REV15730 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Dan Mathews 4 June 9 20 wells, a paragraph was added to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Program shown on page 4-17, and a double asterisk was added to Tables 4.2-1 thru 4.2-5 stating the AW do not equal GW monitoring wells. DMG -Because the alluvial sediments associated with East Salf Creek have been designated as an alluvial valley floor, certain surveys and geohydrologic data are required. Please see Rule 2.06.8 (4)(c)(iv). At a minimum, well completion logs and drill logs should be submitted for all monitoring wells that are included in the approved monitoring plan. If sufficient data exist, a groundwater contour map should be developed and updated annually with the future AHR submittals for East Salt Creek Alluvium. Figures 4.1-3 through 4.1-6 present boring logs (with well completion information) for four of the alluvial wells, which appear to correspond to G W-2, GW-3, GW-4, and G W-5. No other well completion logs or drill logs are presented in the permit document or AHR for any of the other monitoring wells. CAM -The monitoring wells at the mines are GW-1 through 8. As requested thru the 2006 permit renewal application, GW-2, 4, 7, and 8 are scheduled to be sealed as they are no longer actively monitored. Atypical well completion log is presented in Figure 4.1-7, and includes surface elevation, type of casing, diameter of casing, total depth of well, perforated interval and formation completed in for GW-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 except there is no data for the perforated interval for GW-1. Old permit data taken from the Munger Canyon permit (Table 4.2-2S) shows the MW series are the same as the GW series wells but the numbering is different. Going forward, the operator will refer to the wells with the GW designation only. Updated Figures 4.1-3 through 4.1-6 showing only the GW series designation. DMG - To clarify these discrepancies, the Division recommends that a new appendix be inserted into each permit or that the existing documents be amended with updated information succinctly presenting the approved groundwater monitoring programs. The nomenclature for each well should be clearly identified and the corresponding baseline data, drill logs and well completion information provided. The water sample location map (Figure 4.2-2) should be updated accordingly and if appropriate a groundwater contour map should be developed for the East Salt Creek Alluvium. Please include in the updated appendices, a well completion summary table of active monitoring wells. Please include in the table at a minimum the following information: surface elevation, measuring point elevation, type of casing, diameter of casing, total depth of well, and perforated interval, and formation completed in. CAM -See Table 4.2 showing nomenclature clarifcation for drill holes included in current monitoring plan. To eliminate the confusion between the alluvial wells and the ground water monitoring wells, a paragraph was added to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Program shown on page 4-17 and a double asterisk was added to Tables 4.2-1 thru 4.2-5 stating the AW do not equal GW monitoring wells. No update to Figure 4.2-2 was required. There is not enough data to develop a groundwater contour map for the East Salt Creek Alluvium. Atypical well completion log is presented in Figure 4.1- 7, and includes surface elevation, type of casing, diameter of casing, total depth of well, perforated interval and formation completed in for GW-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 except there is no data for the perforated interval for GW-1. 5. DMG -There appears to be a discrepancy with reference to the baseline data for GW-3 on Table 5 of the AHR (A W-6 = G W-3). Comparison of Figure 4.1-2 with Figure 4.2-2 of the McClane permit and cross- referencing this to Table 2.5-1 of the Munger permit appears to show that MW-2 = GW-3. It is unclear if MW-2 equates to A W-6. Please check the reference to baseline data for GW-3 on Table 5 of the AHR, and update Table 5 if appropriate. Both permits need to be amended as necessary to ensure that the relationship of AW, MW, and GW well designations is clear, consistent, and correct. CAM -See Table 4.2 showing nomenclature correlation for drill holes in the current approved monitoring program. To eliminate the confusion between the alluvial wells and the ground water monitoring wells a paragraph was added to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Program shown on page 4-17 and a double asterisk was added to Table 4.2-1 thru 4.2-5 stating the AW do not equal GW. A summary of baseline data for GW monitoring wells are shown in new Table 4.2i. Individual data for GW monitoring wells is shown in new Table 4.2ii