Laserfiche WebLink
NEWMONT N N, ,... 3. <br /> 14. Figure G-1. There appear to he errors and omissions on this figure: The figure's scale (1:52.000 <br /> or I inch = 4,333.33 feet) does not meet the smallest allowable scale of 1 inch = 660 feet pursuant <br /> to Rule 6?.1(?)(e). There is inforntcrtion on this figure that is difficultto discern. However, the <br /> Division ackztowletkes the area covered in this figure does not make it practical to use even the <br /> minimum scale. Rule 6 ?.1(?)(e) also allovv5 for maps to "he prepared at a scale that is appropriate <br /> to clearly show all elements that are required to be delineated by the.-let anti these Rules".-4s.such, <br /> plotting this map on larger paper may suffice. Use of'the term 'Amendment 13 Cresson Project <br /> Permit Boundary"on this figure implies.4.lI--13 is modifying the permit or affected area boundary, <br /> which is misleading. It would be less confusing if'the same terminology used for the houndarti, on <br /> the maps in Exhibit C ivere used on the figures in Exhibit G. Please: <br /> a. Plot the map on either D (2.0 x 34.0 in) or E(3.1.0 x 44.0 in) size paper, <br /> b. Revise the map,for accuracy anti update the map with a current DUR well search (2015 vs <br /> ?0?0). <br /> c. Cleariv mark the monitoring locations on the map, <br /> 41 .4thl missing monitoring wells to the figure. <br /> Newmont Response: <br /> Figure G-1 has been updated to address the above comments and the revised Figure G-1 is included in <br /> Attachment 5. Specifically: <br /> a. The figure has been plotted on a 34-inch by 44-inch sized paper as requested. The title has been <br /> changed to"Groundwater wells within 2 miles of the Affected Lands Boundary". <br /> b. The figure has been updated with an April 2020 Division of Water Resources(DWR) well <br /> database. <br /> c. Monitoring well locations have been added to the figure. <br /> d. Missing monitoring wells have been added to the figure. <br /> DBMS Comment(italics): <br /> 15. Figure G-?. Similar to Comment 14, there appear to be errors and omissions on this figure. Please: <br /> a. Plot the map on either D (2.0 x 34.0 in) or E (34.0 x 44.0 in) sire paper. <br /> b. Revise the Wrap for accurcu•y and update the Wrap with a current Df R well.search (2015 vs <br /> 2020), <br /> c. Label all lakes,reservoirs correctly. <br /> d. Clearly mark the monitoring locutions on the map. <br /> Newmont Response: <br /> Figure G-2 has been updated to address the above comments, a copy of which is provided in Attachment <br /> 5. Specifically: <br /> a. The figure has been plotted on a 34-inch by 44-inch sized paper. <br /> b. This comment appears to be misplaced. Figure G-2 is meant to show locations of springs and <br /> reservoirs and other surface features within 2 miles of the affected lands boundary. Please see <br />