Laserfiche WebLink
To: \Ii-. Pctcr Ili}s <br /> Date: Februaiti ?1, 20?2 <br /> Page ?K <br /> Comment 11 <br /> Section 6.1.5, the Dunn well is not an on-site monitoring well but rather an adjacent private <br /> well that may be influenced by mining. Is it the applicant's intent to extend the S foot <br /> trigger to this well? If so, are there historic groundwater level data to support this trigger <br /> value? <br /> Response 11 <br /> LRM intends to work with Mr. Dunn to establish a baseline and monitor for potential <br /> drawdown effects. <br /> Comment 12 <br /> In Monitoring Well Drilling Summary Report, Section 2.1, it is stated during drilling soil <br /> samples were collected for SPLP testing. Please provide the results of these analysis? <br /> Response 12 <br /> We collected the samples as our standard, pre-mining characterization approach. Because <br /> mining is to be subaqueous (i.e.,no chance of changing the valence state),we have had the <br /> lab archive the samples in case of the future need. We will share results with the DRMS <br /> when/if they become available. <br /> Comment 13 <br /> In the text, Section 2.2, it is stated the monitoring well screen size used was 0.01" but on <br /> the boring logs the screen size indicated is 0.1",please clam. Please note the discrepancy <br /> appears to have made onto the forms submitted to DWR. <br /> Response 13 <br /> Thank you for pointing this out. Boring logs showing screen size of 0.1" was incorrect. <br /> Boring logs have been updated to show the correct screen size of 0.0 L" Updated boring <br /> logs are attached(Attachment 17). Telesto will contact the DWR to make the appropriate <br /> correction on the monitoring well construction forms. <br /> Comment 14 <br /> In the Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Plan Section I it references a water <br /> management pond. Please provide more details of the pond and clearly show it on Figure <br /> 1. <br /> 20220209_1045_DRMS_Adequacy_Review_Response_MASTE <br /> Rdocx TELEST® <br />