Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 <br />Groundwater <br />1. An EC value of 1187 umhos/cm has been added to CCAW-1 on page A-1. <br />2. A review of the original field data suggests that data from LA-221 and LA-264 had been <br />transposed. Sampling didn't occur at LA-221 in December, due to difficulties in <br />removing a steel cap. Sampling did occur at LA-264. A value for December EC is not <br />available, as the equipment was malfunctioning (pages A-33 and A-34). <br />3. Field data was taken on December 30, 1994 at LA-264. As indicated above, the <br />conductivity meter was malfunctioning (page A-34). <br />4. PAW-4 mittimum 1994 value for water level has been amended to the correct value of <br />7 feet (A-65 and A-68). <br />5. The water monitoring data reported the January depth-to-water as dry at PAW-7. The <br />July pH has been corrected to 8.4, and all minimum values have been corrected (A-77). <br />6. Basin's labelling of the SF wells drilled southeast of the facilities area resulted in some <br />confusion between the driller's identification of the sites and the sampling of those sites. <br />The sites actually are SF-1 and SF-2 and the Golden Eagle monitoring plan has been <br />modified with the accompanying Minor Revision (MR) to reflect that. <br />7. TH-201, TH-202, and TH-203 were piezometers drilled in January, 1995, to assess water <br />levels within the RDA. The attached New Elk MR adds these sites to the monitoring <br />list. <br />8. Basin did not monitor NEW-3 in 1994, due to confusion associated with the timing of <br />approvals for permitting actions. TR-34, [he thickener recycling project, was submitted <br />12/30/93. Simultaneously in early 1994, the permit renewal was being issued, and a <br />revised hydrologic monitoring plan was proposed. An artifact of TR-34's monitoring <br />plan was approved through the renewal process before it was ever clear that TR-34 <br />would ever be approved. NEW-3 was proposed, withdrawn, and later re-proposed as <br />a monitoring location for that the thickener recycling project. Access is difficult. <br />Ordinarily the revision would have been approved by March, 1994, but it wasn't <br />approved until July 21, 1995. Basin was not aware of the discrepancy between the <br />permitted plan and their monitoring until late 1994. <br />9. The New Elk Mine permit page 2.05-90, dated 7/ 17/95 was derived from an unapproved <br />TR-34 submittal. Previously, the page was officially changed as part of the permit <br />renewal June 14, 1994. <br />