Laserfiche WebLink
Trapper Mine 1992 Am• Report (TR-63) • <br />Response to Adequacy Review Comments <br />Page 3 -June, 1993 <br />~J <br />Trapper Response: <br />B. 1. All missing groundwater data noted by CDMG that could be located was placed in <br />Table B-1 (Ground Water Quality Data), and Tables A-1, A-5, and A-8 (Water Level <br />Data) of Section 2.0 of TR-63. Revised table pages are enclosed. Missing data that <br />could notbe located are discussed below. <br />©~, b. The fourth quarter level reading for GD-2 monitor well was not taken because the <br />well head froze and broke. <br />c. The data for the new supply well, GD-1(2), has been changed to a different well <br /> number as shown on the updated pages for water quality data for wells GD-1 and <br />b GD-1(2), submitted with this response. Well GD-1(2) was monitored instead of <br /> GD-1 but the data was put in the database under well GD-1 because these two <br /> wells essentially monitor the Twenry-Mile sandstone at the same location. No <br /> 1992 water level readings were taken for Well GD-1(a). Because of the demand <br /> on GD-1(2) as a production water well and the resultant fluctuating water levels, <br /> collecting water level data would be meaningless. <br />~ d. Well P-8 was redeveloped due to mud in this well preventing the first quarter- <br />0 1992 sample. The well was sampled after redevelopment. <br />• ~ g. Water samples could not be collected for data analysis during the aid and 4th <br /> quarters for Well P-1 because of an apparent down hole obstruction. This well is <br /> scheduled to be redeveloped, if possible, by airlifting to remove accumulated <br /> sediment during the third quarter of 1993. If treatment proves unsuccessful, other <br /> options with regard to this well will be explored. <br />®~ h. As indicated on revised Table B-1 (page B-42) well GA-2 could not be sampled <br /> due to lack of sufficient water to take an adequate sample. <br />j. First quarter sample data for List D were not located. Apparently, the first quaz- <br /> ter sample was overlooked. <br />CDMG Comment: <br />B. 2. Surface Water <br />a. No flow value was shown for the June sample at site S-1. Also, no TDS, Fe, of <br />TSS was taken in September. No BiCazb, Ca, Mg, Na, SAR, or S04 was taken <br />b~ for any sample. <br />b. No data was represented for the No Name site after August 18, 1992. No pH was <br />shown. <br />c. The Johnson lOR site missed the December Fe and Tss. No pH values aze repre- <br />• rented. Also no data was shown for the semi-annual List A-3 for this site. <br />