|
Hi friends, Today I received this e-mail from the legislative liaison (Heidi Van Huysen) for the Dept. of Natural Resources in response to some of the questions you and other raised about the recent drilling activities you've observed up your way. Please feel free to forward this on to others who were wondering about the recent activities up there. Yours,
Randy >> Rep. Fischer, The following information has been compiled in response to the questions you raised in your previous email. Question 1: Some of the Nunn residents were surprised to see Powertech out drilling again with past week, as they were under the impression that the latest NOI application was incomplete. Do you know if Powertech has actually been granted a new permit to conduct prospecting pursuant to their June 23 application? Response: Powertech has not been given any authorization to drill under the NOI submitted 6-23-08. The hole they started drilling last week was approved under their 2007 NOI (P2007015). It is fully bonded. I inspected this drill site today and no problems were observed. Question 2: In talking to the drillers, some of the residents also indicated the drillers had not obtained permits for the completion of monitoring wells, as required by the state engineer's office. Response: I’ve talked to some locals about this subject on the phone over the past week, and talked to two nearby residents to the currently operating drill site while I was inspecting today. From those conversations, it is my understanding that some residents approached the drillers (not Powertech personnel) and asked about permits and permit numbers, and that the drillers were dismissive and stand-offish. The hole that is currently being drilled is properly permitted and bonded by DRMS, and is not a monitoring well, and thus does not need to be permitted by the State Engineer. In all of the monitoring holes and pump test holes that Powertech has drilled over the past 1.5 years, to my knowledge (and I’ve worked hard to stay on top of their activities through review of DRMS and SEO documents, site inspections, etc.) they have done the required permitting with DRMS and SEO for all holes. Question 3: Can you tell me if Powertech has modified their previous NOI after the effective date of SB-228? If so, will those modifications be made public? Are they still drilling under the previous NOI? Response: Powertech has not modified the 2007 NOI. Since there have been no modifications, the information in the 2007 NOI will not be made public at this time. As we have discussed, I will be contacting Powertech to determine where they stand on previous indications of willingness to make portions of the 2007 NOI public. Question 4: I noticed the attachments to the NOI were not provided, including the borehole and monitoring well construction details. Is this the information that DRMS and Powertech are discussing with regard to the waiver of confidentiality that you mentioned in your e-mail? Response: Rep. Fischer is referring to the 2008 NOI, for which certain attachments were not included in the public file posted on the DRMS web page. DRMS in its review questioned Powertech about their position on the confidentiality of some of those documents, and until those confidentiality issues are resolved, Powertech’s 2008 NOI will remain incomplete. Rep. Fischer here refers also, I think, to the 2007 NOI, for which Powertech has indicated a willingness to release certain information from the confines of pre-SB-228 confidentiality, but has yet to follow through on those indications. Question 5: Finally, I had a recent conversation with a local groundwater expert who expressed concerns about Powertech's well completion specifications. This expert has been hearing from some local water-well drillers that the annular seals between the upper aquifer and the mineralized zone consists only of hydrated bentonite chips which would be inadequate to provide an impermeable seal between zones. Has anyone from DNR reviewed and signed off on Powertech's well completion techniques and then actually been on site to check the driller's compliance with the specs? It seems to me that the well completion specs should be a matter of public record. Are they? Response: DRMS has approved the use of neat cement grout and sodium bentonite gel (e.g. wyobent enviroplug) to prevent comingling of aquifers. Bentonite chips have been used in limited quantities in some wells immediately above, and for limited distances, the sand packs in the monitoring wells. DRMS is in receipt of a 147 page well completion and abandonment report for the 2007 drilling; we received that report in Jan. 08, which timing is in accord with NOI requirements and the rules. The report has been reviewed in detail, and demonstrates that proper procedures were followed. DRMS has now inspected the Powertech project twice in the past year. Last year, some minor problems were identified, all of which were corrected. No problems were identified during today’s inspection. DRMS will be inspecting again, for two days at the end of August 2008, to audit Powertech’s sampling procedures and collect split samples. The only well completion info DRMS has at this time is for the 2007 NOI, which is not available to the public record. The availability of completion and abandonment details for the 2008 NOI were a subject of the DRMS adequacy review, and we agree with Rep. Fischer’s position that they should be a matter of public record. DRMS is awaiting Powertech’s response, and until all issues are adequately addressed, Powertech will not be authorized to prospect under the 2008 NOI Please contact me with any other questions or concerns. Thanks so much,
Heidi Van Huysen Legislative Program Manager
Dept. of Natural Resources
office: 303-866-4392
cell: 303-854-4934 <<
|
