4 600:18 612:21 616:9 656:10 658:4 673:17 704:7 706:13 711:8 723:14 725:9 726:1 735:1 767:4 771:13,14 781:17 810:4 expertise 567:18 570:24 574:5,12 622:10 646:18 647:10 659:20 687:8 697:11 723:16 725:14 759:20 experts 634:14 expires 815:18 explain 572:3 666:15 668:4 670:6 693:8 716:15 726:14 730:20 731:15 737:17 793:13
explained 731:20 explanation 726:10 736:5 explanations 735:18 explicitly 720:2 exploration 664:15 707:8 explored 807:8 export-oriented 729:2,8 748:19,22,25 749:6,22 expose 589:20 exposed 597:10,11 598:3 598:5,8 619:25 621:16 621:19 exposure 589:5 597:18 597:19 598:21 599:1 628:11,17 640:17 697:15 705:24 706:8,10 813:13,16 express 789:17 expressed 675:9 extend 677:22 678:7,8 684:19 extending 677:20,24 extensive 703:4,7 763:14 extent 590:3 610:1,3 616:8 625:14 627:11 642:22 643:8 662:15 670:15,17 683:4 698:24 700:16 733:9 736:7 764:13 766:18 807:23 extract 596:20 668:10 673:15 679:16 682:9 704:16 extracted 577:14 624:22 671:13 685:21 extracting 666:6 extraction 577:12 626:24 750:6 extreme 678:18 743:16 extremely 577:18 620:15 eyes 796:21 e-mail 803:11 F F 561:21 815:4,21 fabric 599:25 faced 755:20 facilities 610:24 613:15 632:22 647:20 654:19 687:14 693:24 696:13 699:5,15 710:3 790:5
facility 604:23 606:24 610:14 612:18 613:17 613:24 614:3 618:6 624:9,12 633:14,15,23 637:4 655:22 667:9 689:10,13 691:21 692:11 693:15 694:5 695:5 696:2,21 697:18 699:20,23 700:2,11 702:21 704:11,20 705:22 706:7,13,16 757:4 759:4,5 768:14 808:23 fact 594:6 608:2,3 609:2 625:2 630:15 632:19 641:14 644:1 673:23 729:18 739:5 747:7 751:20 753:9 760:21 799:25 801:18 806:8 facto 799:19 factor 733:21 737:15 factors 683:7 faculty 718:14 fades 775:7,21 FAEGRE 562:8 fail 699:9 Failed 720:1 failsafe 602:8 failure 607:22,24,25 610:11,16 fair 618:19 661:10 fairly 741:6 748:15 fall 649:4 falling 646:1 falls 695:7 familiar 576:15 579:13 589:4 601:1 603:6 608:22 613:10 662:23 758:16 794:3 802:19 812:1 families 729:20 749:21 family 724:23 729:25 784:7 785:20,22 800:20 famous 788:22 fan 715:11 fantastic 788:18 far 567:22 700:12 735:17 737:17 741:2 747:19 759:16 760:9 763:13 779:11 781:16 791:6 804:14 813:19,22
Fargo 562:10 farm 746:1,1 farmers 800:18 806:6,20 farming 788:21,24 farther 604:1 fashion 567:8 fast 668:19 father 774:8 fault 612:12,14,15 670:19 670:23 678:4,6 681:5 683:14 693:17 696:8 707:12,15,18 722:9 faulting 612:5 faults 612:4,8,8,11 678:25 683:11 684:17 684:18,20,20,22,25 685:1 favors 779:1 fear 757:7 feature 683:15 features 694:13 February 815:18 federal 569:25 654:13 656:13 721:24,25 746:18 feed 594:10 702:8 705:16 705:20 feedlots 767:8 feeds 658:22 679:14 806:8 812:13,13 feel 786:8,23 788:11 802:7 804:8 808:13,14 feeling 749:8 751:5 776:23 feelings 796:8 feet 629:2,9 634:7 637:6 638:19,23,24 639:1,2,2 666:7 667:1 675:25 689:21 691:18,22,22 692:5,7 693:20 694:20 695:14 696:8 697:23 811:10 fellowship 566:6 felt 804:3,13,21 806:5 Fernald 603:18 633:17 633:19,21 fewer 649:22 field 658:5 679:8 686:5 713:15 714:3 746:7 803:2 fields 718:22 720:9
figure 590:5,7,18 626:22 641:18 670:10 688:18 688:20,21,22,23,25 689:5,8 706:23,25 707:1 708:3 730:4 744:18 771:17 Filas 606:21 637:16 651:1 665:4,25 687:23 702:2 files 584:16 filled 761:25 filters 627:5 final 616:24 618:1 626:23 627:1 759:19 761:16 finally 658:24 753:13 768:25 812:5 finance 745:7 748:12 financial 616:6,8 792:12 financing 804:19 find 578:6 582:18 583:18 602:14 756:24,25 759:22 760:1 773:18 809:4 812:8 finding 636:25 813:15 findings 761:21 767:17 767:25 768:8 801:17 finds 695:8 745:14 750:3 761:22 fine 576:6 659:19 725:21 fineness 631:16 finer 630:24 650:19 finger 803:9 fingers 622:14 finish 606:25 finished 789:21 finishing 570:7 firm 779:24 first 565:12 584:21 601:8 601:19 608:12,13 609:4 617:14 620:19 626:12 649:15 652:15 672:13 689:8 712:20 716:10 717:20 724:17,19 725:5 729:4 732:11 748:8 787:11 793:13 794:23 795:16,17 799:18,21 803:8 firsthand 801:9 fish 580:22 fishing 788:20 fit 578:17 782:4 five 577:5 585:3 587:4,12
588:5 671:7,14 679:20 679:22,24 681:20,24,24 682:1,25 686:7,13 761:1 763:4 783:18 five-county 762:12,14,20 805:17 five-year 671:8,16 679:24 680:14 685:3 686:9 fix 615:18 616:20 691:9 fixing 608:9 flat 738:11 745:17 748:24 748:25 flesh 567:24 flicker 747:7,13 floodplain 790:18 Floor 562:18 Florida 730:10 flow 623:24 654:4 679:13 683:11,24 684:21 696:5 696:10,15,25 709:21 710:7,17 flowering 806:17 Flowers 561:21 815:4,21 flowing 697:3,8 749:3 flows 626:18 695:16,17 695:23 753:2 fluctuate 745:11 fluctuated 741:11 743:10 743:20,22 fluctuates 745:8 fluctuating 798:15 fluctuation 694:23 745:5 745:6 fluctuations 743:6,15 744:1 745:13,17,24 746:8,11 747:2,4 fluid 694:11 696:22 701:24 705:12,13 710:11,14 fluids 693:24 697:16 699:15 flux 568:19 flying 645:1 811:5 focus 569:5 572:10 591:1 621:21 708:19 728:17 736:14,16,18,20 749:6 793:16 795:7 797:15 799:1 focused 644:15 719:18 720:2 727:10 729:8
736:9 737:12 739:7,11 739:13,15 focuses 728:13 focusing 619:16 750:16 folk 721:4 folks 665:5 732:21 737:20 748:16 770:9 783:19 follow 591:6 followed 717:15 742:2 following 672:11 follows 565:13 652:16 716:11 follow-up 575:4 food 749:20 foot 668:15 669:12 691:19 807:25 footloose 753:2,3 764:7 footprint 798:11 force 721:2 729:23 forced 642:17 forces 570:1 719:8 730:24 732:23 749:4 foreclosures 805:24 foregoing 815:10 forest 656:8 720:3 forests 728:19 forever 789:10,11 forget 646:8 661:7 Fork 657:9 form 649:2 738:14 739:14 815:10 formal 758:22 formation 666:9 former 790:4 forming 715:11 forth 815:9 Fortunately 717:3 forward 700:18 734:6 740:19 741:4 744:19 781:22 782:25 804:22 found 578:9 583:21 589:2 606:6 671:15 707:1 708:21 774:13 812:7 Foundation 789:4 founding 722:6 four 690:1 707:21 745:11 767:20 779:20 806:13 four-day 657:21 fractured 659:9 684:15
fractures 684:17 frame 674:2 framework 665:2 frankly 793:23 798:3,5 Frank's 628:24 637:3 fraught 767:15 frequency 611:5 705:3 frequent 802:21 Friday 561:19 662:5 703:2 friends 724:23 810:14 front 613:16 614:11 636:21 664:19,23 700:7 757:6 fuel 796:6,23 Fuels 561:5 562:12,15 577:4 583:22 584:1,7,8 584:23 585:1 586:25 589:24 591:25 593:3,8 594:17 602:17 604:4 605:10,21 612:22 618:8 626:3 661:4,23 663:3 675:1 687:17,20 688:2 688:19 689:19 690:5,17 693:13 701:12 713:14 714:9 722:17 723:11 724:4 731:5,16 736:8,17 738:8 739:6 740:2 743:13 761:6 762:7 780:19 789:19 792:10 798:2 804:11,17,20,23 813:3,21,25 Fukushima 787:19 796:20 fulfill 722:9 full 565:8 587:24 627:21 652:10 657:3 680:11 716:4 728:7 742:17,18 742:25 743:3 744:6 759:10 Fund 567:14 fundamentally 625:15 funds 804:1,5 further 574:10 697:13 707:23 760:13 770:20 776:3 777:1 783:14 791:18 794:5 796:3 804:24 815:7,12 future 601:9 611:3 751:6 793:10,16 795:7 796:6 797:15,17 798:2,10,12
798:17 799:1 G G 565:1 gain 801:16 gallons 600:4 663:7 667:10,11,13 669:22,25 670:1 671:12,12,17 672:7,8 673:14 676:18 680:6 681:23,25 685:18 714:1 805:4,8 807:9,11 games 571:6 gas 570:6 746:17 750:7 gasoline 740:10 Gateway 754:21 gather 740:12 763:16 800:3 gathers 763:13 GCL 632:15 633:6,16,17 640:3 general 562:16 603:25 604:25 631:2 649:9,11 650:3 655:6 674:1 684:20 687:15 696:5 747:6 798:1 generally 581:2 648:20 648:23 653:9 664:1 668:21 707:19 Generals 721:21 General's 568:9 771:2 generate 570:10 generation 787:12 788:1 generations 788:2 generator 748:13 generic 651:8 782:11 geochemical 573:15 574:3 geochemist 565:18 566:8 572:10 geochemistry 565:24 571:11 572:1 geographic 727:2,4,7,11 736:7 739:23 777:4 geographical 733:8 736:24 802:5 geography 730:25 geologic 663:4 678:1 Geological 566:7 567:7 geology 565:23,25 647:14 653:18 684:15 803:1,3
geomembrane 597:8 geometry 678:13 696:22 Geophysical 657:24 George 767:18 geo-synthetic 601:15 German 728:23 getting 591:10 611:24 612:14 633:22 653:22 729:10 758:11 760:9 764:17,24 783:9 803:20 810:3 811:22 814:9 ghost 747:1 Gick 784:22 787:2,3,5 gift 800:9 gigantic 774:4 give 567:24 586:15 593:20 651:9,10 655:7 656:20 664:7 665:1,2,18 700:4 707:5 708:4 722:15 724:5 749:8 784:14 813:2 given 635:15 678:24 683:25 685:6 699:24 700:1 712:14,18 745:10 756:22 782:16 794:18 805:1 gives 580:6 751:5 giving 760:11 glass 802:16 glider 810:23 gliders 811:1 go 567:21 570:20 579:11 581:21,23 592:11 603:4 614:12 616:7,19 618:23 622:18 627:18 641:18 641:20,21,22 643:11 651:20,21 652:4 683:7 686:12 708:14 710:18 711:21 720:13 726:8,13 732:13,15 734:20 735:3 735:4,16 738:4,24,25 741:4 742:23 747:22 762:13 768:6 771:25 774:16 775:4 777:1 779:16 780:9 781:12 784:7 793:11 797:5 811:8,9,10 813:18 Goad 562:17 564:5,14 571:22 572:16,20 574:10 584:19 586:13 586:18 640:23,24
659:14 714:20,21 725:10 760:18 770:21 770:24 771:1 776:2 780:11 goes 591:7,11 604:7 612:12 614:5 616:12 624:20 632:11 642:24 675:11 694:25 736:6 753:4 776:17 777:21,22 782:7 788:14 going 566:16 582:23 583:3 587:18 588:23 590:25 591:17 592:23 600:6 603:4 607:17 614:16 615:2 616:2,20 622:1,1 624:18 627:13 628:6 629:4 632:2 637:2 639:14,15 642:5 643:13 646:19 647:6 648:11 655:4 656:25 657:3 664:25 669:5 673:22,24 674:16 675:13,16 676:2 676:10 677:19,22 686:6 686:16 694:7 705:11 706:22 707:21 711:19 715:14 717:19 722:15 724:5 725:15 727:11 735:8 736:14,16,16,18 736:20 737:9,20,23 739:3,8,16,23 740:8 742:1 744:4,12,22 745:17,18 747:8,22 751:16 756:10 762:17 766:3 768:6 770:9 773:16 777:10 784:20 786:13 796:5,6,12 797:16 801:5 807:3,4 810:19 813:14,15,17,23 814:16 gold 607:5,6 656:6 805:5 805:6 Golder 663:2,5 664:10 665:15 669:20 675:15 679:12 680:24 681:22 683:22 good 571:17 587:17 588:16,18 593:4 600:1,2 610:5,6 622:21 629:16 643:3 652:19 658:10 715:18 716:14 744:9 770:10,25 771:4 776:14
778:9 787:13 794:3 796:8 801:14 Goodtimes 784:23 792:23,24 793:2,2 gotten 588:4 government 570:1 656:3 659:11 721:21,24,25 746:19 750:6 752:15 797:4 813:12 governments 721:19 graciously 632:14 grade 606:10,10,12,14,14 606:22 610:10,15,18,22 611:7,13 644:3 gradient 696:12 grain 650:19 Grand 617:21 724:23 737:7 739:14,19,19 753:10 754:20 755:15 755:16 756:1 762:14 763:7 772:25 773:1,3,6 773:13,17,20 781:10 grandmother 787:7 grandpa 751:3 grandparents 728:15 785:21 grant 653:23 Granted 792:1 grants 714:1 graph 674:17,25 675:8 695:21 706:22 749:10 750:14 graphical 675:8 Grass 793:16 grass-roots 794:22,23 795:3,4 798:24 grateful 799:13 gravel 746:21 great 592:22,25 609:1 627:10 628:3 629:15 648:8 742:5 749:13 787:17 810:16 811:23 greater 628:5 676:12 697:1 747:3 804:17 greatest 808:25 greatly 620:9 green 670:20 671:11 675:3 678:4 683:17 689:5 793:3,4,6,7,8,9,11 793:14 794:22 795:9 798:6,6 799:1
Greens 795:6 grew 796:3 Grossman 563:2 564:7 564:14 640:25 641:1,8 646:13,14,22 647:6,8 648:7 659:15,18 714:22 725:11 776:5,6 778:1,3 778:4 779:14 ground 577:10 607:16 638:24 639:2 667:2 692:6,7 694:21 695:15 695:20 696:9 715:7 811:7 groundwater 567:10 568:18,19,24 589:19,20 591:15 592:12 593:9 596:21 619:23 625:11 628:12,18,20 629:1,7,8 633:9 634:4 644:7 653:6 653:8,21 654:4,10,16,17 655:13,14,21 657:25 659:7,8 661:5 662:13,15 662:20,23 663:14,25 664:3,12,21 667:13 675:24 680:7 687:12,16 687:17,24 688:1,5,9,14 689:3 690:6,10 691:5 693:14,16,18 694:15,19 696:17,18 697:1,3,12,20 698:5,11,14,18,25 701:13 702:16 707:8 709:7,21 710:20 713:1 803:17 812:12 groundwaters 567:13 697:8 groundwater-related 655:3 group 561:1 780:14 groups 656:4 784:9 grow 807:12 809:18 growing 749:12 785:20 788:25 795:15,21 806:11,15,17,21,23,25 growth 750:1,4,10 751:1 755:11,20 769:14 growth/job 751:1 guess 569:7 570:3 592:5 607:1 614:21 619:5,15 621:20 638:9 642:9 645:16 656:4 661:24 678:25 698:10 705:6
713:21 726:8 732:11 760:8 764:24 765:10 785:9 812:4 guidance 700:3,6,14 guider 810:23 guy 802:13 H H 562:12 habits 763:11,13 half 730:4 745:19 754:2,7 787:23 797:13 handed 584:8 626:6 handle 642:2 handled 732:17 778:14 handlers 766:23 hands 785:15 814:16 hantavirus 810:12 happen 605:9 614:13 615:17 627:13 642:14 744:4,22 767:23 770:7 770:10,13 788:9,9 805:23 811:16 happened 569:15 643:2 643:4 644:10 710:1 712:16 769:4,5 773:9 802:15 happening 684:12 695:3 737:2 755:1 801:4 happens 588:21 615:1 619:16 621:25 642:2 647:11,11 648:21 656:18 703:11 706:4 777:20 happy 575:8,24 596:18 623:16 635:6 802:3 hard 567:16,19,23 569:6 569:9,15,18 586:16 617:7 636:25 637:23 657:17 812:8,22 hard-scrabble 770:8 harmed 753:23 harvest 807:3 hazard 765:25 766:1 hazardous 632:21 633:6 636:13 hazards 787:16 HDPE 601:11,14,17 632:15,15 640:3 head 629:23 headed 745:23
heading 691:10 headings 691:7 headwaters 792:20 health 562:19 704:4 742:9 748:11 749:19 750:5 771:3 772:11,15 772:18 787:16,16 790:12 795:10 803:24 804:4,6,14 812:19,21 813:4,7 814:4,12 Health's 661:24 heap 607:6 hear 702:2 734:14 762:19 784:3 785:7,11 heard 596:23 599:8,12 600:12 602:16 606:20 609:5 611:18 628:9 649:15 679:19 684:14 687:23 699:8 724:12 732:20 787:5 797:14 805:2 809:6 810:4,6 hearing 561:3,18 565:3,7 566:11,22 570:20 571:20,24 572:18 574:11 575:10,14 582:1 582:4,7,9,13 584:13 585:11,14,21 586:9,14 610:1 622:13,17 625:25 637:20,25 640:23,25 641:6 648:9,11,18 649:3 649:8 650:1,7,13 651:3 651:7,15,22 652:1,9,12 658:6 659:15,19 686:14 686:19,22,24 690:5 692:2 708:7,9,23 711:16 711:21 714:20,22,25 715:2,6,16,20,24 716:3 716:7 725:13,17,21 734:14,19 735:2 741:2 760:15,18,19,24 778:1 779:15 783:15,18 784:10,13,19 785:3,13 785:17 787:1 789:14 792:23 793:1 799:4,6,19 800:1 802:2 804:2 809:6 809:8 814:15 hearings 735:14 801:25 806:4 hears 760:25 heart 788:14 heavily 776:25 800:5
heavy 644:22 751:23 800:23 height 691:15 held 806:5 help 598:14 599:16 642:5 659:25 665:1 693:3 699:3 700:4 705:20 709:5 723:20 725:16 736:1 737:15,18 750:17 801:16,17 803:14 helpful 567:2 575:25 723:23 helps 693:5 782:2 herd 716:25 herds 716:23 hey 640:4 hi 641:9 high 577:18,20 593:12 597:25 621:20 778:13 higher 578:15,22 580:9,9 581:11,24 582:23 595:25 596:9,11,13 601:12,13 618:4,7,11 639:12 650:21,22 670:2 671:3 681:4 743:15 811:10 highest 581:9 617:21 highly 580:19 598:11 739:3 797:11 highway 717:3 790:1,15 790:16 791:6 high-crime 751:24 high-level 568:14 571:4 high-metal 619:17 hiking 788:19 Hill 768:13 hired 780:15 Hiroshima 795:15 historic 640:1 656:24 672:21 756:12 800:11 Historical 790:15 historically 632:17 history 566:4 573:24 744:7 789:22 796:22 hit 648:25 679:8 hits 647:12 hitting 678:22 hold 598:2 736:23 742:21 holds 794:3 hole 693:20 holes 598:7 649:22,22
706:18 home 665:5 773:25 784:7 800:13,14 homes 775:6 hometown 775:1 honest 782:5 honor 571:22 572:17 574:13 575:5 586:6 609:17 637:24 641:2 659:21 686:11 687:1 708:5 711:12 715:1 770:22 783:17 784:5 787:4 792:25 HONORABLE 561:18 hope 608:1,2 706:23 801:15 809:4 hopefully 783:11 787:7 802:9 hoping 801:20 horizon 663:17 680:13 790:24 horizontal 604:5 638:20 horseback 788:19 hot 781:24 hot-button 779:7 hour 686:22 hours 597:11 811:2 House 794:16 household 753:3 housekeeping 784:6 houses 802:16 huge 735:21 755:2 798:3 801:5 806:12 hugely 794:25 human 590:16 628:17 704:4 humans 577:2 580:20,21 792:2 Humboldt 796:16 hundreds 727:22 773:5 797:14,18 808:18 hundred-year 639:12 hunting 788:20 hydraulic 668:7 hydrogeologic 678:24 hydrogeological 629:11 655:9 hydrogeologist 652:22 653:3,5 655:1 hydrogeology 653:19 654:10 657:14,18 658:5
660:18 hydrologic 643:4 678:2 hydrology 657:18 hydro-geochemical 574:3 hydro-geochemistry 572:2,4 hypothetical 638:4,6,10 782:21 hypotheticals 646:25 647:3 I idea 611:5 613:17,21 614:9 642:3 649:20 650:14 747:24 764:18 771:12 789:12 806:6 ideally 679:4 ideas 614:10 789:8 identical 742:4 identified 586:3 598:12 612:3 666:10 667:19 670:24 685:7 identify 590:24 612:5 698:24 identifying 616:6 idle 808:19 if/then 615:1 ignores 729:6 ignoring 744:7 illustrate 725:16 792:4 illustrated 791:4 image 795:17 imagine 770:2 813:22 imagined 643:2 immediately 802:17 811:17,17 impact 569:13 573:21 590:7,14,18,19 630:12 661:20 687:22 697:7 702:19 711:2 717:23 719:18 722:19 723:11 726:11,19,25 727:1,7,9 727:15,15,19 732:3,4 733:1,18,19 734:23 735:23 736:7,8 737:8 738:9 739:5 741:17,25 743:13 749:12 752:6 755:3 760:2,7,11 762:4 762:5,11,18 767:9,10 774:19 775:25 783:4
803:4 804:3 808:17,18 810:15,17 impacted 751:13 impacts 599:17 612:23 654:16 655:12 657:17 657:20 658:16 662:20 705:16,17,21 706:13,16 720:17 727:25 732:8,18 732:19 736:14 739:21 747:11 754:9 767:19 768:12 780:21,25 810:20 impartial 809:6 impermeable 679:14 implement 640:15 implementation 656:17 implications 809:2 implicitly 738:22 importance 749:8 important 571:9 595:21 600:14 612:25 613:3 615:8,9 619:11,21 620:16 621:9 626:25 643:19 668:9,12 670:16 701:20,21 703:24 706:6 716:16 726:24 727:14 729:15 745:12 751:17 753:16 775:18,23 786:24 790:17 798:10 800:4 importer 806:10 imports 786:14 impoundment 569:1 579:9 594:1 606:1,9,11 606:13 608:5 610:10,20 611:24 639:9 649:24 650:9 657:4 687:14 694:6 709:9,11 impoundments 581:22 587:19 590:1 591:5 592:10 595:16 611:1 612:12 613:4 620:14 621:13,19 631:21 637:1 647:19 654:19 655:13 697:17 impressive 570:23 improve 622:5 improved 620:9,24 790:21 improvements 802:9 improving 766:5
inactive 569:19 808:19 incapable 812:15 inch 599:14,25 631:19 incised 698:1 709:23 include 607:15 617:3,10 642:19 662:13 778:4 included 570:11 583:7 584:17 591:20 594:15 598:14 621:6,8 628:18 705:10 720:19 721:18 776:16 includes 584:16 634:17 719:3 including 584:11 619:23 648:3 716:23 income 729:7,13,14 740:25 748:2,21 749:2,9 749:16,17,17,18,21 750:5,9 751:1,4 753:1,2 753:5 764:6,7 incorporate 600:21 614:2 incorporated 619:12,13 620:25 713:7 increase 611:21 626:25 627:3 648:24 increased 577:23 581:5 588:2 611:4 640:15 increases 626:23 630:25 631:8 increasing 578:17 615:21 increasingly 729:14,18 730:13 incredibly 621:17 independence 770:5 independent 729:23 786:13 index 564:1 745:18 746:13 India 797:21 Indian 809:20 813:9 indicate 697:7 775:14 indicated 583:14 633:19 669:2 736:11 762:11 indicates 689:22 719:24 743:1 758:23 774:22 indicating 728:12 indication 702:22 703:20 728:25 indications 728:18 indirectly 599:23 individual 729:20
Indonesia 655:25 industrial 613:14 797:24 industrialization 753:21 industries 745:13 748:10 752:22 765:2 industry 607:4 609:25 615:5 620:4 654:12 656:3,6,14 659:4,6,10 724:9 728:9 741:6 744:4 744:18 745:1,5,6,15 746:21,24 747:3,8 752:8 757:11 763:21,23 767:7 773:22 781:1 785:21 786:10,11,15,25 790:23 793:25 794:7,18 795:13 796:10 797:24 798:10 798:21 810:1,9 813:5 inefficient 682:8 infiltrating 689:22 694:1 696:19 infiltration 695:6 inflation 748:21 influence 678:7 801:24 inform 740:22 747:21 761:18 information 576:23 583:6,15 584:2,16 586:4 588:4 616:23 626:12 627:20 641:15 661:10 661:22,25 664:9 676:25 677:5,6,7 683:25 685:11 685:14 688:12,13 697:5 708:14 710:25 711:6 714:5 722:13 733:24 734:17 783:24 800:3 812:8 informed 757:23 786:4 infrastructure 751:25 798:22 inhabit 729:1 inherited 795:25 initial 712:13 initially 579:2 582:24 739:15 Initiative 789:5 Inn 716:22 inputs 759:5 inspect 635:14 inspected 635:12 inspection 635:17,24 636:1
install 670:11 installed 603:13 664:22 665:22 670:13 698:14 699:2,13 701:17 instance 579:18 598:15 730:9 746:12 754:16 755:13 774:25 778:23 instruction 657:13 instrumental 799:15 integrity 597:13,24 607:22 intend 704:1,1 intended 748:3 intends 712:25 intensity 727:6 interact 579:10 interaction 572:7 645:14 645:22 647:17,21 648:1 653:8 intercept 673:15 interest 561:17 563:3 656:4 722:4 765:19 interested 579:13 646:12 647:9,13 776:8 777:11 815:14 interesting 720:6 742:3 742:14 776:10 792:18 801:8 810:25 interests 766:17 interior 635:13 intermittently 689:18,21 international 741:14,17 768:10 interpretation 690:7,9 690:14 interrupt 567:4 581:13 733:22 interrupting 566:16 intersect 666:8 709:18 interval 639:13 666:6,18 666:19,22 interview 763:10 764:18 interviewing 764:22 introduced 625:7 626:5 introduction 724:13 751:17 invariably 800:12 inventing 614:13 invention 727:17 investigate 570:5 697:13 investigated 566:9 567:7
645:14 investigatory 698:9 investment 749:9,16 750:4 753:5 790:25 investments 753:6 involved 570:4 573:1,23 633:20,21 642:25 653:5 766:16 involvement 622:3 776:8 involving 723:4 791:3 in-house 724:3 761:6 in-migration 764:9 in-situ 780:3 Iowa 728:21 irresponsible 813:6 Island 793:25 796:19 isolate 797:19 isolated 739:12 isolation 568:10 769:9,19 issuance 712:9 issue 587:16 593:7 625:18 757:9,10 760:17 772:22 774:10 780:9 781:25 784:6 786:8,19 795:5,12 802:25 808:13 issued 623:7,8,13 761:16 791:15 issues 576:10,20 633:5 659:7 675:12 685:6 687:6,9 712:20 721:14 722:2 723:22 752:7 772:2 782:8 784:7 789:19 794:9 801:19 805:11,25 IV 561:3 i.e 626:18 J JAG 561:2 James 562:9 665:5 January 623:7 712:9 Japan 741:21 Jeff 626:6 665:9 Jefferson 812:10 JEFFREY 562:5 Jerry 562:17 771:1 job 566:21 571:17 654:1 654:25 732:19 733:19 766:3,19 786:21 788:16 788:16
jobs 727:6 729:6 732:22 733:20,21 735:19 736:10,12 737:4,6,8,12 737:23,24 739:10 740:25 743:14,20,20,21 748:5 749:23 751:4 754:1,2 756:1,2 761:22 761:25 762:3,15,16,18 762:20,25 765:13,21,21 765:23,25 766:3,24 767:1 771:22 772:3,17 781:24 788:25 789:1 794:3,3 800:23 801:14 805:12,16,17,17 814:9 814:11 join 784:11 joint 565:25 573:17 joke 666:11 jokes 566:21 journal 719:12,15 Juan 763:7 767:20 Juans 724:22 Judge 799:7 809:11 judged 752:10 JUDICIAL 561:1 jumping 745:23 Junction 617:22 724:24 737:7 739:14 753:10 754:20 755:15,16 762:14 772:25 773:1,3,6 773:13,17,20 781:10 juncture 646:19 justice 656:9 justifiable 801:11 justification 732:24 justified 673:19 justify 765:25 K Kappa 658:2 keep 599:17 642:5 647:3 650:20 652:6 661:12 686:16 759:5 784:11 797:19 813:15,15 keeping 680:8 kept 746:19 key 726:10 731:17 732:12 740:19,20 747:18 787:12 793:15 794:23 795:5,6 Kim 617:22 649:16 662:4
703:1 kind 569:17 570:5 575:4 579:8 582:24 589:12 590:25 597:14 598:18 603:2,20 604:11 605:5 614:5,23 620:3 641:18 645:22 646:20 647:16 648:1 656:16,21 660:23 665:24 673:18 687:5 692:10 693:5 696:3 704:5 705:15,21 710:7 744:14 756:25 758:7,7 776:9,17,21 777:24 781:21 783:20 786:10 kindergarten 728:16 kinds 654:21 655:3,17,23 704:18 Kleinfelder 576:21 577:8,22 663:3 664:10 683:21 know 587:13,23 591:10 591:10 592:9 598:10 603:8,16 604:25 605:6,7 605:13,17 607:5,23 610:20 611:3 613:16,25 615:1,11,12,17 616:18 618:10 619:17 620:2,23 620:25 621:2 627:17 633:10,20 634:6,16,17 634:20,21,23 636:12,14 636:25 639:4,12,20 640:2,5 642:11,23 643:9 643:9,21,22 644:14,14 644:22 645:12,13,16 647:10,22 649:23 650:13 651:6,16 656:17 658:16 663:17 665:11 666:3 670:18 671:10 673:4,6,9 674:1,21 676:2 677:17,18 678:20 679:5,9,11 684:11,12 691:18 694:22 697:2,24 703:19,22 704:11 706:1 707:15 712:16 713:25 717:7 728:14 740:12 743:17 744:12 745:10 750:25 758:24 760:4 761:15 766:12,13 773:8 773:14 775:20 777:6 778:25 779:10 782:10 783:3 785:24 786:1,16
788:10 792:17 793:17 796:24 797:10 809:24 810:11 813:9,22 knowing 605:10 known 683:21 684:19 knows 637:4 651:1 L La 642:17 label 718:24 labeled 688:19 730:15 753:2 759:1 labeling 808:7 labor 749:10,14,14,17,18 759:13 laboratory 568:12 Labor's 742:9 labs 588:12 lack 586:1 698:9 751:19 773:15 lacking 799:17 laid 720:13 805:18 Lakewood 562:14 land 775:4 791:20 landfills 603:15 767:8 775:22 landing 774:15 landmark 804:21 lands 647:15 Landscapes 720:1 language 753:15 laptop 727:17 large 569:11,15 739:13 752:9,9 773:3 largely 575:22 736:9 748:23,25 larger 599:17 667:15 largest 797:24 lastly 621:4 late 755:8,9 laterally 694:11,11 698:2 latest 676:1 Latin 569:20 law 562:2 636:10 714:16 801:18 laws 609:7 lawsuit 575:8 lawyer 666:11 698:10 lawyers 566:17 lay 567:4 layer 633:16,16 695:9,12
697:24,25,25 709:13,16 709:19 710:13,17 layers 689:24 690:1 693:1 694:2,8 695:17,18,19 696:20,23 715:3 layoffs 805:24 leach 577:11 595:18 599:3,5 607:6,7 780:3 leachate 601:18 603:1,15 604:2,7,17 605:12 607:8 608:19 609:14 615:12 615:20,24 621:10 625:22 710:22 leaching 588:24 lead 577:20 592:9 657:13 719:9 805:24,24 leads 688:12 690:19 691:4 leak 592:24 593:5 601:25 602:5,11,18,23 605:11 607:2 608:4,7,20 609:8 612:14 619:18 633:5,12 633:14,15 635:13,18 636:11 699:8 700:8 705:13 710:7,16 leakage 605:6 655:12 696:21 700:9 709:10 leaked 609:4 leaking 568:22,25 602:10 604:10,21 812:11 leaks 573:12 591:9,14 592:7 595:15 603:10 605:14,17,18 613:4 628:4,14 687:13,17 699:11 704:12 learn 728:14 796:9 learned 567:15 796:5 learning 665:7 leave 636:22 765:8 779:12 left 631:1 648:22 682:10 687:4 742:6 774:25 legacy 746:25 800:8,8,10 legal 562:13 609:19 610:2 714:8 782:23 legitimate 803:13 805:9 Lehigh 718:4 letter 649:16,17 letting 647:10 let's 567:6 582:14 613:25 615:18 620:9 623:17
625:8 628:3 629:18 630:3 632:13 635:7 636:23 638:7,25 639:23 649:24 652:6 653:15 658:18 664:5 672:12 686:20 694:10 708:15 711:17 732:2,10,11 740:19 747:18 761:21 763:8,17,19 767:16 780:10 782:14 789:11 level 578:21,22,23,24 615:15,16,24 616:1,3 630:9 631:12 634:23 635:3 650:10,10 668:15 675:1 701:18 704:5 755:9 779:10 796:14 levels 593:12 667:25 674:8,14 675:13 676:21 677:6 695:24 liabilities 616:6 license 561:6 583:25 623:7,8,13 643:18 644:13 661:1 663:5 691:2 700:20 701:2 703:16 712:8 713:7 714:5 761:16 813:2 licensing 712:13 793:12 793:14 795:1 798:14 lie 790:25 life 579:18 580:22 620:3 656:15 663:20 679:25 680:5,11 699:3 719:4 743:24 751:18,19 756:7 756:13 769:2 787:23 797:14 809:24 life-threatening 788:17 lifted 744:15 limbo 643:18 lime 577:24 581:6 593:24 limit 599:18 683:18 limitation 679:5 802:4 limitations 678:24 679:3 limited 629:8 669:2 682:20 764:13,15 802:5 808:15 Lincoln 562:10 Linda 784:22 789:14,15 789:15 line 605:21 642:5 670:22 670:25 671:11 681:2 683:17 696:1 742:15
746:5 755:14,14 778:17 778:17 lined 568:23,24 604:16 605:20 609:3 635:17,20 636:3 liner 592:24 593:5 597:7 597:13 598:7 601:10,11 601:15,15,16,20,21 603:3,4,5,6,9,13 604:2,8 604:18,22 605:7,13,14 607:1,1 608:13,14,18,21 608:23 609:13,15 615:19 621:11 636:5,6 709:11 liners 595:22 596:3,6,23 597:23,25 598:2,5 601:17,25 602:4,10,11 602:17,23 603:2,15,17 604:3,14,15,16 608:4,5 608:6,16 615:12 621:16 636:12 699:9 787:24 lining 597:20 609:7 liquid 576:12 648:13 791:7,16 list 587:24 624:3 661:13 listed 704:19 listen 652:3 listened 665:4 785:6 listening 599:10 literally 588:13 719:15 730:24 literature 672:4 730:3 751:12 757:19,20 758:3 767:5 775:19 776:1 781:2 little 565:20 567:3,21,24 567:25 568:1 572:16 573:19 579:11 580:11 587:1 589:4 593:11 597:9 598:9 599:9 606:21,25 610:9 628:4,8 636:14 641:11 643:15 665:2 670:7 677:22 678:18 685:12 687:7 707:16 721:5 763:22 777:14 801:20 805:10 807:22 live 580:23 724:23 729:24 753:4 785:19 786:20,20 786:21 789:16 lived 724:14,25 787:6
livelihood 770:4 801:14 livelihoods 770:1 living 653:24 752:2 786:18 810:13,14 livings 748:16 LLP 562:8 loans 789:6 local 642:16 720:14 727:18 728:16 729:7 730:14 732:21 737:4 750:5 751:18,18 752:1 752:15 753:7 764:25 780:13 790:7 798:24 locate 729:22 located 691:21 736:16 737:7,9 739:9,17,18 location 707:7 729:19 locations 604:6 629:9 664:19,22 689:3,7 701:18 locking 798:15 logging 720:3 logic 758:25 759:15 long 598:6 607:10 621:1 621:3 634:2 676:8 677:3 679:5 681:13 718:14 724:15 728:4 751:21 752:6 761:9 longer 677:23 678:20 684:11 746:20 803:2 810:19 long-term 568:13 682:15 795:7 804:19 814:12 look 579:22 581:9 586:23 589:14 604:13 607:23 613:21 614:14 626:11 636:15 637:9,19 641:22 642:7 667:24 672:21 673:5,9 679:23 681:23 681:25 686:6,8 709:14 721:6 728:8 729:12 739:21 743:14 744:18 745:1 746:5 747:25 748:18,21,22 749:25 751:3 752:24 753:25 754:21 758:25 778:6 781:12 800:2,4 803:16 809:1 looked 568:6,22 597:12 629:13 648:5 649:24 655:13,14 657:8 658:16
670:15 671:7,14 672:2 675:15 681:5 684:21 689:8 744:14 747:14 754:11 767:4 775:19 779:23 looking 573:8,12 576:19 604:1 630:17 637:3 654:4,15,18 662:19 681:15 694:16 695:6 708:10 739:24 741:8 745:15 748:4 753:19 764:6 776:11 777:2 797:15 807:14 looks 583:1 755:25 Lost 719:25 lot 567:11 578:14 580:19 590:25 591:1,17 593:8 594:2 602:10,12 605:9 607:17 617:23 618:18 620:10 622:3 629:5 644:10 651:1,17 665:7 669:6 672:25 683:6 684:4 728:14 740:17 775:2 801:12 806:9 810:1,19 lots 665:12 716:24 769:13 785:24 loud 626:15 Louis 563:2 762:22 low 579:2,12 581:4 582:2 588:3,22 596:10 597:25 598:5 627:19 669:3,14 669:15,24 671:1 681:3 694:8 695:9,16,18 696:20,22 697:23 752:1 752:3 755:9 778:12 779:7 lower 578:22,24 580:25 595:2,17,18,21,24 596:21 600:9 601:21 603:4,9 611:8 627:17 689:23,24 694:2 695:23 707:14 709:12 790:17 lowered 578:11,15 813:14 lowest 587:11,15 592:24 593:5 604:18,22 605:2,7 605:13,14 609:15 621:11 635:2 low-income 722:2 749:19
low-interest 789:6 low-level 603:19,21 634:10,17 Lucas 562:9 564:9,10 575:16 609:17 658:7,9 658:10 659:13 662:8 675:7 711:12,20,23 lumber 769:25 775:1,17 lumping 740:4 lumps 746:21 lunch 686:20,23 Lyons 562:6 lysimeters 704:16 M Maest 564:4 565:5,9,9,11 565:16 566:13,16 570:21 571:23 572:1,3,6 572:13,19,21 574:14 582:3,5,8,11 586:22 622:9,19 641:7 648:17 648:20 649:6,13 650:5 650:12,15 651:6,19 657:15 660:15 687:7 699:9 magnitude 580:7 627:25 638:16 main 561:20 562:3 569:4 610:25 618:22 621:21 maintain 742:10 784:9 maintaining 799:1 major 739:16 744:1 794:8 majority 729:6 742:18 makers 797:25 making 617:10 662:14 676:7 708:11 723:3 734:16 744:10,11 750:6 764:4 769:22 773:23 782:9 799:18 806:22 807:5 812:16 mammals 591:12 man 796:7 manage 665:2 management 573:9,22 613:9,11,14,18 614:1,4 614:9,10 615:7,23 616:15 619:1 621:5,22 621:25 641:12 642:10 642:20 643:3,6 777:14 791:20 808:3,6 mandating 790:9
manganese 577:20 manual 720:16 manufacture 748:14 manufactured 601:16 603:3 manufacturing 748:23 man-made 566:14 map 665:23 670:20,22 696:9,14 maps 612:7 Marble 724:21 March 623:8 761:18 market 739:22 741:14,17 745:9 805:19 806:1 marketed 719:2,6 markets 798:16 marking 807:23 Mason 767:18 master's 653:18,22 718:6 material 577:17 585:7,8 587:18 590:6 591:3 595:12 597:8 601:11 604:9 606:11,16 613:5 617:17,23 631:1 639:6 650:17 709:14 710:16 726:22 766:22 materials 561:6 572:7 574:19 576:15,19 578:20 579:11 583:10 583:20,25 589:14,23 591:21 597:20 598:22 601:2 602:15 604:1 606:8 611:9 612:6 614:18,18 619:7 620:1 645:6 648:3 660:12 661:16 674:10 687:11 687:11 688:3,13,19,21 690:19 691:1 697:6 702:18,23 706:25 710:24 711:1 730:18 774:9 777:19 807:24 mathematical 727:19 MATT 562:21 matter 561:17 587:18 669:16 699:6 703:21,23 703:23,24 704:21 705:1 705:4 757:7 779:21 786:17 matters 699:7 751:18,19 791:18 maximum 580:5,6
627:25 642:16 651:4 680:20 Maywood 726:22 760:17 mean 574:6 578:6 580:7 580:12 581:14 593:21 596:17 602:24 603:14 610:13,17 611:12 613:13 615:10 618:13 620:7 625:10 628:14 629:4,20 632:20 635:23 636:1 640:14 643:21 645:16 648:21 650:2 660:4 666:16 669:4,16 672:16,17 673:25 678:17 684:10,18 686:18 697:22 703:8,9 703:22 713:17 734:15 756:6 762:6 763:14 770:7 777:7 781:3,25 807:12 809:2 means 580:9 607:13 634:12 652:2 666:13 669:5 676:14 meant 669:18 696:10,12 737:13 measure 594:14 598:24 672:3 673:4 691:24 695:24 measured 578:2 579:3 580:19 587:5 675:6 690:16 691:13 measurement 589:1 691:11 720:20 measurements 690:22 694:17 measures 572:14 573:11 598:12,14 600:25 602:7 614:20 619:11 measuring 677:6 694:25 meccas 775:13 Medicaid 749:19 meet 792:12 806:13 meetings 614:1 member 657:22,24 722:6 785:1,5 794:16 798:6 809:12 members 800:20 membership 780:14 memo 575:4 583:11 Menlo 566:7 mention 566:16 758:4
768:21 789:3 mentioned 567:23 569:4 569:24 583:6 593:7 594:7,12 599:8 610:9 615:24 617:23 619:15 624:14 636:10 659:4 667:4 676:24 677:1 679:17 683:10 761:10 761:11 763:4,19 765:12 768:16,25 771:5 772:2 807:16 merely 609:21 mesa 665:24 670:25 681:5 683:21 715:10,12 736:19 739:18 742:13 743:21 750:8 755:6,13 765:7 807:21 815:3 mesh 599:24 600:1,6,12 631:19,19 649:10,18,25 650:4 651:18,19 meshes 649:12 mess 632:5 791:25 792:2 message 618:23 metal 578:11,11 594:2 644:22 741:9 746:11,12 746:20 755:7 metalloids 577:19 metals 577:19 578:2 581:1 627:2 645:10,23 649:4 metal-laden 627:4 meteorological 638:14 639:7 672:22 meteorologist 639:20 meteorology 643:9 777:9 meter 796:7 methodologies 720:9,24 723:15 780:22 methodology 685:7 704:6 717:22 721:9 722:23 750:23 758:8 759:21 781:11 782:25 methods 594:11 657:16 metropolitan 762:17 Mexico 568:8,10,15,20 568:22 571:7 609:3 721:15 Michael 716:6 middle 639:9 650:19 692:11 middleman 807:5
Midnight 655:18 migrate 693:1 694:7 697:17 700:11 709:23 709:25 710:12,13 migrates 695:8,11 697:25 698:2 migrating 694:2 migration 604:19 693:24 696:21 704:24 706:7 709:6,12,15,18,22 710:2 710:11,22 Miguel 663:11 736:20 739:19 755:6,21 769:7 789:23 790:18 791:24 792:19 795:2 803:22 808:9 Mile 791:5 793:25 796:19 miles 790:1 803:20 809:20 811:2 mill 561:6 568:21 572:14 576:13,17 577:10,13 583:4 585:5,8 589:15 594:10,15 595:10 599:5 601:1 603:22 604:25 607:21 609:3 615:9 616:7,17,25 617:11,12 618:14,17,21 619:3,8 620:19 624:7 630:2 641:17 643:20 654:16 655:18,19,19 660:3,13 662:24 663:18,20,24 667:7,14,15 679:25 680:5,7,11 682:16 683:9 690:7 692:9 699:3 701:22 702:13,16 705:17,22 726:23 728:8 731:5 732:24 733:19 735:25 736:15 738:9,23 738:25 739:8,17,22 741:3,15 742:13,25 743:21 754:19,20,21 755:15,17 756:3 757:15 757:15 764:23 765:7 770:14 773:3 774:4 776:25 780:6 787:11,11 787:14 788:3,24 789:18 789:25 790:2,4,16,19 792:6 793:12,13,18 794:2,21,24 798:14,25 799:21,25 805:3,15 807:10,18,20 808:24
812:2,23 813:23 milled 788:5 Miller 784:22 789:14,15 789:15 milling 572:24 653:12 767:19 790:5 793:19 million 617:17 618:3,9 656:11 792:18 805:4,8 807:9,13 813:21,24 814:1 mills 608:24 617:15 620:3,25 632:18 636:8 640:1 728:9 742:12 775:1,18 780:3 812:6 813:10 Milwaukee 728:22 mind 661:12 mine 567:23 573:22,23 583:8,8 594:8 643:1 655:17,19 656:9,12 657:2 741:15,16 742:9 742:10 748:13 768:13 770:14 776:22 807:17 808:15 812:7,10,16,23 mined 617:15 669:19 788:5 mineral 570:5 723:16 726:12 728:2,20,20 744:4,8 745:14 747:2 750:6 813:2 minerals 798:16 miners 762:9 766:22 mines 568:17,18 569:10 569:18,19,19,19,23 571:10 579:4 583:17 585:3 588:10 607:6 616:10 654:14,16 655:4 655:4,5,17 656:23 657:8 658:13,14 662:10 739:16 742:11 754:19 780:3,6 808:19,20 811:24 812:6 813:10 minimal 633:8 minimis 711:4,7 minimize 605:16 minimizing 620:11 minimus 687:16 mining 562:5 567:12,12 567:16,19 569:3,6,16,18 569:22 570:6,12,12 572:14 577:6 607:4,5
620:4 653:11 654:12 655:23 656:3,6,13,16,23 657:1,18,20 671:23 682:21 719:18 720:3,7 720:25 728:19 736:11 741:9,12 746:6,11,12,20 746:22,24 747:1 748:23 754:18 755:6,7,21 756:1 756:2,5,7,7,10,13,14 762:25 767:19 769:2,5,6 769:21,25 790:20 793:19 mining-dependent 720:7 mining-related 654:11 655:2 659:5 mining/milling 785:23 minor 737:8 minus 743:17 minute 600:5 628:7 633:13 663:7 667:10,11 667:14 669:23,25 670:1 671:12,13,17 672:7,9 673:14 676:18 680:6 681:23,25 685:19 714:2 763:5 814:17 minutes 622:15 711:17 717:19 783:19 miracle 796:2 mirror 729:9 mislead 736:25 737:19 misleading 729:10 744:9 misled 781:18 mispronounce 784:20 missed 708:2 missing 591:19 613:1 619:11 661:8 Missoula 716:15 775:2 misspoke 703:10 mistake 798:3 mistaken 625:2 misunderstandings 721:8 misunderstood 631:24 misuse 720:24 mitigate 610:12 631:11 640:16 mitigation 619:3 mitigations 642:4 mix 579:7 588:14,22 748:4,5
mixed 579:6 581:22 582:10,11 588:9,17 596:5 603:20 621:15 624:16,18,23 627:17 759:2 mixer 626:19 mixing 581:5 mixture 589:16 Moab 754:16 755:25 769:12 773:23 774:4 775:9,15 mobile 724:22 model 589:13 740:2,14 746:5 modeled 683:23 modeling 654:4,6 models 727:15,16,18,19 727:20,21 modest 742:2 746:9 moment 662:9 708:5 733:23 805:14 Monday 785:2 801:21 803:12 money 653:24 752:23 monitor 611:12 625:10 625:15 698:17 699:4,17 704:1,2,23 705:11,25 706:9 monitored 689:18 704:2 711:10 monitoring 604:5 605:8 607:9 608:2,7 610:19 611:22 613:18,20,23 621:2 661:5,6 674:7 675:2 688:6,10,17,25 689:3,6,7,9,11,16 690:2 692:5,6 693:22 694:20 698:16,18 699:3,11,19 699:23 700:1,2,19 701:16 702:24 703:4,7,8 703:9,25 704:3,9,14,18 705:3,15,23 706:3,5,19 707:22 712:20 713:1,2,3 monographs 719:16 Montana 657:9 716:15 718:11,15 722:7,11 723:19 728:19 770:10 months 597:18 Montrose 735:13,15 736:9,15,18,19 737:9 738:10,11,13,17,18,20
738:22 739:1,4,8,12,17 740:4,7,9 741:10,11,18 741:25 743:7,10 748:5 748:17,20 749:2,11 750:2 753:10 755:6,17 755:18,19 762:1,23 763:1,2 764:10,12 767:20 772:7 789:23 794:20 800:12 806:5 808:16 monuments 800:11 Moore 562:12 564:12,13 724:2,3 725:8,22 726:4 733:22 734:9,16,25 761:4,6 770:19 771:8 moral 778:16 781:24 morning 622:10,21,22 625:8 652:19 658:10 716:19,23 785:4 Morrison 617:22 649:16 651:13 662:4 703:2 Morrison's 712:22 mothballing 796:15 mother 787:7 motivation 804:11,12 motorcycle 791:25 mountain 562:7,21,24 571:7 642:17 654:3 656:7 659:25 712:1,17 713:12 775:13 780:13 799:14 mountains 810:24 mouse 795:24,24 809:17 move 576:8 589:3,13,19 592:11 601:13 613:7 617:23 628:3 629:18 632:13 635:7 636:23 639:23 643:7 684:23 692:24,25 694:10,11 721:3 726:13 732:10 740:19 747:18 758:11 797:23 798:4,11,20 moved 577:25 687:5 741:11 769:7,8 movement 567:8 568:6 569:1 589:25 591:14 612:10,13 613:3 653:6,7 730:8,21 moves 678:15 moving 574:16 593:11 598:9 600:24 612:15
628:19 630:19 631:18 652:6 696:20 715:11 797:22 MSHA 625:7,9 626:4 mudflaps 808:1 municipal 603:14 municipality 804:22 mutually 797:7 MW-1 689:10 693:19 699:17 707:22 MW-2 689:11,17 690:24 691:17 692:4,8 694:9,10 694:20 697:23 698:6 699:18 700:24 701:14 MW-3 689:11,17 690:24 691:20 692:6,10 694:10 698:6 MW-4 689:11 707:22 Myers 784:23 799:4,5,7,8 809:12 811:18 mysterious 727:16 M-A-E-S-T 565:10 N N 565:1 Nagasaki 795:15 naive 644:25 name 565:8 652:10 708:13 716:4,5 724:3 770:25 783:23 785:18 787:2,5 788:19 792:17 799:8 809:11 names 784:21 785:14 nation 786:25 794:13 798:18 national 566:5 570:4,8 657:25 741:13,16 794:19 796:14 Native 787:24 natural 566:9 695:6 719:1,5,6 720:18 724:8 748:9 770:8 788:8 natural-resource-based 719:23 nature 570:2 Naturita 663:10 725:6 769:5 776:13 788:15 near 665:24 699:14 738:23 nearby 577:6 necessarily 612:13
696:16,24 769:16 780:12 necessary 619:2 702:5 786:1 798:7 need 596:20 600:15 602:21 606:3 610:19 619:19 663:18 667:5,6 667:10,12 679:7 700:25 702:11 704:25 706:3 710:5 740:12 756:16 760:16,20 780:21 782:9 783:18,23 786:12,19 787:15 789:7 800:2,3 804:25 needed 637:23 653:25 663:23 702:10,25 765:22 786:1 791:14 797:6 798:7 needing 680:13 needs 600:11 648:5 737:11 781:20 786:25 808:12 negative 730:15 766:21 767:6,9,9 775:25 777:1 negligible 797:12 negotiated 808:9 negotiations 569:22 neighborhood 801:7 neighborhoods 774:15 775:23 neighbors 800:20 neither 798:17 net 806:10 netting 598:17 599:12,18 599:20 630:22,24 631:4 631:17 network 698:16 neutral 598:1 neutralization 593:23 594:4,12,24,25 598:23 629:18,19 neutralize 621:14 neutralized 582:12 587:3 599:4 Nevada 656:25 never 585:24 586:2 649:10 651:16,18 745:14 801:2,6 802:2 nevertheless 793:22 new 568:8,10,15,20,22 600:11 609:3 618:14
627:24 640:9 686:12 719:21,24 721:14 733:24 734:17 751:4,4 756:13 769:15,15 777:23 795:23 799:24 800:1 805:5,6 808:23 809:19 Newmeyer 789:25 807:17 Newmont 656:6 news 812:9 newspaper 801:3 newspapers 728:17 nice 590:12 717:14 nine 597:18 736:20 nominal 637:17 noncommercial 719:7 nongovernmental 721:18 nonprofit 722:1 780:14 non-potable 667:10 noon 686:13 north 693:17 702:20 704:20 707:12,17 739:14 768:11 776:17 northeast 670:21 681:1 683:18 692:9 northern 568:21 689:10 689:12 707:20 754:18 769:7 northwest 683:14 696:7 730:10 Northwestern 722:11 Notary 561:23 815:5 note 575:6 584:20,25 587:9,15 597:17 623:19 735:2 792:18 807:22 noted 566:22 574:12 575:21 notes 712:24 725:23 notice 561:16 686:12 698:4 745:21 755:15 November 561:4,19 649:16 662:5 703:2 712:22 815:17 no-flow 681:2 683:22,23 NRC 597:14 599:2 608:3 700:5,6,14 NSF 653:23 Nucla 561:20 725:5 735:15 740:6 769:4
776:13 785:19 788:15 800:17,19,20 Nucla-Naturita 788:12 nuclear 608:2 741:20 757:11,12 774:8,9 793:7 793:9 794:11,12 796:16 796:23 797:1,16,25 798:5,9,20 809:20 number 569:15 570:4 571:16 581:24 588:12 592:22 594:11 595:11 604:15 616:10 617:11 619:10 623:20,21,25 624:13 629:6 645:9 679:20 681:7 685:3 699:25 704:21 735:19 752:9,10 762:13,16 772:10,16 777:16 numbers 583:9,18 586:23 617:25 618:2 623:24 627:24 727:5,6 737:14,17 762:24 778:8 813:17 Nursery 806:14 O O 565:1 Oak 796:24 Obama 794:14 object 566:20 647:5 objection 574:12 584:18 584:24 585:10 586:10 586:13 609:18 610:6 647:2 659:13,14 734:2 734:15,17 735:3 objections 571:19 725:8 725:10,12 objective 782:6 obligation 802:7 observation 611:19 observed 690:18 699:24 obtained 677:7 obtaining 770:1 obvious 728:17 741:5 758:25 obviously 629:20,21 633:5 656:15 667:15 678:17 735:22 749:4 occasionally 692:21 occasions 691:17 occupation 565:17
652:20 occur 597:17 706:4 765:6 occurred 791:5 occurrence 639:12 occurrences 698:11,25 occurring 802:20 occurs 630:23,25 October 691:19,22 771:18 791:3,15 offensive 779:3,3 offer 572:13 638:3,5 723:13 806:3 offering 585:12 734:12 offers 789:5 office 562:16 568:9,21 753:14 771:2 officer 565:3,7 566:11,22 570:20 571:20,24 572:18 574:11 575:10 575:14 582:1,4,7,9,13 584:13 585:11,14,21 586:9,14 610:1 622:13 622:17 625:25 637:20 637:25 640:23,25 641:6 648:9,11,18 649:3,8 650:1,7,13 651:3,7,15 651:22 652:1,9,12 658:6 659:15,19 686:14,19,22 686:24 692:2 708:7,9,23 711:16,21 714:20,22,25 715:2,6,16,20,24 716:3 716:7 725:13,17,21 734:14,19 735:2 760:15 760:19,24 778:1 779:15 783:15,18 784:13,19 785:3,13,17 787:1 789:14 792:23 793:1 799:4,6 809:7,8 814:15 official 793:5 801:1,12 offsite 612:15 712:25 off/seepage 591:2 Oh 575:14 585:19 Ohio 603:18 634:6 oil 570:6 746:17 750:7 okay 567:6 568:1 571:2 572:23 575:15 582:7,13 583:12 586:15 587:1 588:9 591:7 601:7 602:11 603:25 607:19 612:16 615:17 623:9 624:17 625:1,5,15,23
626:14,17 628:3 629:10 630:4 631:14 632:2 633:12 635:18 636:7,19 636:22 639:23 641:6,13 643:20 645:25 646:22 647:5,6 648:6 651:3,15 651:22 658:21 688:18 692:16 693:13 733:4,11 741:24 751:16 758:24 762:2,5 763:8 764:16 765:5,10 767:24 768:5,7 771:24 old 620:3 633:22 725:2,2 809:17,22 older 655:22 796:8 Olivia 562:9 629:17 658:10 once 789:17,21 ones 573:4,5 577:7 613:3 619:16 621:10,21 644:18 664:17 730:15 730:16 one-sixth 745:20 ongoing 775:21 812:3 on-site 713:1 open 655:15 657:2 666:17,19,22,23 811:24 opened 796:20 opening 642:12 776:10 776:20 808:23 opens 613:24 operated 613:17 790:6 operates 722:10 operating 624:9,12 742:25 759:3,5 790:22 operation 613:24 639:17 641:16 663:18 682:16 728:7 790:6 809:24 operational 573:24 614:3 614:24 operations 573:22 600:23 607:6 622:4 624:7 635:12,16 654:20 654:20 701:25 780:4 790:21 791:9 Ophir 799:15 803:22 opinion 597:4 600:18 602:24 612:21,22 660:17,18 673:18 698:21 699:22 700:15 704:7 706:13 711:8
722:12 732:11 734:13 737:18,19 746:1 747:12 751:8 756:21,24 758:5 758:12 760:11 780:23 781:14,17,23 782:16 783:2 opinions 574:22,24 575:2 660:10,14,16,17 660:18,20 675:9 712:3 717:21 722:15 733:24 734:25 735:23 774:20 opportunity 604:17 646:19,21 784:2,14 787:4 789:17 806:12,13 806:15 809:6,10 813:25 opposed 728:4 737:5 793:6,11 797:13,19 opposes 799:2 opposite 613:20 opposition 795:3,4 optimistic 664:2,4,8 oral 708:11 784:1,24 orange 671:1,10 675:4 681:2 orchards 788:22 order 667:7 710:7 760:9 782:12 784:11 803:23 804:3 811:1 orders 634:11,15 ore 577:5,9 583:3 585:4 588:11 617:14,14 790:7 808:24 Oregon 609:10 636:10,14 636:15,16 ores 587:14 588:5,5 organic 568:5 806:11,15 organics 626:20 627:7 organizations 657:23 721:19 722:2,3,4 organs 778:23 oriented 695:19,19 original 712:8 750:12 752:18 761:13 763:20 originally 599:13 600:17 790:2 ornamentals 806:17 ought 635:9 746:9 outcomes 779:7,8 outcry 801:5 outdated 789:12 810:2 outlined 747:24
outside 656:25 734:25 742:13 748:14 762:8 774:4 775:9 807:18 Outward 724:21 756:9 outweigh 814:11 overall 729:11 741:11 overflows 591:9 overhead 756:11 overlooked 729:18 overseas 786:11 oversee 791:13 overstate 720:24 overview 604:11 overwhelming 794:23 owe 779:10 owner 806:13 owners 812:16 P P 565:1 Pacific 730:10 Packrat 577:8 581:4 583:8 584:4 587:10 page 564:3 590:7,19 626:10 777:8 pages 731:13 Pandora 577:8 581:3 583:8 584:4 587:10 pants 645:1 papers 719:16 Paradox 716:22 753:21 788:15 789:4 800:17,18 811:5,12 paragraph 625:20 627:15 parallel 715:7 parameter 673:3,20 parameters 705:14 paraphrase 745:4 paraphrasing 763:21 parents 785:22 795:22 Park 566:7 756:10 768:11 parks 775:22 Parsons 562:5 564:4,6,8 564:9,10 565:3,4,15 566:15,23,25 570:13 571:25 572:12 574:13 574:15 575:5,19 576:2,8 582:14 584:5,14,25 585:13,18,23 586:20,22 609:20 610:8 622:8 651:24 652:6,18 658:3
659:21,23 665:7,10 676:5 686:11,16,21,25 687:1,3 692:8 707:23,25 708:4,21 709:2 711:11 711:14 715:1,23 784:5 part 574:18 575:7 578:21 579:20 583:24 587:2 598:16 603:20 624:4 628:25 653:24 659:24 666:20 670:16,17 671:2 671:3 681:3 683:2,13,16 688:1 689:10,12 700:20 701:10 703:16 712:12 712:18 716:21 746:25 753:22 754:18 764:6,7,8 770:10 775:18 776:1 781:17 793:10 794:8 801:4 804:11 805:12,19 814:6 Participants 785:16 participate 660:1 participated 760:18 779:22 particles 647:21 648:2 particular 601:6 639:21 641:16 716:21 718:23 723:15 728:6 729:1 731:5 732:18 734:7 756:19 770:2 782:3 particularly 605:18 796:11 800:4 802:21 particulate 803:19 parties 561:16 731:9 793:8 794:8 815:13 Partly 720:15 parts 747:4 749:23 753:23 party 563:3 793:3,4,6,6,7 793:9,11,15 794:5,6 795:9 798:6,6 799:2 802:1 passage 774:24 passed 742:6 patent 566:9 pathway 591:9,13,19 605:25 606:19 611:22 628:17 644:7 646:4,7 647:24 648:4 687:15,25 693:21,23 694:13 697:15,15 706:8 710:22 711:4,9
pathways 589:5,6,22,25 592:4,13 613:1,22 628:11 644:5 684:23 687:12 700:22 705:24 706:6,9 patio 802:17 Patrol 791:12 pattern 710:7 770:6 Pay 719:21 payroll 749:15 755:7 peace 795:14 Peekskill 809:19 peg 667:20 pegged 679:20 pegging 673:18 Pekini 795:18 Pennsylvania 780:6 pension 753:5 people 571:6 634:14 647:10 673:5,9 677:17 708:14 727:10,12,20 728:25 729:1 730:8,11 730:21 736:2 738:12,24 739:3,9 740:8 746:23 747:1 749:15 752:2 753:4,11 757:6,12,13 761:25 764:22 766:5 767:11 774:10,11,13,18 775:5,14 778:23,25 779:10 782:1,2 783:4,25 784:3 785:10,14 786:6 786:20 787:19 788:15 789:7 800:16 802:6 805:18 810:23 814:9 people's 737:3 774:21 percent 606:10,11 610:18 621:13 644:2 672:5 673:7,8,9,12,19,22 676:8 745:20 746:15 810:7 percentage 648:3 762:15 perception 754:3 perched 690:10 691:24 692:21 694:18 709:18 710:5,6,10 perching 689:22,25 694:1,9 perennial 662:21 perfectly 709:9 738:11 743:19 744:6 745:16 perform 764:1
performance 568:13 728:4,5 performs 744:18 perimeter 650:16 period 597:16 598:6 645:20 663:21 671:16 686:9,10 695:11 728:4 755:10 periodically 694:4 permeability 601:12 689:23 694:2,8 695:9,17 695:18 696:20,23 697:24 709:13 permeable 710:17 permit 626:4 643:21 782:15,18 791:10,14,15 799:19 permits 643:22 786:3 permitted 618:18,22 655:4 permitting 654:14 656:22 657:6 658:12,15 700:17 703:14,15,17 799:2 person 646:9,10 652:5 736:25 782:9 personal 774:7 795:11 personally 649:19 perspective 573:15 574:4 578:8 665:1 682:17 810:25 pertaining 609:7 660:13 pertains 644:12 pH 577:17,23,25,25 578:4 578:10,15,18,21,22,23 578:24 579:2,9,12 581:4 581:5,9 582:2 587:4,5,9 587:10 588:2,3,22 594:1 594:22 595:1,17,21,24 595:25 596:10,13 597:10,25 598:5 624:1,4 624:15,25 626:23,23,25 627:4,12,17,19,22 648:19 phase 569:17 phenomena 802:24 803:13 Phi 658:1 phone 778:11 783:25 784:1,11,15,17 785:7,11 photo 802:13 803:8,9
photograph 807:19,19 photographer 802:12 photographs 802:11 photos 790:15 802:14 803:11 phrasing 665:6 physicist 774:8 physics 718:4 774:8 Ph.D 563:2 565:23 566:5 718:6 picking 779:22 picocurie 634:23 picocuries 634:12 picture 588:6 589:12 590:12 688:16 689:2 806:4 pictures 665:12 pie 750:14 piece 598:4 647:14 pieces 738:16 pile 644:25 645:20,21,24 647:11,12,15 648:13,14 649:11 piles 644:1,2 649:12 651:17 pills 795:24 Pilot 568:10 pin 684:9 pink 665:20 670:10 675:4 689:6 Pinon 561:6 577:13 585:5 603:22 607:21 618:8 619:8 627:13 660:2 738:23 761:23 765:17 765:20 787:10 789:18 794:2,21,24 798:14,25 pipe 604:5,20 635:8,13 635:19 pipes 605:25 704:12 piping 605:18,19,20,23 pit 800:17 pitfalls 792:13 pits 655:16 657:2 793:15 Pittsburgh 728:21 placard 807:25 808:1 place 595:23 605:4,6,16 611:16 618:5 703:21 720:2 722:10 724:15 729:24 744:1 755:18 769:19 770:8 786:5 790:22 791:5 815:8
placed 707:21 places 671:21 684:16 740:11 772:25 781:14 plain 738:12 plan 574:7 594:15 598:16 601:3,10 607:25 611:16 611:19,20 613:19 614:1 614:4,10 616:15,20 619:3 621:22,25 622:6 624:7,9,12 635:12,16 643:3,5,6,11 662:24 663:1,5 664:1,1,3 688:17,25 699:11,23 700:5,16,18,19 702:10 702:24 703:8,10,20,21 703:25 704:4,8 705:9,15 705:20,23 707:2 713:3,6 784:21 planet 789:13 planetary 787:9 planned 600:17 611:10 616:7 619:8 703:3 planning 607:22 681:11 686:4 722:7 plans 573:1,22 574:3,6,6 614:3 620:23 624:7 650:8 741:14 743:2 plant 568:10 809:20,22 809:23 plants 787:19 810:2 Plastic 787:24 plateau 738:15 play 779:11 playing 571:6 plays 626:25 781:13 794:25 please 565:17 567:5 718:1,8,22 732:15 733:11,12 742:23 751:14 771:23 789:11 792:21 plenty 741:1 plumes 808:5 plus 743:17 plutonium 797:6,6 pockets 749:3 point 582:14 586:15 614:12 617:10 630:22 631:7 647:8,9 648:25 649:4,4 651:12 697:21 699:17 709:21 710:21
727:14 728:11 733:25 736:6 744:3 745:12 748:8 751:17 766:8,10 773:22 775:6 776:19 809:20 pointed 741:5 pointing 754:15 points 700:1 713:1 725:16 764:4 policy 567:16 polishing 627:5 political 781:25 politicians 794:17 798:9 poll 767:4 polling 757:14,16,17 polluted 775:17 pollution 567:12 572:14 751:23 pond 609:12 699:4 709:12 ponds 568:23 579:1 581:24 582:19,21,25 590:2 591:5 595:4,13 598:17 599:22 600:6,19 601:23 606:2 607:7 608:6 609:4,11 621:15 621:18 624:21 626:22 627:18 630:21 631:9 632:12 651:20 690:11 690:12 692:12,23,23 694:6 697:16 698:12,15 699:21 704:11 707:20 pool 650:2 poorly 573:25 popular 721:4 population 742:1,3,4 786:7 pore 669:8 692:25 710:23 portion 613:7 629:3 666:1,14 683:1 782:23 portions 702:4 734:7 Portsmouth 633:21 poses 793:14 position 602:20 652:25 positions 718:9 positive 730:14 745:24 776:25 possessed 714:12 possibility 592:6 603:7,9 737:4 763:23 770:13 778:6 807:7 811:23
possible 591:8 592:3 605:24 606:19 613:21 616:19 646:7 699:12 700:9 706:12 710:18 775:16 810:16 possibly 647:4 810:3 postdoctoral 566:6 Post-Cowboy 719:20 post-mining 754:24 755:2 post-war 742:2 potable 667:11 potential 577:1 589:10 589:24 592:17,19 596:3 601:9 605:3 607:24 610:11,12 611:14 612:10,23,24 616:6 644:6 647:23 685:20 687:11 688:14 693:22 693:23 704:12,24 705:24,25 706:1,12,15 720:25 739:10 764:19 765:23 768:12 777:4 792:13 potentially 602:22 606:15 683:23 697:16 697:18,21,22 699:18 700:22 710:16 737:23 788:16 795:20 pound 806:22 807:1,11 pounds 806:21 807:2,4 power 564:11 716:5,6,8,9 716:14 718:13,20 721:17 722:7 723:14,19 724:1 725:25 726:6 761:3,5 770:23 776:2,4 776:6 779:17 793:7,9 794:11,12 797:1 809:20 810:2 powerful 795:19 796:2 PowerPoint 725:16 771:23 powers 770:25 793:21 795:25 practical 669:16 practice 606:3,12,23 615:4,7 619:14 622:7 803:2 practices 573:9 621:5 700:4 808:3,7 precipitate 594:9 649:1
precipitated 644:23 645:3 precipitates 627:3,4,7 precipitation 672:1,5,14 672:18,20,23,25 673:7 673:12,13,22,23 675:5,6 675:23 676:3 683:6 693:25 695:7 696:19 predicted 569:12 predicting 657:17 prefer 686:17 729:22 pregnant 581:19 607:7 preparation 660:1,24 prepare 659:25 674:13 731:4 761:13 prepared 574:17 626:3 662:3 663:2,4 664:10 674:18,21 690:21 720:15 722:17 preparing 574:22 presence 690:15 692:15 701:19,24,24 705:12 784:10 803:18 present 682:4 690:2,23 691:12,23,25 695:10 700:24 701:15 709:24 717:20 777:13 presentation 725:23 735:21 750:17 752:18 771:22 777:13 presented 627:21 660:21 663:15 674:10 685:18 685:22 697:5 702:18 714:6 723:22 732:25 733:18 744:13 760:7,10 presently 711:1 President 635:6 794:14 pressure 601:20 800:23 presumably 599:16 presumptively 715:7 pretended 744:15 pretty 602:11 617:20,24 631:15 632:23 638:9 643:3 682:1 711:20 prevent 604:19 preventing 620:11 previous 575:8 590:21 592:8 620:3 719:25 728:10 733:3 750:13 806:4 807:16 previously 769:8
price 752:4 805:16 primarily 654:22 722:5 736:17 737:6 756:4 766:2 primary 567:18 569:7 576:21 663:12 738:6 765:18,19,22 Princeton 565:24 568:3 573:19 718:5 723:17 principal 653:2 718:12 principals 732:13 principles 572:8 731:4 734:4 print 725:20 prior 575:20 702:16 private 722:5 809:14 probability 777:22,24 778:12 779:8 probably 569:19 579:2 581:8 586:8 593:25 604:13 647:5 661:8,12 743:1 813:17 problem 729:5 777:6 778:11 796:11,11,21 813:16 problems 608:23,24 654:11 657:10 723:21 757:24 769:18 780:5 796:10 812:2 procedures 790:22 proceed 567:5 741:24 proceeding 584:22 734:8 760:8 proceedings 814:18 815:7 process 576:13 577:12 617:14 626:24 629:22 641:16 648:19 649:5 657:11 667:14 680:8 700:17 703:14,15,18 708:15 766:15 795:1 799:14,16,17,23 800:5 800:15,16,25 802:8,10 808:12,14 809:1 813:4 processed 577:9 581:15 585:5,8 813:11 processes 572:9 processing 625:4 645:7 655:20 680:10 768:14 787:11 788:23 produce 806:16
produced 579:23 617:16 620:5 661:22 705:21 734:23 739:6 759:11,12 producing 759:13 product 591:3 production 664:23 665:21 666:4 670:11 721:13 728:20 741:9,12 742:19 productive 670:17 683:2 productivity 671:2,3 681:3,4 products 720:4 professional 653:11 657:22 680:12 697:10 698:20,21 699:22 700:15 702:9 721:5 722:22 723:1,7 726:10 726:18 728:12 731:17 736:4 737:13 740:21 747:20 748:11 780:19 782:17 professionally 717:21 781:21 783:10 professionals 752:5 765:1 professor 718:10,11 proffer 570:15 571:25 584:6 658:4 profit 641:21,23 642:4,5 642:8 program 566:2 573:18 608:2,8 programs 749:18 796:4 project 562:5 567:10 614:19 656:16 716:17 728:6 732:23 744:5,19 761:23 projected 741:1 743:13 projections 732:18 743:2 744:5 projects 653:12 654:12 655:3,8,23 658:23 659:5 723:16 proliferation 727:18 promise 794:3 promising 664:21 pronouncing 787:2 propagate 686:7 properties 668:2,18 677:8 773:6
property 668:11 692:10 752:1 774:20 proponents 765:25 proposal 600:4 699:17 716:17 723:11 726:12 726:21 731:5,6 765:17 765:20 782:3 proposals 775:3 proposed 568:12 569:18 573:5 577:13 597:20 599:6,13 600:12 601:1 601:22 604:5 605:21,23 607:20 611:1 619:20 621:12 656:23 658:13 662:24 663:6 689:7 698:18 699:3 701:16 728:8 732:24 735:25 738:23 780:6 789:18 793:12 807:10 proposing 657:1 prosperity 719:21 720:20 793:19,22 protect 598:15 599:17 610:16 611:16 704:4 766:16 785:25 786:6 797:7 803:23 804:4,5,14 protecting 812:20,24 813:3 protection 569:8 579:17 583:22 720:11 790:11 813:6,7 protections 618:20 619:19,21 protective 573:11 580:5 580:24 581:1 619:11,14 620:22 protocol 799:24 provide 575:8,25 633:7,7 657:13 684:23 723:3,9 726:15 736:5 738:24 765:21 770:3 provided 585:24 586:7 661:4 675:1 712:1 providing 586:4 748:16 proximity 634:4 prudent 622:7 PTI 654:8 public 561:23 562:19 564:16 614:2 622:2,3 656:4 708:11 721:22 722:4 723:9,23 736:1
737:20 740:22 747:6,21 748:12 758:16 765:19 766:9,11,14,14,16,19 771:3 778:7 781:18,18 781:20 783:19,22 784:1 784:25 785:7 790:12,20 801:5 802:6 804:9,20 808:7 812:19,20 813:4,7 814:4 815:6 publications 719:17 published 719:10,11 720:5,8,10,23 pull 579:22 664:25 667:19 682:12 688:16 706:22 708:5 pulling 588:23 590:5 666:19,24 667:1 688:18 690:25 pump 601:19 663:7,9 664:13 666:18 667:6,12 667:24 668:14,19,22 669:7 670:13 671:9 676:25 677:1,3,18,23 678:11,14,16 679:1 680:6 681:11 685:24 686:4 pumped 626:20 627:5 681:25 pumping 615:14 655:15 662:17,20 663:14,25 664:3 667:23,25 668:1 668:17 669:21,21,24 670:2,21 671:6,19 672:6 675:15,18 677:8,13,15 677:18,21,24 678:6,8,10 678:20 679:19,22,23,24 680:4 681:8,10,13,23 682:23 683:4,9 684:11 685:21 686:8 purchase 759:4 pure 648:22 purely 767:1 purple 670:22 671:11 678:5 purpose 625:10 699:10 purposes 580:1 634:19 PURSUANT 561:16 pursue 766:18 Pursuit 720:12 put 579:1 582:25 593:25 595:23 598:16 599:4
605:16 606:22 610:17 610:21 611:12 620:13 621:14 643:5 680:25 693:5,6 700:18 703:21 763:15 766:4 767:11 781:22 782:25 784:12 798:1 putting 584:24 595:3 puzzle 736:2 PW-1 664:23 665:17 668:22 669:2,15,21,25 671:2 675:3,4,17 713:14 714:2 PW-2 664:24 668:22 669:2,15,22,25 671:2 675:3,4,17 713:14 714:2 PW-3 664:24 668:23 669:3,9,14 670:1,10,12 671:4,6 675:3,3,16,25 676:21 681:8 713:15 714:2 PW-4 670:12 671:7 675:17 PW-5 670:12 671:7 675:17 P-I-C-O-C-U-R-I-E-S 634:13 P-O-W-E-R 716:7 p.m 716:1 784:18 814:18 P.O 562:6 Q quadrant 692:9 quadruple 727:24 qualifications 570:15,25 qualified 571:23 658:4 qualities 719:4 730:22,23 752:1 quality 567:20 569:5,9 569:13 572:11 579:15 581:7,25 584:9 654:17 654:18 657:10,17,20 674:9 701:4,9,12,19,24 702:13 704:3 720:13 751:18,19 763:16 quantified 751:20 quantify 748:3 quantitative 749:8 quantity 654:17,18 quarter 742:11 753:18 query 642:9
question 571:9,14 573:25 610:3 632:7 640:7 641:3 643:14 649:8 650:8 651:8 675:7 680:18 706:17 715:3 733:3 736:13 741:19 757:5 763:9 768:4 772:13 774:2 776:7 778:2 782:7 785:2 805:6 questions 570:19 610:8 622:11,25 635:10 640:24 648:12 658:7,11 662:7 672:10 707:23 710:4 711:24 713:11 714:21 715:21 717:17 717:21 720:6 724:5 726:1 759:19 760:14 761:8 765:11 770:21 776:3 779:15 780:11 quick 607:18 637:8 741:19 761:7 765:11 777:14 quickly 616:18 699:11,16 713:11 797:22 quite 578:13 613:20 615:21 618:7,11,24 657:7 717:4 719:19 725:4 755:9 776:14 793:23 797:15 798:3,5 R R 562:9 565:1 radiation 645:5 648:4 757:7 789:10,10 812:12 radioactive 561:6 568:2 568:14 591:3 603:19,21 606:16 634:10,18 645:10 726:22 730:18 752:8 754:16 767:7 773:22,24 775:15 777:19 781:1 797:11 807:24 radioactivity 752:11 753:20 757:21 758:2 790:14 797:12 radiochemistry 627:1 radionuclide 644:5,12 803:18 radionuclides 568:5 643:17,25 644:16 648:4 811:22 813:13
radium 587:8 594:6,9 627:2 radius 801:24 radon 650:22 raffinate 576:17,24 577:1 577:16 578:25 579:4,7 579:10 581:3 583:24 587:3,10,17 588:7,9,14 588:17,19 589:15 591:4 593:23 595:4,12 596:4,5 597:10,19 600:5 601:23 606:1 620:15 621:14 623:20,21 624:13,20,21 624:23,23 625:3,19 626:18,19 627:2,9,12 630:1,2 632:11 644:24 645:3 687:13 692:24 698:12 710:22 raffinates 584:3,4 rainbow 717:14,15 rainstorm 639:11 raise 578:10 594:1 595:1 729:25 785:14 795:5 raised 587:3 712:21 752:7 779:20 781:16 782:8 785:19 794:9 Ralston 812:13,13 ranch 746:1,2 random 801:20 range 617:21 618:10 634:15 635:1,3 642:17 664:19,23 667:18 670:4 673:5,10 685:20 719:1 802:6 803:8 rapidly 597:17 608:10 rate 597:5 600:7,9 615:14 615:20 631:20 649:19 650:4 667:3,4 669:24 670:2 672:8,14,17 679:18,23 680:4 685:24 686:8 rates 650:22 662:17 675:18 681:11,13 685:25 751:24 rational 686:20,21 715:25 reach 580:17 616:2 reached 574:23 660:11 reaction 647:13 reactor 741:21 796:16 797:2,3
reactors 797:2,3,25 read 579:5 605:23 625:20 626:14 637:5 646:5 651:4 661:2 692:3 713:8 765:3 785:14 801:3 reading 587:11 650:8 670:8 776:23 796:22 reagents 614:22,23 real 672:17 745:17 748:12 748:21 749:2 751:20 752:5 755:7 776:12 812:18 realistic 664:2 744:24 realized 795:19 801:2,6 really 569:4 581:9 582:20 588:3,6,22 594:19 595:20 596:7 597:20 605:8 618:19 619:17 620:7,16,23 621:2 627:12 629:6,13,22 644:25 650:14,23 678:9 711:19,19 737:2 747:25 756:17 758:21 776:24 777:20 785:8 786:8 787:24 794:1 796:20 798:22 800:25 801:8 812:22 realm 778:20,21 rearview 729:9 reason 587:7,25 738:6 746:18 753:19 767:2 793:10 reasonable 683:19 684:3 714:15 738:11 782:23 reasonably 726:18 reasoning 592:21 reasons 702:14 748:18 752:3 787:13 rebuttal 662:2,6 703:1 760:6 recalculated 600:11 632:1 recalculation 600:13,20 recall 611:22 668:21 687:19 695:22 713:4 received 587:22,24 662:4 receives 672:20 receptor 602:22 receptors 590:17 591:14 592:14,17,20 598:13 619:23,24
recess 622:16 686:23 716:1 784:18 Recession 749:13 recharge 671:25 672:2,3 672:7,14,18 673:1,2,6 673:20,24 676:4,8,9,11 676:12,13,16,20,22 682:19,22 683:3,5,7 685:17,20,25 reclamation 789:1 recognize 618:12,13 665:13 688:20,22,23 707:3 709:3 725:14 747:2 762:6 recognizes 602:17 recollection 629:1 633:22 758:18 recommendation 608:15 recommendations 573:10 recommends 597:14 599:2 608:3 reconcile 738:2 record 575:6,7 576:4,5 585:17,22,25 586:8 587:23 590:6 621:2 622:18 623:12 626:9,16 641:4,4 672:21 686:24 708:8,20 711:15 712:12 712:19 733:24 734:12 784:12 785:12 793:11 814:17 records 746:20 recount 574:23 recounts 575:2 recoverable 581:16 recovery 656:11 742:3 recreation 755:23 775:11 recreational 773:25 recreation-oriented 756:5 recruited 657:12 red 755:18 803:6 811:19 redirect 564:15 651:10 651:11 714:25 779:17 reduce 593:16 594:18 598:25 599:24 774:20 reduced 815:9 reducing 599:20 766:6 798:11 refer 567:1 732:6 758:3
refereed 719:15 referenced 635:12 referred 688:7 751:13 771:6 referring 665:19 769:1 773:21 refers 718:25 refining 728:20 reflect 627:12 705:23 706:5 reflection 706:7 reflects 660:16 regard 597:23 616:17 663:25 674:6 regarding 616:24 662:8 713:14,19 717:21 789:18 region 729:24 750:10 756:19 762:20 763:25 764:2,18,20 765:2 780:14 782:20 793:20 798:15,18 804:15 805:17 806:8 807:8 809:3 810:17 812:7 regional 607:16 688:8 692:21 693:15 694:15 696:11,13,25 709:7,20 710:20 718:25 719:8 739:25 753:10 810:8 regions 569:10,10 register 609:18 regularly 744:2 745:1 regulations 633:7 785:24 786:5 788:4 regulatory 608:3 610:4 relate 660:18 related 576:11 626:4 628:12 630:19 647:5 657:14 659:6 687:9 722:14 772:2 810:9 815:12 relation 787:23 relative 586:24 675:5 relatively 593:12 668:25 689:14 746:9 release 620:11 639:8,19 668:14 669:10,12 681:10 694:5 699:16 700:13 706:1,4 710:11 710:12 794:10 released 606:16 651:23
651:24 652:2 669:6 681:17 697:16 715:22 735:6 783:16 releases 612:24 654:21 684:24 692:22 693:22 699:4 relevance 765:16 781:16 782:8 relevant 584:22 585:6 653:10 662:22 668:18 678:1 717:18 765:18 781:4 782:13 reliability 740:25 reliable 723:3,9 relied 758:6 religious 778:25 rely 663:13 680:14 722:22 723:1,7 758:7 786:13 805:25 relying 680:7,8 684:2,10 remain 627:8 759:7 remaining 627:6 748:25 755:9 remarks 809:14 remedial 790:10 remediate 618:24 789:21 791:1 remediated 617:17,18 773:7 remediating 617:19 remediation 596:21 616:10,21,24 618:1 639:25 656:12,19 773:15,15 777:21 789:23 792:9,16 remember 629:5 634:3 639:1 666:3 667:3,4 670:4 689:15 702:2,7 708:19 795:15,17,22 809:17 810:11,11 remigration 730:11 remind 567:2 694:17 708:16 removal 601:18 603:1 604:3,17 605:12 608:19 609:14 615:13,20 621:10 626:20 remove 581:15 594:6 604:21 671:6 removed 627:5,8 removing 671:24 686:2
766:23 renaissance 770:15 render 607:22 renewable 789:2 reopen 808:20 report 574:17,22,23 575:19,20,21,23,24 576:22,25 577:8,22 579:21,23 580:3,3 583:9 583:21 584:2,6,9,11,17 585:1,1,12,21 586:3,10 586:19,20,25 587:7 590:4,15 591:23 613:2 617:2,8 623:1,12,22 624:5 625:7,9,21,25 626:3 629:11 643:20 651:14 660:16,17,21 661:7,19 662:2,4,6 663:4 665:11 670:8 685:15 703:1,4,5,8 708:25 712:22,24 717:23 722:16 731:4,16 735:1,1,9,11 736:22 738:3 739:5 740:18 750:12 754:5 758:19 759:17,23 760:12,17 761:13,21,22 763:20 765:12 767:18,25 768:8 768:22 781:12 reported 577:7 Reporter 561:21 815:5 REPORTER'S 561:3 815:2 reports 575:3,6,17 660:4 660:14 661:3,5,6 663:2 663:6,15 664:10 675:2 675:10 711:25 712:2,4 712:15,16 719:13,16 722:24 723:3,9 731:8,14 731:15,21,23 734:10 735:9 738:3 744:14 768:18 771:5 779:20,23 report's 758:13 repository 796:13 represent 585:3 637:2 674:20 696:10,12 709:8 771:2 representation 675:9 representations 665:18 692:17 representative 582:18
585:4,7 597:20 794:16 represented 583:19 693:12 696:3 724:8,9 representing 793:3 represents 753:18 Republican 794:6 request 661:24 require 609:22 667:16 678:16 required 609:13 738:2 783:5 791:10 requirement 650:20 requirements 609:24 663:23 requires 609:10 632:21 636:11 research 566:6,8 567:8 718:10 768:10 772:21 772:24 reservation 813:9 reservations 726:2 reservoir 807:21 812:13 812:14 reset 799:13,16 804:2 resident 799:11 802:2 809:16 residents 794:2,25 residual 626:20 790:14 residue 807:20 resorts 769:17 resort-based 769:15 resource 570:6 658:1 717:18 718:24,25 719:6 720:18 resources 561:5 562:12 562:15 565:24 570:10 572:10 719:1,3,7,7 724:8 748:9 761:7 766:14,15 798:20 respect 601:5 605:18 612:3 614:19 618:25 656:21 660:11 662:12 676:23 677:13 678:25 688:5,14 774:12 798:24 respond 789:20 responded 791:12 responding 792:15 response 614:21 627:23 661:23 695:6 700:13 737:3 responses 586:1 661:21
661:22 792:4,8 responsibilities 781:9 responsible 750:9 791:8 791:14 rest 739:12,25 744:8 749:1,1,5 814:2 result 578:6 595:5 747:16 765:7 799:20 815:15 results 587:25 668:21 727:5 740:5 759:15 resumed 561:17 retention 572:24 574:7 610:11 611:15 retirement 749:9,16 750:4 Retirement/investment 729:14 753:1 retrieval 742:10 review 574:2,7,19 576:14 576:19 577:3 578:5,20 589:23 592:16 597:2 601:2 602:14 606:7 611:9 612:5 619:7 660:12,23 661:18 662:1 662:22 666:3 667:8 687:10 688:3,22 698:7 710:24 722:16,19,23 723:2 732:3,7 779:25 780:15 809:1 reviewed 583:6 614:19 616:23 623:22 624:6 629:12 661:1,3,3,6,7,9 661:15,20,21 662:2,5 663:2 664:9 674:11 702:23 703:1 711:7 712:21 722:14 738:3 reviewing 626:13 662:14 703:25 714:5 revised 713:6 revive 786:10 revived 763:20,23 reviving 755:8 re-evaluate 622:2 re-initiate 657:1 re-initiation 656:23 rich 730:2 791:19 Richard 561:18 799:8 Richmond 768:9 rides 810:23 ridge 561:6 577:13 585:5 603:22 607:21 618:8
619:8 627:13 660:2 670:24 738:23 761:23 765:17,20 787:10 789:18 794:2,21,24 796:25 798:14,25 riding 788:19 791:25 right 571:5,8 580:15,16 581:17 582:3,11 583:17 590:23 592:21 596:2 597:1 603:24 605:9 612:12 614:7,14 615:20 618:1,3,16 621:24 625:17 628:22 630:1,17 633:18 634:7,15 637:12 641:19,21 642:16,25 643:19 644:18 645:1,11 646:3,8 650:12 652:13 656:5,10 659:1 665:9 670:18 672:15 698:18 700:21 714:1 717:15 738:22 741:4 744:20 746:8 747:24 750:13 752:19 754:6 757:6 758:9 759:24 762:4,21 768:3,5,23 771:10,19 775:4 776:13,25 777:3,8 777:23 779:9 780:24 785:15 787:2 788:11 790:16 797:21 798:8 804:7 rights 658:19,20,22 662:10 713:13,18 714:10 right-of-way 791:11 rigs 756:11 rise 651:9,10 665:25 rising 811:3 risk 605:16 706:9 777:14 777:15,15 778:7,7 810:8 risks 767:15 794:4 river 657:9 663:11 754:17 790:18 road 563:2 760:23 792:9 ROBERT 563:2 Robinson 656:24 rock 567:16,19,23 569:6 569:9,15,18 657:17 Rocky 562:21,23 role 626:25 658:14 722:9 730:13 rollover 791:3
romantic 746:25 room 566:17 708:11,16 783:21 784:4,24 roots 793:16 rough 642:3 roughly 635:2 round 656:6 799:18 routinely 594:6 RPI 768:22 RTI 768:10 rule 648:12 682:5 rules 785:25 788:4 run 591:2 612:8 622:10 792:4 rundown 751:24 running 696:1 runoff 591:6 rsum 570:23 S S 565:1 Sacramento 657:21 saddled 814:2 safe 757:13 787:20 797:20 safely 778:20 788:5,6 safety 742:9 787:21 sake 789:12,13 Sal 642:17 salaries 749:15 sales 806:23 salt 649:2 salts 645:2 sample 803:17 samples 578:1 583:2,3,7 583:15 585:2 588:11,15 588:20 674:9 701:13 sampling 674:8 698:23 701:9 San 663:11 724:22 736:20 739:19 755:6,21 763:7 767:20 789:23 790:17 791:24 792:19 795:2 803:22 808:9 sand 650:18 Sander 714:23 Sandler 562:21 648:9,10 659:16,17 714:24 725:12 784:6,10,16 sands 639:18 650:16,23 651:5
sandstone 803:6 sat 760:19 saturated 675:20,24 676:14 682:7,11 Saunders 784:23 809:8,9 809:12 saw 583:9 607:20 612:3 685:2 716:25 717:8 724:14 735:17 791:25 793:23 saying 593:1,3 629:6 632:4 635:5 639:1 640:14,19 647:4 692:14 776:12 780:24 781:7 807:6 says 591:2 608:3 615:11 618:2 626:17 635:18 693:14 700:7 772:12,19 scale 745:14 757:25 scales 777:10 scare 810:12 scary 796:1 scenario 611:10 632:8 scenarios 710:15 scene 791:13 scenic 719:4 scheme 642:10 school 571:10 718:4 724:21 756:9 Schwarzwalder 812:10 812:23 science 653:17,19 779:5 796:4 Sciences 570:9 scientific 641:15 scientists 798:8 scope 808:12 Scott 576:23 794:16 scout 809:21 scratch 789:11 screen 590:5 623:18 666:23 689:15 screened 666:5,7,13,14 666:16 689:14 scrubbing 627:8 scrutinize 800:5 se 687:18 search 609:10 720:1 Seasons 806:14 seat 645:1 seat-of-the-pants 776:22
second 570:7 625:8,19 629:25 637:19 647:7 730:5 736:23 740:24 742:21 782:14 803:9 806:25 second-to-last 719:20 Secretary 794:14 section 699:20 sections 657:19 sector 806:1 sectors 748:20 749:6 751:13 754:1,12 security 753:5 see 567:6 578:3 581:2,6 586:23 588:1,8,15 596:1 600:8,13,20 604:10,10 604:14 606:18,20 611:20 612:9 614:2,17 614:25 615:11,19,25 617:7,9,20 622:3,5 635:14,19,21 637:22 658:18 660:20 663:22 676:19,20 685:18,19 689:4 691:3,18 694:3,22 695:10,12,21 697:5 698:6,8,22 699:1,2 700:18 702:17,22 703:13 706:22 707:10 728:25 742:17 749:5,11 749:12 756:2 761:21 763:8,19 764:6 767:16 774:3 777:22 781:12 794:11,12 800:13 801:9 802:9 803:18 808:4 809:1 811:14 812:21,25 813:7 814:1 seed 806:18 seeds 806:19,24 seeing 584:21 611:22 694:9 695:22 764:5 seen 603:13 612:7 649:10 651:16,17,18 701:4 703:5 714:4 724:16 733:25 757:4 775:11,16 795:1 796:18 800:16 811:8 seepage 591:6 655:14 selected 664:19 selective 768:17 780:1 selenium 577:19 630:9 sell 775:6
selling 778:23,24,25 806:16 seminar 777:14 Senators 794:15 send 588:10,11 604:22 SENES 576:25 sense 572:4 603:25 638:16 656:20 730:2 751:2,7 753:3 756:8 778:17 sensing 666:15 sent 703:2 712:17 731:9 786:11 separate 729:23 746:21 separates 738:15 September 575:22,24 712:7 731:10 771:18 sequence 792:3 Serengeti 717:5 series 795:23 serious 757:4 802:25 seriousness 566:25 servant 802:6 804:9,21 serve 718:14 753:10 served 569:24 722:8 769:10 service 656:8 721:22 748:10 services 654:9 748:11 750:5 serving 799:9 set 605:9 608:7 643:16 702:15 708:14 747:18 795:16 815:9 sets 750:9 setting 766:10,11 778:3 779:4,11 settle 792:13 settlement 569:22 804:10,13,16,18 808:10 settler 626:19 settlers 626:19 seven 788:2 795:16 seventh 788:1 seven-generation 795:8 severe 611:14 sex 778:25 shading 649:21 shallow 628:19 688:7 689:15,25 690:10,10 692:19,24,25 693:1
694:4,13,18,21 696:17 696:18 697:3,8,12,20 698:5,8,11,24 699:1,2 699:14 700:1,9,22 704:10 709:17,18,22 710:6,10,21 713:2 share 795:11 800:22 shared 804:19 Sheep 562:7 659:24 712:1,17 713:12 780:13 799:14 sheet 708:15 783:25 sheets 708:12 783:22 784:20 sheriff 791:24 Sherman 562:17 Sherry 784:22 785:18,18 shifted 730:6 shocking 774:13 shopping 738:24,25 shore 611:20 short 570:19 711:19,20 shortcoming 800:1 802:5 808:25 shortcomings 801:23 shorthand 561:21 815:5 815:8 shortly 795:14 short-term 664:16 814:11 show 692:14 709:5 755:10 790:15 803:9 showed 771:21 793:21 showing 612:8 697:11 733:15 749:10 755:5,14 shown 626:22 670:19,22 671:1 714:10 741:25 743:19 788:7 shows 674:23,25 675:2 676:9 701:5 709:10 733:18 741:9 742:11,16 803:9 shrubs 806:16 shut 755:15,17 shutdown 755:17 side 642:8 643:18 657:4,6 657:7 683:15 684:5 691:21 692:11 693:17 696:1 698:19 707:17 721:21 722:1 780:8 783:7,8 790:17 808:1
sides 610:20 639:5,19 657:11 728:15 790:15 794:17 signature 815:17 signed 804:10 significant 723:21 729:22 730:2 748:9 749:23 753:9 755:20 765:24 770:13 794:4 significantly 729:17 743:15 747:3 749:17 777:5 sign-up 708:12 783:22 784:20 silenced 800:21 silver 806:1 807:6 similar 575:23 601:22 603:21 607:19 609:16 623:21 762:24 766:4,4 simple 623:15 simplified 681:14 simply 580:8 739:2 741:9 744:9 752:14,19 753:25 803:9 808:4 simulate 568:13 simulation 743:4 single 636:5 672:24 single-walled 605:23 635:8,16 sir 651:25 sit 641:17 799:5 809:10 site 568:14 571:3,4 589:11 593:10 603:18 612:3,6,9,24 629:2,7 634:5 643:9 649:10 655:18,21 656:12 659:8 663:11,24 666:10 671:22 672:20 678:2 684:24 687:25 688:1,5 688:10 690:7,24 692:9 693:10 695:7 698:2 701:12,15 702:24 706:20 709:14,25 717:12 757:16 773:9,10 789:22 790:1,13,17 791:19 792:20,20 807:18 sites 567:23 568:3 569:16 569:18,20 572:15,24 573:2,23 577:6 616:25 617:11,13 618:13,24
632:16 654:16 710:1 765:14 772:22 775:17 800:7,8,8,10 site-specific 730:14 sitting 598:19 738:22 739:2 762:15 783:20 784:3 808:19,20 situation 596:18 604:24 633:8 636:4 739:21,22 739:22 situations 778:14 six 566:8 681:20 682:25 708:14 719:11 761:1 783:24 790:1 sixth 745:19 size 599:20,24 649:18 650:18,19 700:2 746:11 763:15 776:11 802:22 sizes 649:25 ski 756:11 skier 725:1 skills 766:4,22 skip 628:6 slide 579:21,23 580:1 584:5,11 585:15,16,18 590:16,17 623:19 639:24 664:25 665:10 665:13,15 726:8,9 730:1 732:14 733:3,11,13 slides 591:20,24 592:8 665:12 726:14 734:22 748:3 slightly 590:20 slimes 650:18,21 slope 715:13,14 sloping 745:22 slotted 604:6 slowly 732:14 sludge 593:24 slurry 579:8 SMA 564:19 586:17 714:15 small 675:18 706:23 776:12 777:25 783:24 807:25 808:1 smaller 599:19 600:6 smiling 780:7 smooth 744:6 smoothly 792:5 snow 811:19 social 716:16 719:5,18
720:21 721:10 723:4,10 723:14 731:17 732:8 737:1 740:21 747:20 750:23 753:4 781:19 782:15 805:25 socioeconomic 726:11 726:18,20 732:12,17 733:1,17 740:23 747:11 762:10 783:4 808:18 soil 591:7,12,15 607:15 607:15 613:5 soils 569:2 589:19 591:11 760:17 sold 790:8 solely 782:15 solid 599:25 636:13 649:22 solids 577:21 625:17 627:9 solubility 578:16 648:25 solution 568:23 578:1 581:11,14,19,20 587:8 588:25 596:7,10,19 597:12 598:1,1,8,10 600:6 604:9,21 607:7 609:3,12,12 621:17 626:18,22 627:3,16 649:1 794:8 solutions 578:7,12 598:5 619:18 620:8 636:16,17 636:18,18 647:22 solve 794:11 solved 796:12,13 solvent 577:12 somebody 618:18 771:15 somewhat 673:2 684:15 715:13 727:16 son 725:1 soon 778:22 sooner 699:7 sorry 567:4 585:1,20 592:25 593:3 595:25 611:14 631:6,24 637:10 644:14 687:21 692:3 703:9 708:21 731:14 sort 577:16 614:17,25 623:17,24 638:14 645:6 647:3 666:15 682:5 701:5 702:9 705:7 726:15 776:7 779:11 782:5 784:6 803:18
sorts 698:11 746:8 770:15 sound 727:16 738:10 750:23 759:22 sounded 632:3 sounds 627:16 634:15 644:21 646:4 678:18 767:14,14 source 589:14 663:13 671:18 700:8 748:10,15 769:23 796:23 sourced 734:22 sources 682:18 704:12 729:6,13 748:1 749:24 750:9,25 751:4 763:24 764:5 794:13 south 655:24 656:10 670:25 681:2 695:25 730:11 776:17 southern 568:10 southwest 670:23 684:5 691:21 692:12 730:10 Southwestern 801:7 so-called 577:15 642:23 Spaanstra 562:9 564:5,6 566:20 570:18,22 571:18 576:1,6 584:20 585:9 586:6,12 622:20 626:1,2,8 637:10,14,22 638:2,5,7 641:2 646:13 646:16,24 648:8 651:12 665:9 Spaanstra's 566:24 space 669:8 704:23 span 795:8 speak 684:9 698:10 787:4 788:11 799:10 800:22 801:21 speakers 807:16 speaking 787:6 793:5 809:13 special 801:22 specialization 718:23 specialized 736:25 specific 655:9 727:2 739:21 specifically 647:18 649:23 720:5 773:1 specifications 663:22 specifics 621:7 specified 747:12 specify 650:9 727:3
737:11 spectacular 717:1,6 spectacularly 769:20 spell 566:12 spent 725:3 spill 596:9,11,12 791:18 791:22 spills 605:17 614:22 687:13 spirit 770:5 spoke 613:8 754:13 spooked 717:2 spread 736:12 spring 811:16 springtime 811:13 sprouts 806:18,21 spurts 755:12 square 602:20,25 692:17 squares 689:5,6 ss 815:2 stability 740:25 stable 611:21 stage 600:23 627:8 700:17 stages 656:16 stamps 749:20 stand 565:5 652:7 723:25 731:24 785:14 standard 581:12 813:12 standards 579:15 580:10 580:21 581:7,25 630:10 702:6 787:21 standing 570:8 standpoint 767:1 Stanford 653:18,19 staring 729:9 start 576:10 600:23 607:1 614:11 629:21 653:13 653:15 662:7 672:12 701:1 705:18 711:24 726:9 789:7 started 653:21 701:1 708:15 789:4 806:17 807:2 starting 577:16 733:13 785:3 startling 757:3 starts 625:24 665:25 758:19 state 561:23 565:7 568:15 568:20 574:18 586:2,3
603:24 609:7,10 612:18 612:20 643:1 652:9 654:13 702:15 716:3 721:15 722:11 733:23 750:5 752:15,20 753:14 761:12 763:5,6 764:22 790:21,25 791:12 793:4 794:18 814:5,9 815:1,6 stated 628:16 630:22 687:24 703:3 787:10 statement 642:12 776:10 776:20 787:12 statements 569:13 573:21 641:11 758:6 771:14 states 569:16,20 585:2 609:6,22 617:12 618:15 655:24 714:8 721:22,23 729:19 731:1 744:8 786:12,15,24 799:11,22 800:8 806:8 state-of-the-art 613:23 status 802:1 statute 780:21 statutory 610:4 stay 729:5 767:13 775:14 782:11 786:21 811:2 staying 716:21 steady 743:19 746:5 steel 728:22 stein 728:23 step 733:2 785:10 804:22 804:24 steps 804:25 stick 652:2 sticky 792:2 stigma 730:18 751:14 752:6,13 757:5,21 763:17 764:17,19 765:6 766:6,20 767:5,13 768:13 772:21,22,24 773:18,21 774:3,7,9,17 775:6,8,18,20 780:2,9 780:11,15 781:2,13 782:25 stigmas 810:8,20 Stills 562:2 564:12,13,15 575:12 576:4 585:16,19 637:8,12,18 638:3 716:13 723:13 725:15 725:19 726:3,7 734:3,11
734:21 735:4 760:13,22 771:6 779:18 783:13,17 stipulated 713:13,17 714:15 stop 647:7 714:18 stopping 812:15 stops 681:24 storage 591:3 668:12,12 669:1,3,3,11,14,14,19 669:23 671:6,13,18,22 671:25 676:15 677:9 680:23 681:6,7,12,17,20 681:21 682:2,17,19,20 682:21,23,24 683:1,8 686:3 791:8 storativity 669:13 store 740:9 stored 669:7 714:11 788:6 stories 754:15 801:2 storm 611:7 777:24 storms 610:25 611:5,15 645:12 straight 624:20 690:4 722:4 strangely 753:14 strategy 619:1 770:18 797:8 Stratus 565:19 571:17 652:24,25 654:25 658:24 659:10 stream 593:17 624:23 625:19 streams 580:23 593:13 595:5,9 596:25 624:19 Street 561:20 562:10,17 562:22 753:6 815:22 streets 774:12 stress 789:9 strike 770:6 stripe 803:9 strong 611:5,6 639:11 strontium 568:7 structural 683:15 structure 632:20,21 758:22 strung 743:7 student 778:19 students 571:15 studied 736:8 738:9 786:3 803:1
studies 568:4,11,12 570:10 645:13 646:5 647:16,21 649:9,11,20 649:23 650:3 733:17,18 774:11 775:20 study 569:11 570:11 577:23 736:14 739:24 754:12 774:18 775:11 775:12,16 studying 738:10 stuff 640:5 subcounty 764:15 subdivisions 775:4,23 subject 686:12 727:8 subjected 577:10 639:18 submit 803:11 submitted 574:17 575:22 584:7,15 585:2,24 586:2 617:3 626:3 731:16 735:13 subscribe 795:22 subsequently 577:14 substance 574:16 576:9 795:20 797:17,19 substantial 686:17 substantially 667:16 subsurface 653:7,8 654:22 694:14 695:16 790:14 subtotals 733:15 suction 704:16 suddenly 795:24 sufficient 597:16 664:18 685:8 699:25 704:25 786:6 787:22 suggestion 631:3 702:24 suit 804:2 Suite 562:3,14,22 815:22 sulfate 577:20 sulfuric 577:11 summarize 621:6 653:10 663:1 summarizes 735:10 summarizing 781:1 summary 733:16 sunflower 806:18,19,21 806:23 superfluous 607:23 Superfund 656:11 659:8 773:9,10 792:19,20 Superfunds 772:22
superhero 795:23 superhuman 795:25 superior 635:15 636:5 supernate 598:19 superstition 757:8 supplemental 661:3 suppliers 808:24 supplies 738:25 739:1 803:17 supply 654:20 655:15 658:13 662:8,10,24 664:21 665:14 667:14 675:12 676:17 684:2,11 684:21 687:6 707:2 713:12,19 739:16 808:24 support 749:18 782:18 786:25 790:5 794:6,17 794:19,21,24 795:4 798:25 supporters 741:3 supporting 793:18 suppose 692:9 708:1 supposed 709:8 727:24 742:24 800:9 805:16 supposedly 728:21 796:12 803:5 sure 571:24 602:1 606:3 627:14 631:15 635:5 651:1 653:13,15 655:11 672:11 701:3 706:17 707:6 708:7 724:12 757:3 760:25 775:5 786:5 791:21 793:1 802:18 surety 792:7 surface 567:9 589:20 591:12,15 607:16 619:23 628:13 653:9 654:6,17 661:5 662:21 662:21 687:12 694:12 694:14 697:21 709:25 712:25 715:7 surprise 774:24 775:24 surprisingly 581:10 surrounding 626:11 753:11 762:12 763:2 survey 566:7 567:7 752:10 suspended 627:9 suspension 655:5
sustain 610:2 667:7 679:23 sustainability 679:20 680:16 681:22 682:15 685:3 sustainable 669:21 671:15 679:18 680:4 686:8 767:14 798:17 806:2 sustainably 663:8 swan 796:18 swans 642:12,13,20,23 778:6,12 Sweetwater 767:21 sworn 565:6,12 652:8,15 716:2,10 785:16 synthetic 604:15 system 574:7 592:23 593:4,6 599:5 601:18 602:1 603:2 604:17,19 605:2,3,5,9,11,12 607:2 608:15,19,19 609:1,14 615:13 621:11 635:11 636:11 657:9 662:20 666:21 667:13 670:19 670:24 672:2 675:24 676:4,22 681:16 689:25 690:11 692:24 693:1,2 693:16 697:1 706:5 709:7,21,22 710:20 742:10 791:4 798:23 systems 572:24 573:13 603:16 605:15 607:1,20 608:23 704:9 706:2,3 T Tab 742:23 table 580:17 607:17 615:22 617:6,8 622:14 688:9,9 690:25 691:3,3 692:20,21 694:17 706:24 733:14 735:10 750:11 752:17 754:5 772:14 802:16,22 803:3 803:10 804:24 tables 624:3 690:21 tablespoons 802:23 tailing 590:1 601:8 647:11 790:4 tailings 569:1,2 579:6,7,8 579:10 581:23 582:10
582:12,19 587:18 588:9 588:13,14,18,23,24 589:16 591:5 594:1 596:4 598:19,20 599:3 601:6,7 605:25 606:1,9 608:5 610:10 611:23 612:11 614:15 615:23 620:17,18 621:13,15,19 624:16,18,24 626:21 627:6,18 637:16 639:8 639:14 641:3 643:25 644:10,17,21,25 645:8 645:15,17,20,21,24 646:1 647:12,15,19 648:13,14 649:11,12,23 650:9,10,17 651:17,21 654:19 655:12,20 657:4 657:8 680:9 687:13 690:12 692:23,25 694:6 697:17 698:12,15,19 699:5 704:11 707:20 709:9,11 710:2,23 773:12,19 775:9,15 tails 642:14 777:12,13,17 take 566:23 581:19 588:15 610:6 619:8 622:15 629:12 633:10 635:4 637:19 640:12 641:23 642:4,11 646:11 646:12 647:24 648:2 686:20 693:9 711:17 713:21 715:25 716:24 728:3,8 747:13,14 752:14 757:5 761:9,11 762:16 767:9 782:21 802:13 807:11 809:9 810:23 taken 590:15 591:22 622:16 637:13,14 716:1 728:13 746:10 747:10 748:21 750:14 761:12 784:18 815:8 takeoff 755:16 756:3 takes 770:4,5,5 talk 591:17 607:17 625:8 629:4 636:9 639:3,21 641:10 664:5 713:10 714:17 735:16 746:23 746:25 747:6,7 763:17 talked 587:2 593:12 598:9,13 620:2 627:15
628:4 630:21 635:8 636:7 642:13 644:5 645:11 660:15 665:25 666:2 689:15 733:6 736:21 747:19 764:25 765:4 talking 589:21 592:8 600:25 608:13 609:23 614:24 624:1 631:22,25 635:24 636:2 639:4 644:1,4 645:2,17,18,25 650:11 657:19 658:12 665:17 675:18 687:20 689:1 693:15 701:4,8 707:12 714:18 715:3 730:17 738:1 745:20 811:18 Tank 791:9 tanker 791:3 Tarlton 760:8 tarp 808:4 task 570:1 607:23 taught 657:15,21 724:20 taxpayer 804:5 taxpayers 814:1 teachers 728:16 teams 791:19 technical 567:1 641:15 654:15 722:7 748:11 789:6 techniques 704:15,18 technological 778:15 technology 633:15 640:9 640:15 780:5 790:22 791:9 798:16 telephone 708:17 television 795:16 796:4 tell 565:17,20 586:25 597:4 607:13 633:22 652:20 653:3 707:16 759:16 778:19 telling 774:23 tells 740:14 Telluride 754:17 755:21 755:23 769:2,12 776:15 787:6 789:4,16 790:1 799:9,15 801:2 802:2,3 803:7,14,20,21 807:18 808:9 809:13,16 810:13 810:22,24 811:16 temperature 568:5
ten 568:16 622:15 633:23 655:1 658:25 724:7 783:19 809:22 812:4 tend 715:12,12 729:2 784:7 tens 581:7 term 567:4 570:7 613:8 613:10 676:8 678:20 684:11 800:6 terms 567:1 569:13 573:16 600:1,3 604:25 620:6 621:7 625:18 628:8,10,14,15 630:12 630:23 631:16 632:24 634:11 668:7 682:15 683:20 684:20,25 693:9 693:21,22 727:5,6,14 730:21 735:24 742:1,3 742:19 749:2 755:7 769:11 801:24 810:5 Terra 654:3 terrible 777:20 terrorism 788:9 test 667:23 668:22 676:25 677:1,3,8,14,15 678:10 678:17,20 679:2,6,9 681:8 684:11 795:18 797:2 tested 596:24 667:21,22 testified 565:13 630:13 638:10 648:15 652:16 716:11 744:23 testify 624:17 634:22 646:20,21 760:5 testifying 593:1 609:18 609:21 647:1 702:3 744:17 745:25 772:1 testimony 566:18 574:17 575:1 576:9 599:10 602:16 613:8 617:2 619:5 621:7 623:18 626:5 628:25 630:19 638:11 660:2,7,24 665:4 692:17 698:4 699:9 702:2,7 723:20 732:21 734:18 750:17,19 760:6 780:10,12,18 795:2 805:1 testing 597:2,5,15 664:16 664:16 681:16 684:19 804:19,19,20
tests 668:17 677:18 678:6 679:2 684:9 Texas 767:22 text 584:8 thank 565:16 566:3 571:18 574:9,13 583:12 584:14 589:3 612:2 622:9 627:10,23 639:23 640:22,24 643:13 659:12,21 660:6 676:23 677:11 687:1 692:13 707:24 711:11 731:2 732:1 760:14 761:5 764:16 767:16,24 768:16,20,24 770:19 776:2 779:14 783:13 787:4 789:13,16 792:22 792:24 799:3,7 809:7,11 814:14 thanked 804:23 Thanks 576:7 652:1 thereof 586:1 thermals 811:3,10 thesis 653:23 they'd 663:13 thick 636:24 638:19 thickness 632:24 675:19 675:20,24 676:14 682:7 682:11 thing 604:4 610:22 643:1 644:4 684:13 728:1 735:20 742:4 769:11 775:21 things 570:1 616:7 618:23 631:11,11 636:2 641:18,22 642:14 643:6 643:11 645:23 661:8 705:10 726:24 732:16 746:22 750:21 760:9 765:3 770:16 774:12,17 778:15 785:25 786:3 807:15 812:24 think 567:2 569:3 570:14 571:7,10,20 573:25 576:22 579:12 585:6 587:16,21 592:21,23 594:7 595:20 602:9,12 602:15,25 603:4,23 606:20 610:25 611:25 612:7,25 615:22 616:1 617:22 618:22 619:7
621:9 622:11,13 624:14 625:2,21 626:7 629:19 630:6,13,22 631:13 633:13 635:23 637:15 638:11 640:8,20 643:9 643:10 645:2 649:14,20 664:5,7 666:2 674:3 683:14 686:19 688:10 693:13 700:19 705:13 706:6 726:24 728:1,11 729:17 734:3,6 737:3 740:17,18,24 745:4 746:23 750:25 756:6 757:7 758:15,18 760:20 761:9,10 763:19 765:8 765:16,18,25 769:4,5,9 769:18 770:6,9,12,15 771:5 775:10 778:10,11 778:16 779:6 782:1 787:18,25 793:21 798:3 798:4,12 799:25 800:3 802:1,4 804:11 805:9 806:9 807:7 808:11 810:20 812:1 813:1 814:6 thinking 595:3 602:25 647:25 649:14 739:9 795:25 thinner 630:24 third 635:2 728:11 800:14 806:24 807:19 Thomas 564:11 716:5,9 724:1 726:6 761:3 770:23 776:4 779:17 thorium 797:3,10,22 798:12,18,20 thoroughly 611:25 792:8 thought 571:2 628:9 664:20 679:19 680:20 689:8 726:16 788:21 thousand 812:11 thousands 581:8 618:2 797:14,18 threat 598:25 766:20 810:16 threatening 779:9 three 570:18 583:17 584:4 587:14 664:19,22 665:21 667:22 670:9 671:12 721:20 736:19 745:19 752:24 763:6
793:25 796:19 806:14 three-county 736:12 750:2 three-quarter 599:25 631:19 three-quarters 599:14 three-year 570:7 thresholds 594:19 630:18 thumb 682:5 thunderstorm 642:15 thunderstorms 642:16 tied 741:12,13 748:13 764:7,7,8 769:16 774:10 timber 719:2 time 568:19 582:19,23 584:21 588:21 597:16 597:22 598:6 607:10 609:5 618:15 622:9 634:2 636:25 642:24,24 645:20 649:15 659:3 663:17 672:8 673:13 674:2 676:3,10 679:7 682:24 683:6 686:2,9,10 686:20,21 689:20 690:23 691:24 694:24 694:25 695:11 703:11 710:6,10 714:15 715:8 715:25 724:15,17,19 725:4,5 728:4 735:12 742:18 752:6 757:14,25 759:18 768:25 769:22 771:13 774:24 775:21 775:24 784:8 790:10 810:14 811:6,6 813:7,8 813:11 815:8 timely 792:10 times 581:8,11,24 593:8 629:6 676:12 687:24 690:9,17 691:25 698:6 700:24 761:1,10 811:13 812:11 timing 622:24 Tipton 794:16 title 719:23 758:21 812:18 titled 707:7 today 566:18 576:10 619:6 660:25 717:20 756:22 782:17,25 790:20 799:10 801:16
801:22 802:8 805:2 809:5 told 635:1 737:22 787:19 790:20 tomatoes 807:1,3,5,12,13 tons 647:21 667:15,16 773:12 806:23 top 587:4 598:20 601:11 604:16 648:14 650:4 742:15,16 775:4 808:4 total 577:21 617:18 669:25 675:5 681:10 733:19 753:17,25 756:1 totally 630:8 638:12 724:16 738:19 totals 733:15 touched 593:14 tough 661:12 toured 809:22 tourism 729:16 745:7,21 788:18 towering 738:15 town 740:7 748:14 769:24,25 799:9,14,15 801:1,21 803:21,22 808:8 809:13 towns 747:1 753:12 769:21,21 toxic 580:20 593:18 595:6 595:9,14 596:10,25 598:11 609:12 619:25 620:14,15 636:18,18 645:6 648:3 774:25 777:19 800:7,12 toxicity 576:11 596:11,14 630:7,25 631:8,22,23 trade 739:13 748:14 753:10 trade-offs 778:21 779:1,5 traditional 753:13,15 Tragic 788:7 training 573:19 722:23 723:2,8 736:25 transcript 561:3 815:11 transformed 730:25 transition 719:22 transitions 769:22 transmissive 668:3,25 Transmissiveness 668:5 transmissivity 677:9 689:24
transmitted 668:6 transmitting 684:22 transport 566:9 569:1 605:24 654:5 748:12 803:2,8,19 transportation 736:11 791:11 transported 788:6 811:1 transuranic 571:3 travel 725:3 738:17 811:2 Travers 564:8 591:17 607:17 629:4,14 652:7 652:11,11,13,14,19 658:8 659:22 675:11 687:2,4 692:4 709:1,2 711:22 715:5,9,18 Travis 562:2 576:7 637:10 treat 759:9,10 treated 759:4,6,6 treatment 596:19 632:10 trees 806:16 trench 635:17,20 trenched 636:3 trend 746:9,16 Triangle 768:11 triangles 665:21 tried 777:13 tries 737:16 triple 727:24 759:14 trips 716:23 tri-county 750:10 truck 638:1,2 762:10,25 791:6 807:24 808:2,5 trucked 663:11 truckers 766:23 trucking 663:10 791:7 trucks 807:20 808:8 true 571:3 583:13 620:8 627:16 632:19 640:4 647:4 744:12 756:6 770:12 777:7 815:11 truly 788:14 809:5 trustees 571:12 try 641:17 642:1 665:18 706:2 708:19 721:3 748:3 752:2 766:16 767:2 774:13,18 778:2 778:19 trying 573:10 704:23 706:8 716:24 721:7
730:4 757:11 760:25 770:16 776:19 807:21 tsunami 741:20 Tuesday 651:13 713:9 tumbles 752:4 turn 732:2 771:20 805:10 turned 756:4 787:20 turning 696:7 turns 811:19 two 570:18 575:3 577:7 579:4 583:2,2,7 588:5 597:11 601:8,9,12,17 602:23 603:2 604:3 612:8 615:12,13 617:13 624:19 625:1,6 660:4 669:23,24 670:11 671:10,21 677:4,19 682:18 692:13 704:19 719:14 738:15,17 745:19 746:14,18 750:3 765:10 771:5 780:1,3,8 790:14 793:15 797:1 800:13 802:23 807:22 two-day 597:19 677:13 677:15,18 678:10 two-thirds 682:7 type 592:15 606:23 609:23 704:6 720:18 757:1 types 613:15 647:19 774:16 typewritten 815:10 typical 598:24 615:3 677:15 typically 592:16,17 615:5 T-R-A-V-E-R-S 652:12 U Udall 794:15 Uh-huh 695:2 uh-oh 615:20 ultimate 782:9 ultimately 783:8 805:4 unattractive 730:23 uncertain 670:18 673:2 673:20,21 uncertainty 685:17 unclear 759:8 undergraduate 565:22 718:3 774:7 underground 568:17
638:13 underline 748:8 749:7 underlines 730:1 undermine 763:24 underneath 601:14 603:3,5,17 605:12 607:8 607:14 609:14 612:12 621:11 632:15 636:11 640:3 681:5 710:2 773:13 understand 579:20 618:5 642:21 643:16 646:22 693:3,5 701:21,23 702:12 703:25 706:15 721:10 723:10,21 727:12 756:17 781:19 782:3 794:1 803:1,3 805:12 understandable 794:19 800:24 801:15 understanding 578:19 578:20,25 609:21,24 618:16 624:15 625:13 625:14 639:13 650:15 663:12 664:14 666:12 668:9,19 670:8 678:13 678:21 698:15 700:23 701:11 744:21 794:25 800:2 805:3 understood 677:11 689:7 714:7 undertake 803:15,23,24 undertaken 620:22 unemployment 749:20 unfair 640:2,4 unified 762:23 Union 562:14 657:25 unique 607:3,4,11 unit 696:8 United 569:16,20 618:14 655:24 729:19 730:25 744:8 786:12,15,24 799:11,22 800:8 806:8 units 689:25 University 565:23,25 653:18,20 718:4,6,11,15 723:18 767:18 unknown 646:7 unneeded 607:23 unprofessional 721:4 unsaturated 592:11
596:20 607:9 613:5 688:8 704:17 Unusual 747:5 updated 575:24 750:13 750:14 752:17 upside 755:3 upward 745:22 746:16 up-front 621:24 up-gradient 696:10 uranium 561:6 568:2,7 568:17 570:11,12 577:14 581:10,16,18 592:9 594:9 595:9 608:24 616:17,24 617:12,14,16 618:14,17 620:4,19 624:22 632:18 644:11 655:17,20 660:2 719:1 721:12,14 728:9,9 738:23 739:17 741:6,8 741:12,15,16 742:13 745:5 754:19,20,21 756:3 757:4,12,22 759:11,12 763:21,23 767:19 768:13 770:14 770:14 773:3 780:3 785:21,23 787:11,23 788:5,23 789:10 792:6 793:18,25 794:6,18 795:12,19 796:1,5,8,10 796:21,23 797:2,5,5,13 797:23 798:2,13,21 799:21,24 805:5,16 809:17 810:1,9,18 813:5 813:11 uranium-connected 726:17 uranium/vanadium 604:24 Uravan 672:22 675:6 755:17 813:22 urges 795:9 use 594:5,10 607:10 616:1 622:7 624:13 684:3 725:15 727:10 742:20 759:17 766:14 778:8 779:4 780:2 792:25 797:16,17 805:4 805:7 807:10,14 811:1 usually 588:10 673:5 689:21 766:13 Utah 725:4 742:13 763:3
763:7 765:7 767:20 775:9 781:11 803:6 utilities 722:6 724:10 748:13 utility 722:10 UT-35 795:24 U.S 566:7 567:7 618:2,3 626:3 741:8,12 742:8 793:7 794:16 797:4 V vadose 607:9,12 628:21 628:23 688:7,11,15 692:19 693:23 694:3 695:8 696:23 699:14 704:10,14 706:14,16 709:6,20 vagueness 736:24 valley 665:25 696:6 715:15 753:22 800:17 811:5,12,14,21 valuable 806:7 value 587:5 720:2 759:10 759:12 794:23 values 578:4,15 581:4 587:9,11 720:17 752:2 774:20 793:15 795:6 vanadium 577:15 581:18 592:9 624:22 625:3 626:18,24 627:15 630:2 789:25 807:18 vanished 812:9 variability 672:19,24 675:22 676:2,4,19 variable 676:10 683:5 variance 733:12 735:19 735:21 736:5 varies 673:24 variety 649:24 655:16,22 704:17,24 722:2 various 598:2 645:23 654:20 662:16 721:23 733:17 742:11 vary 673:24 vast 729:6 738:6 742:18 vastly 790:21 vegetables 788:25 806:12 venture 792:12 version 750:15 versus 596:12 598:1
793:16 vertical 638:23 vetting 643:19 view 654:3 707:5 729:10 743:24 744:24 766:8,10 806:2 views 735:17 Virginia 570:11,12 659:8 768:10,14,17 virus 810:16,18 visit 753:12 visited 724:19 visiting 724:17 visitor 729:16 753:8 764:8 visitors 729:16 748:12 visitors/second 773:25 vistas 719:4 visual 611:19 635:24 636:1 665:18 728:17 vital 740:24 vitality 751:6 756:18 763:24 769:13,16 805:20 voir 564:5,5,9,12 570:17 570:21 572:16,19 658:6 658:8 723:24 724:1 volatile 742:14 volatility 746:2 volume 561:3 615:23 617:17 624:7,8 629:11 637:15,16 641:5 663:4 680:20,20,23 681:10,15 688:21 691:2 707:1 volumes 625:1 661:1 vulnerabilities 791:4 vulnerable 753:24 754:2 754:8,9,14 V-A-D-O-S-E 628:23 W W 562:17 wage 759:9 wages 749:15 759:3 waiver 633:8 walk 623:17 726:9 Wall 753:6 want 566:18 585:15 614:2,10 616:1 626:9,14 631:11 638:3 641:4 643:8 652:4 662:7,12
679:6 682:6 686:14 726:15 728:25 733:2 736:23 743:2 744:24 749:7 766:12,14 779:5 783:6,21 786:20 789:7 794:12 800:18 wanted 571:12 587:9 591:18 593:14 665:18 677:4 687:6,8 733:23 734:1 763:8 779:19 784:24 803:12 wants 729:12 747:25 761:2 766:19 784:1 war 730:6 795:13 797:4,9 warm 811:3 wash 657:5 Washington 567:15 643:1 655:18 721:16 wasn't 578:14 583:24 594:19 624:17 628:11 628:18 629:7 631:22 632:1 633:21 640:19 643:2 713:20 724:12 735:12 756:13 775:2 781:8 waste 568:10,14 571:3,3 572:24 574:7 576:12,17 577:4 578:7,21 587:19 593:13,17 595:5,9 596:25 598:22 600:24 601:3 603:19,20,21 604:1 609:12 620:5,6 624:19,23 628:5 632:13 632:21 633:6 634:11,12 634:18 636:13,13 647:19 654:18 655:14 687:9 726:22 757:15 774:25 788:6 796:11 807:20 wastes 620:12,13 watched 796:3,4 watching 716:23 757:17 water 565:24 567:9,12,20 569:5,8,13 572:7,10,10 578:17 579:14,17 580:21 581:7,12,25 582:22 588:25 589:20 591:16 594:8 598:18,19 600:10,13,15,16,16 601:13,19 607:16 619:23 628:13 631:21
631:25 632:5 639:16 644:19 648:22,24 650:2 650:10,21,25 653:6,9 654:6,17,20 655:15 657:3,9,17,20 658:1,13 658:19,20,22 661:5 662:8,9,10,21,21 663:10 663:13,19,23 664:17,18 665:14 666:1,4,6,9,19 666:24 667:1,5,11,11,13 667:17,24 668:6,8,9,13 668:15,15,19,20 669:1,6 669:7,12,17,19 671:6,18 671:21 673:25 674:7,8 674:14,25 675:3,12,13 675:19 676:15,17,21 677:6 679:15 680:9,13 680:23 681:6,9,12,15,21 682:9,10,12,15,18,19,21 682:23 684:2,5,6,11,16 684:21,22,25 685:9 686:3 687:6,12 688:9 689:17,17,19,20,21,22 689:23,25 690:2,15,22 690:23 691:10,12,13,15 691:18,19,23,25 692:15 692:20,21,22,23,25 694:1,2,3,7,9,12,16 695:1,10,24 697:23,25 698:2 699:18 700:24 701:4,6,8,11,14,18,18 701:19,24,24 702:12 704:16 705:12 707:2 710:6,10,23 712:25 713:11,13,18,19,19 714:1,10,10 715:10 719:4 788:9,23,24 805:4 805:6,8 807:9,11 waters 588:22 watershed 792:19,21 water-related 654:23 waving 728:23 way 574:1 582:12 596:17 600:20 604:8 605:8 610:12,15 611:21 620:17 637:5 641:25 642:7,21 643:16 647:2 676:24 679:2 705:16 710:19 723:22 730:6 732:17 734:5 739:20 743:10,21 746:19
753:19,25 770:2,3 777:21,22 782:2,6 783:2 784:21 785:22 794:11 803:6 807:14 812:17 ways 593:16 677:22 717:4 721:1 wean 794:12 wearing 622:14 week 662:3 weigh 781:20 weighed 783:9 weighing 758:16,19,21 783:6 welcoming 794:2 welfare 803:24 804:6,15 wells 562:10 664:23 665:19,20,21 666:5,7,25 667:22,25 668:22,24 669:2,17,21,23,24 670:9 670:11,14,21 671:12 673:15 674:1,2,6,8 675:14 677:7 678:11 683:4,5 685:21 689:6,9 689:11,14,16,17 690:1,3 690:16,22 691:25 692:13 694:4 698:9,14 699:1,13 700:10 701:15 701:16 702:20 704:14 704:19,21,25 705:1 706:19 707:10,11,22 713:2,14 well-being 720:12,14,21 721:10 787:25 well-done 726:18 well-prepared 790:23 went 601:19 617:15 641:23 654:2,8 718:5 722:8 743:11 746:13 759:13 769:6 786:3 796:9 809:21 810:18 weren't 663:9 678:9 734:9 780:15 787:20 west 698:19 719:22 736:15 737:9 738:13,16 739:7 740:3 741:10,18 743:4,6,9,23,25 747:1 748:5,17 762:1,2 763:1 764:11,13,20 769:14,15 776:17 790:1 793:18,24 794:1,20,24 798:24 805:5,6 808:16
western 562:5 655:23 692:10,11 719:24 724:14 728:19 799:11 wetlands 720:18 wetted 597:9 we'll 622:15 628:7 629:21 633:12 636:22 711:18 784:2 we're 600:25 616:2 694:9 787:22 814:16 we've 635:18 796:18 wheel 614:13 whereof 815:16 wherewith 792:12 White 742:12 743:21 765:7 wholeheartedly 805:11 wide 617:20 637:6 639:2 733:12 735:18 736:5 widely 735:22 wider 686:2 Wild 562:21,24 wildlife 570:25 577:1 594:18 595:14 598:15 599:18 619:24 621:17 630:13,14,15,18,20 631:10 784:9 willing 570:16 willingness 804:23 wind 569:1 591:12 639:6 639:20 788:10,12 803:7 winds 811:15,16 windstorm 639:11 wind-blown 644:9 win-win 766:3 WIPP 571:3 wise 798:17 wish 708:18 741:3 769:12 wishes 728:5 withdraw 571:14 withdrawal 714:2 withdrawn 663:10 witness 565:6 570:15 610:5 626:13 651:23 652:8 658:4 659:20 686:25 708:24 715:22 716:2 771:13,14 783:16 810:4 815:16 WITNESSES 564:3 wonderful 724:15 word 607:12 633:11
635:4 661:2 698:9 730:18 words 642:13 689:23 work 565:19 567:11,12 567:22 569:25 609:2 616:4,5 640:9,11,18 653:23 654:2,4,6,8 655:2,9 658:19,23,24 662:13 717:17 721:17 723:17 729:25 738:7,8 739:4 749:23 752:10 764:21 766:5 767:11 worked 567:6,14,23 568:8,15,20 572:23 654:7,10,11,12,24,25 655:8,16,17 656:1,5,7,8 656:13,21,22 657:6,7,11 659:3,6,7 721:14,21 722:1,5 723:19 756:8 785:21,23 797:3 workers 738:24 742:19 766:4 workforce 763:15,15 working 571:16 653:21 654:10,14 656:9 658:12 658:14 725:24 812:22 works 647:3 659:10 693:9 720:8,19,23 721:12 784:21 world 621:1 672:17 730:6 788:7 793:8 798:4 806:9 worn 783:20 worried 732:22 758:1 782:1 worries 814:9 worst 758:9 worth 594:19 807:13 wouldn't 595:22 609:4 630:8,9 635:14,20,21 678:19 695:15 700:11 752:24 767:13 775:24 writing 721:2,7 written 575:1 613:8 617:2 624:4 660:1,7,24 661:4 731:21 750:18 765:4 803:12 wrong 573:3,5 614:6,12 616:12,19 618:23 641:18,22,24 643:11 763:22 wrote 660:5 712:4,15
Wynkoop 562:22 Wyoming 767:21 Y ya 814:1 yards 617:18 yeah 568:1 582:5 593:21 598:16 609:9 624:2,10 631:25 632:2 634:1 635:25 636:1 637:22,25 638:5 646:10 665:9 666:17 674:3,7,25 682:5 683:14 684:10 703:9 709:1 717:1,13 732:15 734:16 785:3 year 567:15 622:2 672:24 673:14,23,24,24 676:18 685:19 805:5,8 806:10 806:24,25 807:2,3,13 810:18 yearly 614:1 years 566:8 567:17 569:4 573:21 611:2 618:16 620:10,20 633:23 655:2 657:16 658:25 663:20 671:7,14 672:25 674:24 675:21 676:11,11 678:12,17 679:20,22,24 680:4,17,19 681:20,24 681:24 682:1,25 683:9 686:5,7 718:16,19 723:18 724:7,20 728:7 728:10,10 729:15 743:5 743:8,11,12,16,17,19,23 745:11 770:11 776:24 787:6,14,24 788:2 789:5 789:16 790:19 797:11 797:15,18,20 799:22 806:14 807:17 809:18 809:22,23,25 810:12 812:4,5 813:14 year-round 806:22 yelled 708:18 yellow 696:1,12 yesterday 593:8 594:7 596:23 599:9,10 602:16 628:25 665:3 666:1 690:5 702:1 yes-or-no 772:13 yield 570:16 682:4 York 777:23 809:19
young 796:7 Yucca 571:7 yummy 788:25 Z zero 742:20 ZIP 740:2,3 zone 592:11 596:20 607:9 607:9,12 613:5 628:21 666:10 688:8,8,11,15 689:16 692:19,20 693:23 694:3 695:8 696:23 699:14 704:10 704:14,17 706:15,16 709:6,19,20 zoom 707:6 $ $100 813:21 $11 813:24 814:1 $200 656:11 $240,000 806:22 $30 807:13 $48,000 807:4,5 $8 806:22 807:1 0 01 669:10 681:8 1 1 575:13,17,20 624:8 1st 791:3 1,000 667:15 1,400 733:20 737:4,23 772:3,16 1.1 626:23 1.8 577:17 579:3 582:4,5 582:6 597:10 623:20 624:1 627:12,17 628:1 630:6 1:05 686:23 1:54 716:1 10 634:19 692:5 694:20 695:14 697:23 10,000 634:12 10:01 622:16 10:22 622:16 100 610:18 621:13 663:7 680:6 737:5,6,8,24 743:17 100-year 642:15 1045 561:20
11 584:12 11-million-dollar 813:20 11:57 686:23 115 590:8 116 590:19 733:20 761:22 761:25 12 561:2 564:20 584:13 586:17 688:21 733:21 737:15 743:5,11,16,23 12,300 581:11 1318 561:2 14 675:25 815:18 140 637:6 638:19 140-by-20-foot 638:17 141 667:10,13 791:6 145 790:1,15 15 575:20,21 618:9 623:1 661:1 790:3 806:23 150 805:17 1525 562:17 1536 562:22 16 691:19,22 16th 815:22 1700 562:10 175 663:7 680:6 714:1 18 745:20 18,000 811:10 1908 790:2 1911 562:3 1920 790:6 1930 742:1 1930s 758:15 1950s 790:7 808:21 1975 718:21 723:20 1979 793:23 1981 746:12 1990 654:7 1995 720:11 1998 743:5 790:8 2 2 615:23 626:22 637:16 641:5 665:17 669:22 673:7 692:2 703:2 712:22 731:12,13 742:23 750:11 771:6,10 2A 731:12 742:22 771:6 2nd 649:17 662:5 2,000 634:12,19 2-inch 599:13 600:1
631:19 2.3 691:18 2:18 716:1 20 567:17 569:4 573:20 606:11 638:23,24 639:1 639:2 644:2 671:12 692:5 694:20 695:14 697:23 807:11 200 569:20 797:11,20 2000 746:19 2002 654:24 2003 768:22 2006 748:6 2007 674:3 691:19,22 2008 576:22 577:8 665:15 674:4 691:20,23 2009 743:5 802:15 2010 574:18,19 575:20,21 575:22,23,24 583:23 586:21 623:1 626:4 712:6,7,7 748:7 761:14 771:9,9,10 2011 623:7,8 712:9,13 761:19 767:17 2012 561:4,19 649:17 703:3 712:22 735:6 791:3 815:17 2016 815:18 216 815:22 22-year 809:16 226 587:8,11 238 562:3 24 791:5 25 573:21 799:22 27-year 799:10 28 575:22 29 691:20 3 3 624:8 637:15 667:11 692:3 3.4 691:22 30 618:16 620:10,20 718:19 729:15 743:12 770:11 787:14 30th 815:17 30,000 806:21 30-plus 812:4 300 629:9 666:7 667:1 696:8 744:16 762:16,20 805:17
300,000 773:12 303 562:22 32 733:14 320 743:13,20,20 3200 562:10 33 787:6 349 562:6 35 789:16 4 4 626:10 670:1 707:1 4.4 579:12 582:4 624:13 624:25 625:4,19,22 627:19 628:1 629:21 630:1,3,5,6 4.44 626:23 4.5 577:25 587:4,5 630:6 4:07 784:18 4:20 784:18 40 611:2 663:20 672:7,8 673:14 676:18 678:12 678:16 679:25 680:4,17 683:8 685:18 686:5,7 717:2,10 718:16,19 723:18 728:6,10 743:19 40s 793:20 796:25 40-year 678:17 680:5,11 680:13 686:9 400 629:9 666:7 667:1 696:8 807:2 43 792:18 44 562:14 45 743:8 460 629:2 634:7 48 597:11 5 5 629:11 663:4 672:5 673:12,19,22 676:8 691:2 707:1 746:14 752:18 754:5 5-1 688:20 5.1 688:21 5:05 814:18 50 634:8 711:17 807:17 809:23,25 810:7 50s 795:21 796:25 50-mile 801:24 803:7 500 667:15 807:2 500-ton-per-day 667:9 540 618:3
56 803:20 565 564:4 57 590:7 570 564:5 572 564:5 574 564:6 58 590:18 586 564:20 6 6 641:5 691:3 735:6 6,000 807:3 60 639:2 671:11,17 681:23,25 728:10 790:19 60-mil 601:11,14 600 562:14 693:20 6215 563:2 622 564:6 63 600:4 640 635:1 641 564:7 650 815:22 652 564:8 658 564:9 659 564:9 687 564:10 7 7 673:8 732:15 7th 562:18 761:18 7.5 577:25 587:4 70s 755:8 793:20 796:17 711 564:10 716 564:12 724 564:12 726 564:13 75 692:7 746:15 805:4,8 807:9 761 564:13 770 564:14 776 564:14 779 564:15 785 564:16 8 8 673:9 8:30 785:4 8:37 561:19 80 606:10 746:15 80s 755:9,19,22 769:6 80-plus 793:8
800,000 787:23 788:2 80202 562:23 815:22 80203 562:11,18 80228 562:14 80303 563:3 80540 562:6 81301 562:4 83 805:16 85 737:5 9 9 561:4,19 9th 791:15 95 692:7 96 720:11

Pinon Ridge Hearing Transcripts Part 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Pinon Ridge Hearing Transcripts Part 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pinon Ridge Hearing Transcripts Part 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

and Notary Public within and for the State of

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

We would like to call

educational background. A Yes. I have an undergraduate degree in

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

employment history. A After I got my Ph.D., I did a National

interrupting, Dr. Maest.

I did take a cue from

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

And a lot my work was on -- I did

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

568 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A Okay. Yeah. Maybe I should say a little

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

your work for the EPA.

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

And I'm not playing games, because people

One last, very important question:

MR. SPAANSTRA: I have no objections.

THE HEARING OFFICER:

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

THE HEARING OFFICER: Expertise noted. MR. PARSONS:

Thank you, Your Honor.

reached in that report accurately recount your opinions? A Yes.

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

recounts your opinions? A Yes. I believe we have two reports. One

them available, I would appreciate it. MR. STILLS: I believe it's in

1 is the December 15, 2010 report.

I would say that the December 2010 report

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

It's in the record. That's fine.

at those issues? A The primary one was the Kleinfelder

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

to an acid leach using sulfuric acid.

And that had a pH of 1.8, so it was

Court Reporting Videography Digital Reporting Transcription Scanning Copying

AGREN BLANDO COURT REPORTING & VIDEO INC

My understanding is that the raffinate that would