Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />revision submitted in response to this mid-term review. The question is re-stated <br />below in Italics; <br />5. Please submit a minor revision proposing the following modifications as <br />necessary to the hydrologic reporting requirements. <br />/a. Due to closure of the mine, sites id 05, 06 and 07 have been eliminated. <br />Please provide a new surface water and ground water schedule (p. 552) <br />that reflects the elimination of these monitoring locations. <br />/b. if appears that flow observations are being made quarterly on the <br />permanent diversion rather than weekly as required. What are Energy <br />Fuels intentions to comply with the approved plan of weekly visits to <br />observe and/or sample any flow? It seems apparent that a change in <br />frequency to observe possible flows is necessary. <br />/c. Does the CDPS permit also require weekly visits to the sediment pond <br />outfall to observe pond discharge? If not, the frequency (weekly) should <br />be change to reflect actual requirements. Another possible option is to <br />state in the schedule that sampling of sediment pond discharges will be <br />conducted in accordance with the approved CDPS permit rather than <br />trying to re-state the requirements in the mining permit application. <br />/d. The quarterly submittal requirement for water data was eliminated many <br />years ago. Please propose new language on page 554 to indicate that <br />the "hydrologic monitoring data will be submitted in an annual report no <br />later than February 28 of each year for the previous monitoring year" or <br />similar language. <br />/e. Although hardness for ground water data is being sampled and reported it <br />is not a requirement based on the sampling list on page 553. Please <br />modify the list to include hardness for ground water wells. <br />3. Please update page 667b as necessary to bring the information current. <br />4. Please add text to the last paragraph on page 516R that states that through <br />written correspondence dated November 15, 1994, the Division approved the soil <br />substitute after review of the Topsoil Suitability Report received by the Division <br />October 31, 1994. Once this information is incorporated, the Division will remove <br />the cost to import topsoil from the cost estimate as part of the technical revision <br />approval. <br />Section VI <br />-~- <br />