Laserfiche WebLink
M M <br />to co <br />parts. The first part is the installation and tes ing of the <br />wells, the second is the data evaluation and system design. We <br />concur with the 2-part process, but would like some assurance that <br />acceptance of the first testing phase does not assure acceptance of <br />the system design. There are a variety of parameters which are <br />necessary to properly design a groundwater containment system. <br />These include information on the aquifer's geometry and geologic <br />makeup, the continuity of geologic media within the containment <br />area, and the hydraulic properties of the aquifer. The testing as <br />proposed will collect this data, however, until the tWO proposed <br />wells are drilled, there is no guarantee that the date collected <br />from these two points will be adequate to characterize the system. <br />We would encourage BMG to evaluate the data collected im the field <br />as the project progresses. If data from these wells, aryd well M-9, <br />cannot be reasonably correlated, some additional testing may be <br />required. Such additional tests, if required, are no~tmally much <br />easier to conduct while a field crew is still mobilize. <br />SURFACE WATER SYSTEMS <br />There was some discussion of flood plains in the orf.ginal mine <br />permit, but little in the current documents. Some discussion by <br />BMG as to which facilities lie in the 100-year flood plain, and how <br />such facilities have been engineered would be helpful in light of <br />the new technical revisions. Some review of this information by <br />MLRD, and a statement of their concurrence with the flood plain <br />designations would also be helpful. <br />If you have any questions on these comments, lease feel free <br />ntact our office. / <br />Resp ful S t d; <br />ott~G. M ord <br />C.P.G. 5021 <br />