2013-12-18_REVISION - C1992080

• Permit No: C1992080
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 12/18/2013
• Doc Name: Adequacy Review No. 2
• From: DRMS
• To: Savage and Savage Environmental
• Type & Sequence: RN4
• Email Name: MLT
• Email Name: SB1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Savage & Savage
C -1992 -080 / RN -4 PAR No. 2
2.05.4 — Reclamation Plan
18- Dec -2013
Page 5 of 7
1. a) DBMS 04119: Page 5 -15 of the APD states that no mine openings require sealing, and
that all exploration, water and monitoring wells were capped or plugged in accordance
with 4.07 [Sealing of Drilled Holes and Underground Openings] or destroyed during
mining. This brief summary does not appear to accurately address the various wells
(water and /or monitoring) that were drilled for the Carbon Junction Mine. Hydrologic
records for the mine reflect that sampling occurred at various times from at least five
wells: PWl(82 -4), B10, B17, 94 -1, and 95 -1. (These wells were discussed in some
detail in the Division's August 29, 2012 letter to Oakridge.) These wells are each
identified on Map 4 -3 of the permit. In accordance with the requirements set forth in
4.07.3, please submit to the Division, for each of the five wells listed, a report detailing
the information listed in parts (b) through (i) of subsection (3). Additionally, please
revise the text of the abridged permit document to individually address each of these
wells and the current status of each.
DBMS 12118: The Mine Openings subsection of the APD (page 5 -15) was expanded to
address the current status of the five monitoring or water supply wells. Please provide a
reference to direct the reader to the portion of the original permit where the drill logs
for the five wells may he found [Drill logs for 10B (B10), 17B (1317), and 82 -4 were
found in Appendix 4 -3 of the permit; the Division was unable to find drill logs for 94 -1
and 95 -1.] With respect to sealing of wells B10, B17, and 94 -1, information provided in
the Aug -2013 response is incomplete. The Division suggests that Oakridge might
contact the reclamation contractor(s) to obtain the details required by Rule 4.07.3(3)(f)
and (g) for inclusion in the APD.
b) DRMS 04119: Based on information received from the Division of Water Resources
(letter attached), the DWR has not received from Oakridge the full body of information
regarding drilling, completion, and/or sealing and abandonment of these five wells.
Please ensure that any permitting concerns of the DWR are addressed in a timely manner.
DRMS 12/18: The Division was copied on a 12 -Nov -2013 transmittal of Well
Abandonment Reports for 10B and 17B from Oakridge to DWR. This topic appears to
be in progress.
2. DRMS 04/19: The Division's August 29, 2012 letter to Oakridge addressed the subject
of a light -use road that remains in the vicinity of well B10. In summary: A light -use
road appears to have been constructed to provide access for the drilling of Well B 10 and
what may be an uncompleted well site. The road is approximately 750 feet in length.
Reclamation of this road, which is required by Rule 4.03.3(7), has not previously been
addressed in the permit. if you, as the landowner, wish to retain the road as a permanent
feature, please provide a letter to that effect for inclusion within the permit. Conversely,
if Oakridge prefers to have the road reclaimed, the permit should be revised accordingly.
Please revise the permit to address the light use road accessing the well(s) in question.
DRMS 12/18: With the Aug -2013 adequacy response, a letter from Oakridge to the
Division (dated 29- Apr -2013) was provided. This letter indicates that Oakridge wishes to