My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP12138
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP12138
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:43:01 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 12:49:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996083
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
3/2/2007
Doc Name
2005 AHR Adequacy Response
From
J.E. Stover & Associates Inc
To
DRMs
Annual Report Year
2005
Permit Index Doc Type
Hydrology Report
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.
/
2
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
J. J. Dudash 2 February 28, 2007 <br />4. Alluvial wells AW-15 and AW-16 appear to be nearly dry throughout their sampling history. <br />Please discuss whether or not these two alluvial wells need to be drilled deeper. <br />BRL -Alluvial wells AW-15 and AW-16 extend some 50-feet below the invert of the Fire <br />Mountain Canal. The fact they are damp to dry indicates the impervious material in which <br />the wells are completed. BRL does not intend on extending the wells. <br />5. The 2005 AHR data sheets for alluvial wells AW-15, AW-16 and AW-17 have notes which <br />state that the three wells were not affected by mining in 2005 and that all of the sampling is <br />considered to be baseline. However, the placement of gob in the gob pile no. 2 began in <br />mid 2004. Please explain. <br />BRL - We agree that alluvial wells AW-15, AW-16 and AW-17 have bee affected by <br />mining. Our records show the monitoring information from the September 27, 2004 date <br />forward should be considered "Operation". This information will be corrected in the 2006 <br />AHR. <br />6. The 2005 AHR data sheets show that water sampling is limited due to problems in three <br />wells. A baler can't be used in well DH-25 due to a broken casing, DH-38 has a lodged <br />baler and TC-03-02 is silted in. Does BRL intend to refurbish these wells? In order to <br />avoid confusion, please revise, in the next appropriate revision, the Active Monitoring Wells <br />Complete Summary Table on page 2.05-83 of the permit application to show which wells <br />have limited sampling and what is the limitation. <br />BRL -These wells, and any other sites that may have sampling limitations, will be <br />addressed in the next appropriate revision. <br />2005 Bi-Annual Subsidence Report <br />On page M-4 of the November 30, 2005 memo entitled "2005 Subsidence Crack Mapping <br />Update", there is a statement that some large sandstone boulders from a failed outcrop <br />were found on the road leading up Stevens Gulch. Were these boulders removed from the <br />road? <br />BRL -Yes, the boulders were removed from the road. <br />If you have any questions, please contact me. <br />Sincerely, <br />J. E.~over <br />Consulting Engineer <br />cc: U. S. Forest Service <br />Bureau of Land Management <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.