Laserfiche WebLink
contents" <br /> RESPONSE <br /> The staff of the Regional Water Quality Control Board <br /> apparently misunderstood the explanation during the site inspec- <br /> tion of the pond liners and they have not reviewed the sketches <br /> submitted with our monitoring report of April 12, 1982. <br /> Ponds one through four were -constructed with a single perimeter <br /> embankment which was keyed into underlying soil materials and <br /> compacted to 90% of maximum density. The compacted perimeter <br /> embankment was tested to insure that permeabilities in the range <br /> of 10 - 6 cm/sec. were obtained. Ponds one through four were <br /> fitted with a single three foot compacted clay liner beneath the <br /> entire perimeter embankment and impoundment. This clay liner <br /> with a thickness of three feet was also compacted to 90% of <br /> maximum density and provided permeabilities in the range of <br /> 10 - 6 cm/sec. The partition embankments between ponds one <br /> through four were not engineered embankments . They were placed <br /> merely to act as baffles to allow drilling muds to settle out on <br /> the pond bottoms before they flowed into adjacent ponds . It was <br /> our intention to allow only fluids to move from the receiving <br /> pond into adjacent ponds. This makes it possible to control the <br /> settlement of solids and affords us the opportunity to clean the <br /> ponds less frequently. The partition embankment between ponds <br /> one and four are not intended as containment embankments . Pond #5 <br /> -3- <br />