Laserfiche WebLink
• SP2300 and SP2400 are listed as being temporarily dropped and site SPOl05 is listed as <br />an active site. Please comment and revise Table 1, if you agree. <br />2. Table 1 of the 1999 AHR shows that surface water location SWOS is required to <br />have quarterly laboratory analyses performed. However, the data shown on <br />monitoring point table page 40 of the hydrology report show that only semi- <br />annual laboratory analyses were performed. Please comment. <br />3. Table 1 of the 1999 AHR shows that quarterly laboratory analyses and monthly <br />field pazameters are required for ground water monitoring well MW-03. However, <br />the data on monitoring point table page 12 show that the first quarter laboratory <br />analyses were not performed and the Field parameters of ph, conductivity and <br />temperature were not taken fot most of the months in 1999. There should be <br />access to the site since it is at the train loadout and, as evidenced by the data, <br />monthly depth to water measurements were made. Please comment. <br />4. Table 1 of the 1999 AHR shows that semi-annual laboratory analyses are required <br />for ground water monitoring locations SM-1, SM-5, SM-6, SM-7, SM-9, SM-10 <br />and SM-1 I. However, the data presented in monitoring point table pages 14 <br />through 21 show that the monitoring data do not exist for the fast half of 1999. <br />Please comment. <br />• 5. Hydrologic monitoring data for drill hole locations DH 60 and 65 aze absent in <br />1999 because of problems with the bore holes. This issue is being addressed in <br />Technical Revision No. 34. <br />6. It appears that none of the laboratory analyses presented, ground water or surface <br />water, have the TDS Ratio calculated. Please comment. <br />An examination of the laboratory results for the hydrologic monitoring of the springs and <br />ponds shows that, for 1999, no chemical constituents deviated significantly from baseline <br />values. The data also show that flow rates vazied seasonally but that the vaziations were <br />consistent with the historical data. <br />The surface water stations showed seasonal variations in flow, but no significant <br />differences from the historical data. Also, most of the surface water stations showed no <br />significant deviation in chemical constituent concentrations in 1999 from baseline data. <br />However, two surface water stations, SW-OS in Stevens Gulch, and SW-06 in East <br />Roatcap Creek, showed increases in several chemical parameters for 1999 as compared to <br />baseline values. When the historic data was examined, however, no long term trends were <br />appazent. <br />Most of the ponds showed no significant variation in water quality in 1999 from the <br />historic norm. However, several ponds did show increases in conductivity for1999, as <br />. compared to baseline, but no long term historic trends were noticeable. These ponds are <br />LO-2, 10-3, LO-4, 10-9 and 15-1. Three ponds, 10-1 in East Roatcap Creek and 10-~ and <br />2 <br />