Michaelsen thought he had won. But when TCEQ commissioners addressed the issue several months later, they again rejected all of the judge’s findings.
in a 19 page order issued in September, the commission concluded that “faults within 2.5 miles of the proposed disposal wells are neither transmissive nor vertically extensive enough to allow migration of hazardous components out of the injection zone.” Old oil wells nearby, the commission concluded, “are likely adequately capped and will not provide a pathway for fluid movement.”
“UEC demonstrated that the proposed disposal wells will prevent the movement of fluids that would result in contamination” of an underground drinking water source, according to the order granting the injection disposal permits.
“I felt like it was rigged, like a setup,” Michaelsen said, holding his 4-inch-thick folder of case investigations and records. “It was a canned decision.”
There is still another series of permit renewals before the Goliad mine can begin operating, and local authorities are also fighting this. In August, the Goliad County Commissioners Court approved a resolution against uranium mining in the county. The groundwater district is looking to challenge the permits again in the administrative court. And in November, the district defendant TCEQ in Travis County District Court seeks to reverse the agency’s permit approvals.
Because of the lawsuit, a TCEQ spokesperson declined to answer questions about the Goliad County mine site, saying the agency does not comment on pending litigation.
One last set of permits still need to be renewed before the mine can begin production. However, after years of frustration, district leaders are not optimistic about their ability to influence the decision.
Only about 40 residences immediately surround the Goliad mine site, according to Art Dohmann, vice president of the Goliad County Groundwater Conservation District. Only they could be affected in the short term. But Dohmann, who has served on the groundwater district board for 23 years, is concerned that the uranium, radium and arsenic stirred up in the mining process will leave the site over the years.
“Groundwater moves. It’s a slow pace, but once the arsenic is released, it stays there forever,” Dohmann said. “Within a generation, it will affect downstream areas.”
UEC did not respond to a request for comment.
TCEQ is currently evaluating possibilities to expand and encourage greater uranium production in Texas. It follows guidance given last year, when Nuclear Caucus lawmakers added an item to TCEQ’s semiannual budget plan. a study of uranium resources to be produced for state lawmakers by December 2024, ahead of next year’s legislative session.
According to the budget line item, “the report should include recommendations for legislative or regulatory changes and possible economic incentive programs to support the uranium mining industry in this state.”