Laserfiche WebLink
.~~' ~ ~ <br />periods so, it appears, ambient conditions include elevated levels of manganese. A permit <br />condition value of.l lppm manganese is consistent with approved limits at M-12 and M-14 <br />(.12ppm and .08ppm respectively) so I don'[ have a problem approving BMRI's request to <br />establish . I 1 ppm as the permit condition value for manganese at the M-15 point of compliance. <br />TDS was elevated at M-15 during the first three months but, since then, concentrations have <br />dropped below SOOppm (286ppm to 490ppm). I don't believe it is necessary to establish the <br />permit condition value at 600ppm since, it appears, ambient conditions aze well below table <br />standard limits (SOOppm). However, the Division and BMRI agreed to set permit condition <br />values using the highest measured value which is not an outlier (using the Dixon m¢thod). So, if <br />the 600ppm measured value is not an outlier, the Division should approve this as the limit for <br />TDS. <br />SF-1 is a low volume well that was drilled to the Santa Fe alluvium just a short distance south of <br />the West Pit. As noted, all of the indicator parameters were at elevated levels during the first five <br />months of monitoring. BMRI was unable to pump enough water out of the well to adequately <br />clean up the drilling fluid and grout that was used to drill and complete the well. Th¢refore, in <br />my opinion, contaminated samples were collected for five months. [n my letter to Amne Baldrige, <br />dated June 16, 1997, [asked BMRI to collect five additional monthly samples from the well so <br />that a total of twelve months of sampling ambient conditions occur before setting permit <br />condition values. BMRI agreed and began monitoring the well in June, 1997. Permit condition <br />values will be set later this yeaz. <br />