Laserfiche WebLink
Trapper Mine 1992 A • Report (7'R-63) • <br />Response to Adequacy Review Comments <br />Page 5 -June, 1993 <br />• <br />they have been in the past, but are within ranges observed in other wells. For <br />example, the nitrate concentration in well GB-5 in 1992 was 2.8 mg/1 while in the <br />past a value of 0.5 was more typical but concentrations have varied significantly. <br />The nitrate concentration in well GD-3 was 0.9 in 1992 while in the past it has <br />only been a few hundredths of a mg/1. This concentration is still a low nitrate <br />value with significantly greater nitrate concentrations observed in other wells. <br />The nitrate concentrations in wells GP-7 and P-8 also varied significantly in 1992 <br />with their values being 7.5 and 3.9 mgl1, respectively, while their previous con- <br />centrations have generally been in several tenths of a mg/1. The ammonia value <br />for well GP-9 was 7 in 1992 while in the past a more typical value was 1.5 mg/1. <br />These concentrations are within ranges observed in the past in wells for the <br />ground water for the Trapper Mine. Therefore, no significance is thought to exist <br />relative to these concentrations unless a consistent increasing trend is observed <br />with time. <br />CDMG Comment: <br />E. Trapper recommended changes to monitoring plan. <br />a. The Division concurs with the request to discontinue airlifting of well GB-1. <br />• b. The current plan already indicates that GD-1(2) will be sampled rather than GD-1. <br />The Division is confused by Trapper's request. <br />c. Trapper may discontinue measurement of field bicarbonate immediately. <br />Trapper Response: <br />E. a. Aclmowledged. <br />b. Please ignore this request as this issue has been resolved. <br />c. Aclmowledged. <br />CDMG Comment: <br />Section 5.0 -Topsoil Pile Locations <br />The Division does not approve of the proposed location directly north of pile NAR2. It <br />appears to be located in a small drainageway of moderately sloping terrain. Rule 4.06.3(2) <br />requires protection from wind and water erosion. A location on a nearby side slope upslope <br />from a topographic dninageway would be acceptable. <br />• <br />