My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV98134
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV98134
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:22:18 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 12:15:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Name
TRAPPER MING 1992 ANNUAL REPORT TR63 RESPONSE TO ADEQUACY REVIEW COMMENTS PAGE 1 JUNE 1993
Type & Sequence
TR63
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
C <br />• <br />O~j <br /> <br />0~ <br />`3 <br />Trapper Mine 1992 Annual Report (TR-63) <br />Response to Adequacy Review Comments <br />Page 1 -June, 1993 <br />CDMG Comment: <br />Section 2.0 Annual Hydrology Report <br />• ~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />A. General Comments. The presentation and format of the AHR data is excellent and aids in <br />review of the data. <br />1. As per Trapper's response dated June 2, 1992, a commitment to spot wells GP-7 and <br />GP-8 on the 1992 AHR map was established. Neither well appears to be spotted. <br />Please add these wells to the AHR map. Also, in the future, please insure that previ- <br />ous year commitments are handled for future submittals. <br />2. Please update the 1993 AHR map with the most recent topography. This will assist in <br />the coming years in relating pits to well locations and more accurately tie the data to <br />the map. <br />Trapper Response: <br />A. 1.-2. As we discussed, the AHR trap will be updated with new topography in the next <br />annual report submittal in March, 1994. Wells GP-7 and GP-8 will also be spot- <br />ted on the AHR map at that time. <br />CDMG Comment: <br />A. 3. In the weather data summary table 1992 summed data appears to be 1991 input data. <br />Please inspect this table for accuracy and re-submit two copies if necessary. <br />A. 4. What does percent PTD mean represent in the weather data summary? It appears this <br />data is also in error due to potential problems referred to in question 3. Please clar- <br />ify. <br />Trapper Response: <br />A. 3.~. A revised weather data summary table is enclosed and should replace the existing <br />table. In the existing table the "1942 Sum" and "?o PTD Mean" row summaries <br />erroneously included 1991 data rather than 1992 data. <br />CDMG Comment: <br />5. How is the spring above Johnson Pond No. 6 sampled? Field inspection seems to indi- <br />cate the need to choose a downstream point where a composite value can be obtained for <br />the numerous springs that emtninate in this area. Please provide discussion. <br />Trapoer Response: <br />A. 5. The spring above Johnson Pond No. 6 is sampled at a point downstream where the <br />R~~ springs come together to form a single flow. However, even at the composite flow <br />~~~~~\ ~pomt, the flow volume has typically been less than the 5 GPM sample threshold limit. <br />Q~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.