2016-09-26_REVISION - M2004031 (4)

Home Browse Search

Rationale for Recommendation to Approve Page 16 September 26, 2016 The Division believes the existing monitoring locations and protocol, which have been in place since early 2004 and provided sufficient data to substantiate the groundwater mounding issue, will provide adequate data to verify whether the drain pipes perform adequately and impacts to the prevailing hydrologic balance are minimized. All monitoring data submitted to the Division will continue to be part of the pubic record for this site. If additional groundwater wells were to be installed at this time on the Orr property, the water elevation data would be of limited use because no pre -mining data from the new locations would exist for comparison. 7. Comments regarding DTVR requiremernt for hvo foot cover for e_ posed and covered grow ndivater. (Equity Funding LLC — second commentperiod) The two -foot cover is intended to apply to groundwater which has been exposed by excavation activity, and subsequently backfilled to eliminate the requirement for permanent augmentation. No permitted excavation resulting in groundwater exposure or backfilling has occurred on the Orr property, therefore the requirement for a two -foot cover is not applicable in this matter. Also as stated in the response for comment 2, it is standard practice for the Division to notice the DWR prior to permit release for any lined reservoir, or any site with remaining exposed groundwater. DWR will have opportunity to object to the release of the permit if they feel that any exposed groundwater issues have not been fully addressed to their satisfaction at that time. 8. Comments regarding mairntellarrce of Bull Seep Chaimel (Equity Funding LLC— second comnrew period) The Division concurs, the channel of the Bull Seep should be maintained to provide positive drainage. However, this comment is outside the scope of the proposed groundwater mounding mitigation plan and irrelevant to the Division's decision process for AM -01. 9. Cotcern that subsequentproperty owner's may Ilot maintain the measures put into place through this corrective action. (Equity Funding LLC—first and second comment period) These concerns are outside the scope of the proposed amendment under Division review. The Division cannot enforce the "durability of the relief' beyond the life of the reclamation permit. Upon termination of the Division's reclamation permit, responsibility for compliance with DWR, USACOE and County requirements may revert to the landowner. 10. Commew that no differentiation or prediction has beers made regarding ewpected contributions of surface water vs. groundwater to the total volumes removed by the Orr drain. (Equity Funding LLC — second conmllertt period)