Fifth Five Year Review Report for Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site Operable Units 1 and 2 Lincoln County New Mexico


FIFTH FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT FOR
CIMARRON MINING CORPORATION SUPERFUND SITE
OPERABLE UNITS 1 AND 2
LINCOLN COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

srX

SEPTEMBER 2018

Prepared by

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6
Dallas, Texas 75202

100012031

000743

-------
[Page intentionally left blank]

000744

-------
FIFTH FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT
CIMARRON MINING CORPORATION SUPERFUND SITE
OPERABLE UNITS 1 AND 2
EPA ID#: NMD980749378
CARRIZOZO, LINCOLN COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

This memorandum documents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) performance,
determinations, and approval of the Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site (Site) fifth five-year
review (FYR) under Section 121(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act, 42 U.S. Code Section 9621(c), as provided in the attached Fifth Five-Year Review Report.

Summary of the Fifth Five-Year Review Report

The Site consists of two operable units (OUs). Operable Unit 1 addresses cyanide contamination
in ground water at the former Cimarron Mill Site, a 0.6 acre milling facility used to recover iron
and precious metals from ores. Operable Unit 2 addresses lead contamination in soil, sediment
and waste rock at the Cimarron Mill Site and the former Sierra Blanca Mill Site, a 7.5-acre site
also used to recover a variety of metals from ore.

The Site was placed on the National Priorities List (NPL) of Superfund sites in 1989. The EPA
issued a record of decision (ROD) for OU-1 in 1990, requiring extraction of shallow ground
water contaminated with cyanide at concentrations above 0.2 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and
discharge to the Town of Carrizozo publicly owned treatment works. The EPA issued the OU-2
ROD in 1991 requiring the solidification and stabilization of contaminated surface soil,
sediment, and waste rock exceeding 500 milligrams per kilogram (mg/Kg) of lead at both mill
sites with on-site disposal at the Sierra Blanca Mill Site. Other components of the OU-1 and
OU-2 remedies included: 1) the plugging of an abandoned water supply well, 2) filling in of
cinder block trenches and a discharge pit, and 3) the removal of chemical drums and the
decontamination of tanks and associated piping.

Institutional controls (ICs) were also specified in the RODs to prevent future exposure to
contaminated ground water, as well as to ensure the integrity of the remedy. The ICs are a
"Restrictive Covenant" at OU-1 and a "Prohibition Against Disturbance" at OU-1 and OU-2 to
protect the monitoring wells and prohibit the drilling and installation of new wells to withdraw
shallow ground water above 100 feet at OU-1. This prohibition was also to prevent any
excavation that could potentially breach or disturb the contaminated soil repositories at OU-2.
The EPA established the ICs with agreement from the property owners in 2006.

The OU-1 ground water extraction system operated for nine years (1993-2001) before it was shut
down due to diminished extraction rates. Ground water monitoring has continued since that
time. Eight consecutive quarterly ground water sampling events were performed from 2013 to
2015 to satisfy the New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission (NMWQCC) regulations for
determining completion of ground water abatement actions, as well as one additional sampling
event in 2017 to support this FYR. Total cyanide concentrations were below the remediation
goal of 0.2 mg/L for cyanide in all samples. Isoconcentration contour maps and time-series plots
of cyanide concentrations show significant decreases in cyanide concentrations both spatially

000745

-------
and temporally. Five recovery wells used for ground water monitoring went dry and were
properly plugged in 2014. No further ground water monitoring is planned for OU-1.

The OU-2 cleanup of soil, sediment, and waste rock included the consolidation/stabilization of
approximately 900 cubic yards of such materials and their placement into two on-site
repositories at the Sierra Blanca Mill Site. This work was completed by 1997. The repositories
were capped with a low-permeability soil cover and revegetated. Operable Unit 2 is currently in
post-closure inspection and monitoring. The NPL Site deletion was completed for OU-1 (partial
deletion - soil only) and OU-2 on August 31, 2001.

The OU-2 ground water monitoring in the vicinity of the repositories showed no detections of
dissolved metals above federal or state drinking water standards or ground water standards, with
the exception of manganese. However, because manganese concentrations in ground water in
the Carrizozo area are similar to Site manganese concentrations, it is uncertain whether the high
concentrations are sourced from the Site or reflect natural background water quality. Periodic
ground water monitoring (once every 4-5 years) will continue at OU-2.

The Site inspection was performed in January 2018. Currently there are no remedial systems
operating onsite. No issues are identified with the remaining ground water monitoring system or
the ICs put in place to ensure the integrity of the remedy. The two soil repositories at OU-2 are
in good condition and intact, with no evidence of surface erosion, digging, burrowing, or
excavation. The Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) is currently being used for residential and
commercial purposes, but the ground water is not used as a source of drinking water. The Sierra
Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) is owned by the town of Carrizozo. It is fenced and presently not being
used for residential or commercial purposes. Construction debris placed at the site by the town
of Carrizozo and Lincoln County has been piled close to one of the repositories, but does not
cover it. The repositories corners were marked with rebar in 2012 as part of an inspection, but
the rebar only protruded from the ground a few inches and has since been covered by vegetation.
Five-foot long metal fence posts were set next to the corner markers during the 2018 inspection
conducted for this FYR.

Environmental Indicators

Human Exposure Status: Current human exposure is controlled and a protective remedy is in place.

Contaminated Ground Water Status: The contaminant ground water migration is under control. The
ground water remediation goal of 0.2 mg/L for cyanide has been met and the successful completion of the
response action has been verified with eight consecutive quarters of ground water sampling to satisfy
NMWQCC regulations at NMAC 20.6.2.4103.

Site-Wide Ready for Reuse: A Site-wide Ready for Anticipated Use (SWRAU) determination was made
on September 20, 2007. All remediation goals set forth in the RODs have been achieved for all media
that may affect current and reasonably anticipated future uses of the Site so that there are no unacceptable
risks. All necessary institutional controls specified in the RODs are in place and effective at protecting
the remedy.

000746

-------
\tii»ns Needed

I hc«c ,ii u ini jl'! s> >n-~ iu eJa! I. -i (hi1 tvfnej) i> * he pi'i ik\.ti \ c
OvU-rniinatum

! !;,svv likioruiinod iliv r.-iiu!>h ilu1 ( linn: r.Mt Miu'Mlm orpoi.ismn Nqtustuikl Stk i- aiiie-nk

pll>H l i IV <¦'

Director. Stiperftincl Division

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6

000747

-------
[Page intentionally left blank]

000748

-------
< <>\< 1 RRI-'MC FN

-vr \r Rmr\vRn»oui

{ iM \KI«)\ \ I ] \ I \». t OUI'OK VI ION SI I'l KM \l> Ml 1<
I I' \ II)#: \\10')SirWN

< \rri/o/.o, i,i\< oi.rs< ot \ n. m w wxiro

- 7 '	/ /

' /{ k' 7	i-f



Blake Atkins

Chief, H ihci	Vvtion

i3elUm((W'



j^firl C. Meyer	1

|l* Superfund Rented ial Branch

lrtv.il !'h Hi

v. I i|tiu Iu:'i< null t i 'ii|i ,ci

V !

< hu't Siij.i i UMKi n Ultice of Regional Counsel



Mark Ptirceli	,	f	Dale

Remedial Project Manager	1



' ' ^ / / /
v	tyy//. /ft

yV/''>/t£

M.rk \	¦	I Kilt

I );itc

000749

-------
[Page intentionally left blank]

000750

-------
ISSUES/RECOMMENDATIONS

FIFTH FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT
CIMARRON MINING CORPORATION SUPERFUND SITE
OPERABLE UNITS 1 AND 2
EPA ID#: NMD980749378
CARRIZOZO, LINCOLN COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

Issues/Recommendations

Issues/Recommendations Identified in the l"i\e-Year Rexiew:

OU-1: No Issues/Recommendations
OU-2: No Issues/Recommendations

OTHER FINDINGS

The following recommendations were identified during the FYR, but do not affect the current and/or
future protectiveness of the remedy:

1.	Evaluate whether the OU-1 ground water meets the criteria for deletion from the NPL, based on
the conditions listed below.

a.	Eight consecutive quarters of ground water monitoring data (October 2013 through
August 2015) indicate that cyanide concentrations have remained below the NMWQCC
standard established for cyanide (0.2 mg/L), thereby satisfying the requirement of
NMWQCC 20.6.2.4103.

b.	The August 2017 ground water sampling results indicate that total cyanide was detected
at concentrations ranging from 0.047 mg/L to 0.068 mg/L, which supports the 2013-2015
findings.

c.	Residual cyanide concentrations in the vadose zone at OU-1 are not expected to migrate
and cause an increase in cyanide concentrations in ground water (to exceed the 0.2 mg/L
remediation goal) via a soil to ground water pathway.

The NPL Site Deletion for OU-1 (partial deletion - soil only) and OU-2 took place on August 31,
2001. The delisting of the OU-1 ground water would complete the NPL Site Deletion.

2.	Although ICs prohibiting disturbance of the existing soil repositories are in place at OU-2, the town
of Carrizozo recommends fencing the repository areas and posting signage that indicates the
repository type, date, and contact information.

000751

-------
000752

-------
Table of Contents

LIST 01 ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS	2

I.	INTRODUCTION	3

I II I II FIVE-YEAR REVIEW SUMMARY FORM	4

II.	RESPONSE ACTION SUMMARY	4

OU-1 Response Actions	5

OU-2 Response Actions	5

Status of Implementation	6

Systems Operations/Operation & Maintenance	8

III.	PROGRESS SINCE THE LAST REVIEW	9

IV.	FIVE-YEAR REVIEW PROCESS	12

Community Notification, Involvement & Site Interviews	12

Data Review	13

Site Inspection	14

V.	TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT	15

QUESTION A: Is the remedy functioning as intended by the decision documents?	15

QUESTION B: Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial

action objectives (RAOs) used at the time of the remedy selection still valid?	16

QUESTION C: Has any other information come to light that could call into question the
protectiveness of the remedy?	17

VI.	ISSUES/RECOMMENDATIONS	17

OTHER FINDINGS	18

\ II. PROTECTIVNESS STATEMENT	18

VIII. NEXT REVIEW	19

000753

1

-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS

This document utilizes the following organization abbreviations:

EPA (or USEPA) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

NMED	New Mexico Environment Department

NMEID	New Mexico Environmental Improvement Division

NM OSE	New Mexico Office of the State Engineer

USACE	U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

USGS	U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey

Common technical abbreviations, which may be found in this report, are listed below:

ARARs	Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

CERCLA	Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CFR	Code of Federal Regulations

COC	Chemical of Concern

EA	Endangerment Assessment

ESD	Explanation of Significant Difference

FS	Feasibility Study

HRS	Hazard Ranking System

IC	Institutional Control

MCL	EPA National Primary Drinking Water Standards, Maximum Contaminant Levels

NCP	National Contingency Plan

NMWQCC	New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission

NPL	National Priorities List

NPDWR	National Primary Drinking Water Regulations

O&M	Operation and Maintenance

OSWER	Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

OU	Operable Unit

POTW	Publicly Owned Treatment Works

RA	Remedial Action

RD	Remedial Design

RI	Remedial Investigation

ROD	Record of Decision

RI/FS	Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study

RPM	EPA Remedial Project Manager

RSL	EPA Regional Screening Levels

SAP	Sampling and Analysis Plan

SDWA	Safe Drinking Water Act

2

000754

-------
I. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of a Five-Year Review (FYR) is to evaluate the implementation and performance of a
remedy in order to determine if the remedy is and will continue to be protective of human health and the
environment. The methods, findings, and conclusions of reviews are documented in five-year review
reports such as this one. In addition, FYR reports identify issues found during the review, if any, and
document recommendations to address them.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing this FYR pursuant to the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Section 121, consistent with the
National Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR Section 300.430(f)(4)(h)), and considering EPA policy.

This is the fifth FYR for the Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site (hereinafter the "Site"). The
FYR has been performed as a statutory FYR due to the fact that hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants remain at the Site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure
(UU/UE). The triggering action for this statutory FYR is the completion date of the previous FYR on
September 18, 2013.

The Site consists of two operable units (OU)s. Operable Unit 1 (OU-1) addresses cyanide contamination
in ground water at the former Cimarron Mining Corporation mill site. Operable Unit 2 is the former
Sierra Blanca mill site which contains two repositories for lead-contaminated soil excavated from OU-2
and OU-1. Operable Unit 2 is currently in post-closure inspection and monitoring, and has been deleted
from the National Priorities List (NPL) of Superfund sites (partial Site deletion).

The Site FYR was led by Mr. Mark Purcell, the EPA Remedial Project Manager (RPM), with support
from Mr. Angelo Ortelli of the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) Ground Water Quality
Bureau, Superfund Oversight Section. Participants for FYR interviews consisted of Mr. Tim Means, the
property owner at OU-1, and Mr. Rick Hyatt, the Mayor for the Town of Carrizozo. The Town of
Carrizozo is the current property owner at OU-2. The public was notified of the initiation of the FYR by
a public notice published in a local newspaper on November 29, 2017.

Site Background

The Site is located in town of Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico, and is approximately 100 miles
south-southeast of Albuquerque (Figure 1, Appendix D). Operable Unit 1 encompasses approximately
10.6 acres, and is located on the north side of Highway 380. Operable Unit 2 encompasses 7.5 acres, and
is located east of U.S. Highway 54.

The historic land use at both mill sites involved mineral and precious metal ore milling activities. The
mill sites operated from 1960 to July 1982, with some suspensions. Both sites are currently inactive. The
land use at OU-1 is currently an auto repair shop and salvage yard. The owner of the auto repair shop and
property has resided onsite since 2000. The impacted shallow ground water aquifer at OU-1 is currently
not used for any purposes. The ground water flow direction at OU-1 is to the northwest. The OU-2
Sierra Blanca mill site is fenced with three-strand barbed wire. The mill site is not being used for

000755

-------
residential or commercial purposes. Analytical results for ground water samples collected at OU-2
indicate that ground water has not been impacted by former milling activities and the presence of
contaminated-soil repositories onsite.

FIFTH FIVE-YEAR REVIEW SUMMARY FORM

SITE IDENTIFICATION

Site Name:

Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site, Operable Units 1 and 2

EPA ID:

NMD980749378

| Region: 6

State: NM

City/County: Lincoln

SITE STATUS

NPL Status: Final

Multiple OUs?

Yes

Has the site achieved construction completion?

Yes

Lead agency: EPA

Author name (Federal or State Project Manager): Mark Puree 11

Author affiliation: Remedial Project Manager, Environmental Protection Agency

Review period: 3/30/2017 - 9/17/2018

Date of site inspection: 1/17/2018

Type of review: Statutory

Review number: 5

Triggering action date: 9/18/2013

Due date: 9/17/2018

II. RESPONSE ACTION SUMMARY

The Site was placed on the NPL on October 4, 1989 due to shallow ground water contamination at the
Cimarron mill site. The primary contaminant of concern (COC) in ground water was cyanide. Based on
the findings of the OU-1 remedial investigation (RI), the major sources of ground water contamination
were cinder block trenches and a discharge pit where cyanide solution recycling and disposal operations
were performed. The OU-1 risk assessment identified ingestion of contaminated ground water (as a
drinking water source) to be a potential exposure pathway. Other potential exposure pathways were
incidental ingestion of soil and inhalation of fugitive dust.

000756

-------
The potential for migration of shallow contaminated ground water (at a depth of approximately 55 feet) to
deeper productive aquifers was a concern. The EPA, in consultation with the New Mexico Environment
Improvement Division (NMEID), the predecessor to NMED, determined that remediation of shallow
ground water in the source area was appropriate to control potential contaminant migration from the
shallow ground water to underlying drinking water aquifers. The contamination in soil at OU-1, however,
was at a concentration below health-based screening levels and did not warrant remediation.

Remedial investigation activities were conducted at OU-2 from May 1990 to June 1991. Surface soils,
tank sediments, and waste rock piles were found to be contaminated with metals (primarily lead) above
health-based screening levels. Based on the RI findings, EPA determined that approximately 570 cubic
yards of surface soils, tank sediments, and waste rock piles were contaminated. Historical analytical
results for ground water samples collected from OU-2 monitoring wells indicated that ground water at
OU-2 was not impacted.

OU-1 Response Actions

The EPA selected a remedy for OU-1 in a Record of Decision (ROD) dated September 1990. The
selected remedy was to restore the ground water to its potential future beneficial use as a drinking water
aquifer, and thus established 0.2 milligrams per liter (mg/L) of cyanide as the remediation goal.

The major components of the selected remedy included pumping and extraction of shallow ground water
with discharge to the town of Carrizozo Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) and ground water
monitoring.

In addition to the ground water remedy, the selected remedy included the following:

• Removal of chemical drums and decontamination of tanks and associated piping;

• Filling-in of the cinder block trenches and a discharge pit;

• Plugging an abandoned water supply well; and

• Inspection and maintenance of the existing fence.

The selected remedy specified a three-well concentric configuration for ground water pumping. During
the Remedial Design (RD) process, NMED requested a revised recovery well configuration utilizing a
seven-well linear placement. This change was implemented through an Explanation of Significant
Difference (ESD) to the ROD dated September 22, 1993.

OU-2 Response Actions

The ROD for OU-2 was signed by the EPA on September 6, 1991. The selected remedy addressed the
remediation of soil, sediment, and waste rock pile contamination at OU-2. The major components of the
selected remedy included the following:

000757

-------
•	Cement solidification/stabilization of contaminated soil, sediment, and waste rock exceeding 500
micrograms per kilogram (mg/kg) of lead for on-site disposal;

•	Installation of a low-permeability soil cover/cap for the repository areas; and

•	Ground water monitoring, including the installation of two ground water monitoring wells.

In addition to the remedy for the contaminated soil, sediment, and waste rock piles, the selected remedy
included the following:

•	Removal of chemical drums, and decontamination of tanks and associated piping;

•	Filling-in discharge pits and cinder block trench with on-site soils and covering with clean fill;
and

•	Inspection and maintenance of the existing fence.

Status of Implementation

OU-1, Ground Water Remedial Actions

Construction of the ground water remedy was completed in January 1993. The ground water extraction
system consisted of seven extraction/recovery wells located directly adjacent to the primary sources of
ground water contamination, the former cinder block trenches. In addition, 13 monitoring wells were
installed onsite, and four monitoring wells (one up-gradient and three down-gradient) were installed off
site (Figure 2, Appendix D).

In April 1993, after initial pumping of ground water during construction and three months of testing, the
remedy was determined to be operational and functional. The Site achieved construction completion
status when the Interim Close-out Report was completed in September 1993.

The ground water extraction system operated for approximately nine years, and was shut down in
December 2001 for a performance assessment due to diminished extraction rates. During the operational
period, the ground water extraction rates from the recovery wells declined from about 2.0 gallons per
minute (gpm) during the early stages of operation to about 0.5 gpm during late 1998, and continued to
decline to approximately 0.2 gpm at the time of shutdown in December 2001. The low water yields from
recovery wells were due, at least in part, to low initial water levels that further declined with pumping.

Several optimization activities were performed during system operations. They included the following:

•	Auto Dialer alert systems were improved in response to nuisance shutdowns;

•	Potential bio-fouling of extraction wells was investigated, and well re-development was
performed;

6

000758

-------
• Jack pumps were found to be worn and were replaced with flow-controlled submersible electric
pumps;

• Based on higher flow rates, the number of operating extraction wells was reduced from six to
three (RW-1, RW-5, and RW-7); and

• Micro-purge sampling devices were installed in 12 monitoring wells to provide more
representative ground water samples.

Although operational efficiencies were achieved, none of the optimization efforts resulted in improved
overall extraction rates or cyanide removal rates. During system operations, there were several periods of
extended downtime, which had the effect of re-saturating the portions of the aquifer that had been de-
watered during pumping. This type of "pulse pumping" improved the flushing of contaminants from the
de-watered zones. Overall, cyanide concentrations in ground water had been reduced significantly by the
time the ground water extraction ceased; however, two monitoring wells (MW-04 and MW-06) and three
extraction wells (RW-02, RW-03, and RW-06) continued to show cyanide concentrations above the
remediation goal. A total cyanide mass of approximately 1.8 pounds was removed and approximately 1.8
million gallons of extracted ground water were discharged to the POTW during the operational period of
nine years (from September 1992 through December 2001). Ground water monitoring has continued
since that time.

OU-2, Surface Soil Remedial Actions

Site remediation at OU-2 was performed by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Reclamation under
interagency agreement #DW 14412401 with the EPA. The remedial activities were completed and a
preliminary close-out report was signed on September 24, 1992.

A total of approximately 570 cubic yards of lead-contaminated soil, sediment, and waste rock piles were
consolidated into an on-site repository, and two monitoring wells were installed by September 1992.
Based on follow-up investigations by NMED, concentrations of lead exceeding 500 mg/kg were observed
in surface soils at two locations onsite. Consequently, in August 1997, an additional 332 cubic yards of
contaminated soils were excavated, stabilized with cement, and placed in a second on-site repository.

Both repository areas were covered with a low-permeability cap and re-vegetated. In consultation with
NMED, EPA determined that all appropriate response actions required at OU-2 had been met, and a
partial deletion of OU-2 from the NPL was completed in August 2001.

Ground water monitoring has been conducted at the Site since remedial actions were completed because
on-site repositories with hazardous waste were left in place and require continued monitoring to ensure
protectiveness of the remedy (Figure 3, Appendix D).

Institutional Controls

In addition to the initial remedies specified in the RODs, institutional controls (ICs) have been
established. The ICs are a "Prohibition Against Disturbance" for OU-1 and OU-2, and a "Restrictive
Covenant" for OU-1, signed by the respective property owners in 2006. These ICs were established by

000759

-------
EPA and are included as attachments to the access and remediation agreement between NMED and the
property owner at OU-1, dated June 18, 2009. A summary of the ICs are presented in Table 1, below.

Table 1: Summary of Planned and/or Implemented ICs

Mcriiii. cniiiiK'eml controls,
iiiid ;iiv;is lliiil do mil
support I 1 /I 1. hiisod on
current conditions

ICs
Needed

ICsCsilled
lor in llic
Decision
Documents

lmp;uicd
P;irccl(s)

IC

Ol).joc(i\o

Tide of l(
Instrument
liiiplcmciilcd ;ind
l);ite (or pliiniicd)

Shallow ground water
(less than 100 feet below

ground surface);
monitoring well network

Yes

No

OU-1

No breach or
disturbance of the
monitoring wells in-
place onsite; and no
drilling and installation
of any new wells onsite
to withdraw shallow
groundwater (i.e., less

than 100 feet below
ground surface), except

for the purpose of
remediation, as needed.

Prohibition

Against
Disturbance
signed on April
25,2006,and
Restrictive
Covenant signed
on July 10, 2006

Two soil repository covers
on top of
solidified/stabilized
repository waste cells

Yes

No

OU-2

No breach or
disturbance of the
monitoring wells in-
place onsite; and no
excavation is to occur
within 10 feet of the
soil repository areas, or
in any manner that
could potentially
breach or disturb the
solidified/stabilized
repository cells.

Prohibition

Against
Disturbance
signed on April
25, 2006

Systems Operations/Operation & Maintenance

Operation & maintenance (O&M) inspections and ground water monitoring were conducted in
accordance with the O&M plans that were developed by NMED for OU-1 (2008) and OU-2 (2007).
Currently, there are no remedial systems operating onsite. Therefore, the O&M objectives consist of site
inspections and ground water monitoring to 1) ensure that activities are not occurring that could mobilize
any residual contaminants in the vadose zone and impact ground water, and 2) confirm that ground water
conditions remain below the Site cleanup standards specified in the ROD.

The NMED conducted the O&M inspections at OU-1 and OU-2 on October 30, 2013, October 29, 2014,
August 26, 2015, and August 9, 2017. During the inspections, NMED contacted the property owners and

8

000760

-------
discussed any activities or issues that may potentially impact the remedies at the Site. The NMED
officials conducted a "walk around" of the properties to inspect monitoring wells, fencing, general
housekeeping, and any evidence of activities or events that would create the potential for water ponding
and infiltration.

During the O&M inspections at OU-1 and OU-2, NMED determined that the monitoring wells that
remain in use were in secure operational condition. The inspections at OU-2 indicated there has been no
new construction debris or dumping activity at the Site. The two soil repository covers were in good
condition and intact with no evidence of surface erosion, digging, burrowing, or excavation.

III. PROGRESS SINCE THE LAST REVIEW

This section includes the protectiveness determinations and statements from the 2013 Fourth FYR Report
(Table 2), as well as the recommendations from the Fourth FYR Report and the current status of those
recommendations (Table 3).

Table 2: Protectiveness Determinations/Statements from the 2013 FYR

ou#

Protectiveness
Determination

Protectiveness Statement

Protective

The ground water pumping remedy at OU-1 significantly
decreased cyanide concentrations in ground water when
the remedy was active but eventually declined in
efficiency and effectiveness. Several efforts were
employed to improve the remedy performance over time.

Ground water from the shallow aquifer below the Site is
not useable as potable water at this present time due
mostly to its salinity. The ICs restrict access to the
shallow ground water or disturbance to the existing
monitoring wells as recommended in the ROD, and serve
to protect human health from direct exposure of any
potential contaminants.

The annual ground water monitoring results collected for
cyanide concentrations were below the 0.2 mg/L standard
in all monitoring wells in 2011, and 2012. Based on the
current five-year review and ground water data evaluation,
the sampling frequency at OU-1 will be increased to
quarterly ground water monitoring in select wells onsite to
determine if cyanide concentrations remain below the
remedial goal for eight consecutive quarters to satisfy the
New Mexico water quality requirements.

Protective

The potential exposure pathway at OU-2 was from
inhalation of lead in soil. Contaminated soils were
stabilized with cement and the disposal cell conditions

000761

-------




remain unsaturated. In addition, lead contamination has
not been detected historically in ground water at OU-2.

Exposure pathways to contaminated soil have been
controlled by the remedy, and ICs prohibiting disturbance
of the existing soil repositories onsite were established to
ensure that the remedy at OU-2 remains protective of
human health and the environment into the future.

Sitewide

Choose an item

No Site-wide protectiveness determinations/statements
were made in the 2013 FYR.

Table 3: Status of Recommendations from the 2013 FYR

OU

#

Issue

Recommendations

Current
Status

Current
Implementation
Status Description

Completion

Date (if
applicable)

1

The Site continues
to remain under
O&M and remains
on the NPL.

The NMWQCC
standard (for
cyanide) has not
been met
consistently over
time and the Site
conditions do not
meet the NMWQCC
requirements.

NMED committed to
increasing the ground
water sampling frequency
to quarterly in select
monitoring wells onsite to
determine whether cyanide
concentrations currently
change in response to
minor seasonal variations
in the static water levels,
and determine if cyanide
concentrations remain
below the remedial goal
for eight consecutive
quarters to satisfy the
NMWQCC requirements.

Completed

NMED conducted
quarterly ground
water monitoring at
OU-1 for eight
consecutive
quarters from
October 2013 to
August 2015,
thereby satisfying
NMWQCC
Regulation
[20.6.2.4103.D
NMAC],

8/26/2015

1

Recovery/extraction
wells have not
operated since
December 2001,
except for the
purpose of
collecting ground
water samples.

As of October 2013,
five recovery/
extraction wells
were no longer
effective for ground
water sampling,

Plug and abandon five
recovery/extraction wells
onsite in accordance with
the requirements for
plugging non-artesian
wells per the New Mexico
Office of the State
Engineer (NM OSE) Rules
and Regulations
Governing Well Driller
Licensing; Construction,
Repair, and Plugging of
Wells under [19.27.4.30.C
NMAC].

Completed

Five recovery/
extraction wells
were properly
plugged and
abandoned in May
2014 in accordance
with the

requirements for
plugging non-
artesian wells per
the NM OSE Rules
and Regulations.

5/20/2014

10

000762

-------


since they had gone
dry or were going
dry due to declining
water levels in the
shallow aquifer.









2

Monitoring wells
(MW-7 and MW-8)
onsite are no longer
effective for
ground water
sampling since they
are either going dry
or have gone dry
due to declining
water levels in the
shallow aquifer.

NMED will evaluate
ground water levels over
time to determine whether
water levels rise to
elevations above the
screened sections of the
OU-2 wells and avoid
replacing any wells to
conduct additional ground
water monitoring.

Ongoing

It is unlikely that
contaminants from
the repository areas
will migrate to
ground water, since
contaminated soils
were stabilized
with cement and
the disposal cell
conditions remain
unsaturated.

N/A

Recommendation # 1:

Based on the evaluation of past and current ground water conditions, cyanide concentrations have
continued to decrease over the past 20 years of monitoring at OU-1, and the cyanide contaminant plume
has diminished in extent. The analytical results for eight consecutive quarters (from October 2013 to
August 2015) did not indicate any detections of cyanide exceeding the remediation goal of 0.2 mg/L.

NMED conducted a vadose zone investigation in May 2014 to assess whether residual cyanide
contamination remains in the vadose zone at OU-1 that could potentially migrate and cause an increase in
cyanide concentrations in ground water. Five soil borings were drilled and advanced to the water table
(approximately 45 feet-below ground surface) using a sonic drilling method. Soil borings were targeted
at locations where cyanide had been detected historically in soil and ground water samples. In addition,
five grab soil samples were collected from the waste rock piles in the southeastern portion of OU-1 to
characterize the contamination in these mining/milling remnants that remain onsite.

Overall, given the low cyanide concentrations that were detected (from 0.295 to 7.74 mg/kg) and a highly
conservative screening level (the residential soil screening level [SSL] for cyanide is 1,220 mg/kg, and
the soil to ground water SSL [using a Dilution Attenuation Factor of 1] for cyanide is 7.35 mg/kg),
residual cyanide concentrations in the vadose zone and waste rock piles onsite are not expected to migrate
and cause an increase in cyanide concentrations in ground water (to exceed the 0.2 mg/L remediation
goal) via a soil to ground water pathway.

Recommendation # 2:

Five recovery/extraction wells (RW-01, RW-02, RW-03, RW-05, and RW-06) at OU-1 were no longer
effective for ground water sampling since they had gone dry due to declining water levels in the shallow
aquifer. The NMED plugged and abandoned the five recovery/extraction wells in May 2014 (Table 1,
Appendix D), in accordance with the requirements for plugging non-artesian wells per the New Mexico
Office of the State Engineer (NM OSE) Rules and Regulations Governing Well Driller Licensing;

11

000763

-------
Construction, Repair, and Plugging of Wells (19.27.4.30.C NMAC). As part of the well abandonment
activities, five concrete well vaults (approximately 7 feet in diameter by 5.5 feet long and 6 inches thick)
and the associated concrete lids (approximately 7 feet in diameter by 12 inches thick) were demolished
and removed. A water valve and metering vault of similar dimensions was also demolished and removed.

Seven monitoring wells (MW-11, MW-13, MW-14, MW-15, MW-16, MW-17, and MW-18) were no
longer needed for ground water sampling to support the remediation goals at the Site. The NMED
plugged and abandoned the seven monitoring wells in June 2015 (Table 1, Appendix D), in accordance
with the requirements for plugging non-artesian wells per the NM OSE Rules and Regulations.

Recommendation # 3:

Throughout the history of ground water monitoring at OU-2, COCs (primarily lead) have not been
detected in ground water samples collected from the wells installed to monitor the waste repositories.
Periodic water-level monitoring (once every 4-5 years) of the shallow aquifer at OU-2 will signal whether
there is a rise in water level elevations that may impact the repositories and potentially result in a
contaminant release.

The vadose zone investigation and well abandonment activities discussed in Recommendation Nos. 1 and
2 above are described in detail in Appendixes B, C, and D of the 2013-2015 Groundwater Monitoring
Report, Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site, Operable Unit 1 and 2, Carrizozo, Lincoln
County, New Mexico (NMED, 2016).

IV. FIVE-YEAR REVIEW PROCESS
Community Notification, Involvement & Site Interviews

A public notice was posted on November 29, 2017 in the Ruidoso News stating that EPA was conducting
the fifth FYR of the remedy, with the results of the review to be presented in a FYR report. The public
notice also invited the public to submit any comments to the EPA and stated the report would be made
available at the following Site information repository:

Carrizozo Community Public Library and Archive
P.O. Box 1053
Carrizozo, NM 88301
CarrizozoLibrarv@,yahoo. com

During the FYR process, interviews were conducted to document any perceived problems or successes to
date with the remedy that has been implemented. Interview records are included in Appendix F. The
results of these interviews are summarized below.

An interview was conducted on January 17, 2018 with Mr. Tim Means, the property owner/resident at
OU-1. Overall, Mr. Means felt well informed about the Site's activities and progress, and he expressed
thanks to EPA and NMED for the efforts made in protecting his health and well-being. His overall

000764

-------
impression of the project is that the remedy has taken very long to complete. Mr. Means would like to see
OU-1 achieve closure and delisting, to enable redevelopment of the property in the future.

An interview was conducted on January 18, 2018 with Mr. Rick Hyatt, the Mayor for the town of
Carrizozo. Specific concerns that Mr. Hyatt expressed included questions as to when the Site would be
delisted from the NPL, and how much longer ground water monitoring activities would be conducted at
OU-2. Mr. Hyatt recommended that fences and signage be installed around the two OU-2 soil
repositories, since they will need to be inspected periodically in perpetuity.

Data Review

OU-1, Ground Water Monitoring

Ground water monitoring activities at OU-1 were conducted on a quarterly basis from October 2013
through August 2015, with one additional event to support this FYR in August 2017. Ground water
monitoring activities at OU-1 included: 1) measuring and recording of water levels at 14 monitoring
wells (four of these wells were abandoned in June 2015); 2) purging and ground water sample collection
at nine monitoring wells and one recovery well; and 3) submittal of water samples to NMED-contract
analytical laboratories for analysis of cyanide and metals.

Based on static water levels (SWLs) measured from October 2013 through August 2015, the hydraulic
gradient ranges from 0.0251 feet/foot to 0.0265 feet/foot with a northwest flow direction at OU-1 (Table
2, Appendix D). Potentiometric surface contour maps were developed using SWL measurements taken
on October 30, 2013, August 4, 2014, and August 26, 2015 (Figures 4, 5 and 6, Appendix D), which
include historical trends from October 2012 through August 2015 for monitoring wells at OU-1.

Total cyanide was detected in samples from four monitoring wells (MW-03, MW-04, MW-06 and MW-
10), at concentrations ranging from 0.012 mg/L to 0.129 mg/L (Tables 3 through 10, Appendix D). When
ground water monitoring at OU-1 began in October 1989, the maximum total cyanide concentrations in
these monitoring wells ranged from 0.45 mg/L to 4.33 mg/L.

Isoconcentration contour maps were developed for total cyanide concentrations in October 2013 and
October 2014 (see Appendix D), with time-series plots for cyanide concentrations from October 2012
through August 2015. Overall, the ground water sampling results show a significant decrease in cyanide
concentrations since October 2008, and as of October 2011, total cyanide concentrations remained below
the 0.2 mg/L remediation goal (see Exhibit 1 below).

The August 2017 ground water sampling results indicate that total cyanide was detected in samples from
the same four monitoring wells (MW-03, MW-04, MW-06 and MW-10), at concentrations ranging from
0.047 mg/L to 0.068 mg/L (Table 11, Appendix D).

The August 2017 ground water sampling results also indicate that there were no detections of dissolved
metals above the EPA maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) orNMWQCC ground water standards,
except for manganese at concentrations ranging from 0.043 mg/L to 1.3 mg/L (NMWQCC standard is 0.2

000765

-------
mg/L). During this FYR period, manganese concentrations of 1.0 mg/L to 1.5 mg/L were detected in
samples from monitoring well MW-04, which is near the former cinder block trenches. However,
manganese concentrations as great as 1.4 mg/L were also detected in livestock wells around the town of
Carrizozo area (USGS 2012). It is uncertain whether the high manganese concentrations at MW-04 are
sourced from the Site or represent natural background concentrations.

Exhibit 1: Total Cyanide Concentrations from October 2008 through August 2015	

Total Cyanide (CN) Concentrations: MW-03, MW-04, MW-06, & MW-10

0.400 	

0.350

0.300

0.100

0.050

E,

Z 0.200

OU-2, Ground Water Monitoring

Ground water samples were not collected from the downgradient monitoring well (MW-08) during the
2013-2017 sampling events because this well has been dry since 2008. Ground water sampling results for
up-gradient monitoring well (MW-07) and inactive supply well (6AG), indicate that there were no
detections of dissolved metals above the MCLs or NMWQCC standards, except for manganese (0.05
mg/L to 0.32 mg/L) during the 2013-2015 quarterly sampling events.

Site Inspection

The inspection of the Site was conducted on January 17, 2018. In attendance were Mr. Mark Purcell,
Remedial Project Manager (RPM), EPA-Region 6, with support from Mr. Angelo Ortelli, of the NMED-
GWQB, Superfund Oversight Section. Mr. Allan (Buddy) Henderson, resident and technical contact for

14

000766

-------
the Town of Carrizozo, also participated in the inspection at OU-2. The purpose of the inspection was to
assess the protectiveness of the remedies at OU-1 and OU-2.

No issues were identified with the ground water monitoring system or the ICs put in place to prevent the
disturbance of the existing monitoring wells located onsite, or the drilling of any new wells and use of the
shallow ground water at OU-1. Operable Unit 1 is currently being used for residential and commercial
purposes. The ground water is not used as a source of drinking water; therefore, no change in exposure or
risk has occurred that would question the protectiveness of the remedy for OU-1. Any future use of the
OU-1 ground water as a drinking water source would also not be expected to affect the protectiveness of
the remedy for cyanide based on the current water quality data.

The current owner of OU-2 is the town of Carrizozo which, along with Lincoln County, uses the property
for the disposal of construction/demolition refuse. Construction debris has been piled close to the
westernmost soil repository, but does not cover it. The repository corners were marked with rebar during
the October 2012 inspection/sampling event. Five-foot long metal fence posts were staked at the corners
of the repositories by EPA and NMED during the January 2018 inspection conducted for this FYR. The
two monitoring wells located on-site were in good condition and remained locked. The 6-inch diameter
steel casing for well 6AG needs to be properly secured and locked to restrict access by unauthorized
personnel; however, this is the responsibility of the current property owner (i.e., town of Carrizozo). Site
access is through the adjacent town of Carrizozo property, and is controlled by a locked gate on the west
side of the property.

V. TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT

QUESTION A: Is the remedy functioning as intended by the decision documents?

Question A Summary:

The OU-1 ROD recognized the possibility that the ground water extraction remedy may not achieve the
cleanup goal and considered the following contingency actions:

• Low rate of pumping for long-term ground water flow control and containment;

• Waiver of chemical-specific applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) for the
cleanup of those portions of the aquifer based on technical impracticability of achieving further
contaminant reduction; and

• Implementation of ICs to avoid disturbance of the monitoring network and prevent ground water
use as a drinking water source in those portions of the aquifer which remain above the health-
based goals.

Overall, cyanide concentrations in ground water had been reduced significantly by the time the ground
water extraction operations ceased in 2001; however, two monitoring wells (MW-04 and MW-06) and
three extraction wells (RW-02, RW-03, and RW-06) continued to show cyanide concentrations above the

000767

-------
0.2 mg/L remediation goal until 2011. Ground water sampling results for eight consecutive quarters
(from October 2013 to August 2015) did not indicate any detections of cyanide exceeding the remediation
goal of 0.2 mg/L.

During the 2013 to 2018 review period, the cyanide concentrations in ground water at OU-1 have
remained below the EPA MCL and NMWQCC standards; therefore, the overarching goals of the ROD
and the remedy have been met at the Site. Operable Unit 1 meets the conditions of the ROD and the
NMWQCC standard for cyanide, based on the results of eight consecutive quarters of ground water
monitoring during the 2013 to 2015 timeframe.

The data review completed at OU-2 indicates the completed remedy, which consisted of excavation,
stabilization, and on-site burial of the lead-contaminated soils, is functioning as intended. Cleanup
criteria (i.e., To-Be-Considered criteria [TBCs]) for soil contamination cited in the ROD were met when
the remedy was completed. Since hazardous waste is left on-site, site inspections and ground water
monitoring will continue to ensure the on-going protection of human health and environment.

The location of the two capped repositories were not adequately marked on property owned by the town
of Carrizozo. The existing corner rebar posts were only a few inches high and had been covered by
vegetation. To address this, five-foot long metal fence posts were staked at the corners of the repositories
by EPA and NMED during the inspection. The ICs established by EPA have been effective in
prohibiting the disturbance of the repositories.

Based on the current FYR, there is no other information that would question the protectiveness of the
remedy at OU-2.

QUESTION B: Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial
action objectives (RAOs) used at the time of the remedy selection still valid?

Question B Summary:

The exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial action objectives used at the time
of the remedy remain valid. Federal or state standards and TBCs identified for contaminants of concern
(COCs) identified in the RODs for OU-1 and OU-2 have not changed during this FYR period. There
have not been any new standards promulgated for cyanide that impact the protectiveness of the remedy
selected in the RODs. A more stringent TBC criterion for lead in soil was established by both NMED
and EPA since the RODs were issued. The NMED established a 400 mg/Kg lead criterion in a 2012 Risk
Assessment Guidance for Site Investigations and Remediation. The EPA Region 6 established the same
400 mg/Kg lead criterion in the 2017 Human Health Medium-Specific Regional Screening Levels (RSLs)
for residential soil. Although the selected cleanup level for lead in surface soils and sediments was 500
mg/Kg, confirmation soil sampling results showed the maximum lead concentration at the Site to be 370
mg/Kg in surface soils, which is below the 400 mg/Kg TBC criterion for lead and supports the
protectiveness of the completed remedy. The EPA is in the process of updating its lead policy based on
recent studies, which indicate that lower blood lead levels may be associated with health effects. The
EPA Region 6 will continue to use the current lead policy until it is updated.

000768

-------
Ground Water Remediation
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements for OU-1

coc

Chemical Specific

Standard
Remediation Goal
ARAR

Action Specific Standard
Pretreatment ARAR

Source

Cyanide
(CN)

0.2 mg/L

_

NMWQCC GWS, 20.6.2.3103 NMAC
EPA MCL (SDWA), 40 CFR 141.11

-

5.0 mg/L

EPA Effluent Guidelines and Standards
40CFR 413.24

Surface Soils, Sediments, and Waste Rock Remediation
To-Be-Considered Criteria for OU-2

COC

Media

Cleanup
Level

TBCs

Source

Lead
(Pb)

Surface
soils,
sediments,
and waste
rock

500
mg/Kg

Previous
(ROD)

500-1000
mg/Kg

Interim Guidance on Establishing Soil Cleanup
Levels at Superfund Sites (OSWER Directive
#93355.4-02, EPA, 1989)

Recent

400 mg/Kg

EPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) Resident
Soil Table (TR=lE-06, HQ=1) November 2017





Recent

400 mg/Kg

NMED Risk Assessment Guidance for
Site Investigations and Remediation
February 2012 (updated June 2012)

QUESTION C : Has any other information come to light that could call into question the
protectiveness of the remedy?

There have been no changes in physical conditions at the Site that would affect the protectiveness of the
remedy into the future. Following the FYR process, no additional information was identified that would
question the protectiveness of the remedies at either operable unit.

VI. ISSUES/RECOMMENDATIONS

Issues/Recommendations

Issues/Recommendations Identified in the l"i\e-Year Rexiew:

OU-1: No Issues/Recommendations
OU-2: No Issues/Recommendations

17

000769

-------
OTHER FINDINGS

The following recommendations were identified during the FYR, but do not affect the current and/or
future protectiveness of the remedy:

1. Evaluate whether the OU-1 ground water meets the criteria for deletion from the NPL, based on
the conditions listed below.

a. Eight consecutive quarters of ground water monitoring data (October 2013 through
August 2015) indicate that cyanide concentrations have remained below the NMWQCC
standard established for cyanide (0.2 mg/L), thereby satisfying the requirement of
NMWQCC 20.6.2.4103.

b. The August 2017 ground water sampling results indicate that total cyanide was detected
at concentrations ranging from 0.047 mg/L to 0.068 mg/L, which supports the 2013-2015
findings.

c. Residual cyanide concentrations in the vadose zone at OU-1 are not expected to migrate
and cause an increase in cyanide concentrations in ground water (to exceed the 0.2 mg/L
remediation goal) via a soil to ground water pathway.

The NPL Site Deletion for OU-1 (partial deletion - soil only) and OU-2 took place on August 31,
2001. The delisting of the OU-1 ground water would complete the NPL Site Deletion.

2. Although ICs prohibiting disturbance of the existing soil repositories are in place at OU-2, the town
of Carrizozo recommends fencing the repository areas and posting signage that indicates the
repository type, date, and contact information.

VII. PROTECTIVENESS STATEMENT

Protectiveness Statement(s)

Operable Unit: Protectiveness Determination:

1 Protective

Protectiveness Statement:

The remedy at OU-1 is protective of human health and the environment.

Exposure pathways to contaminated ground water have been controlled by the remedy. Institutional
controls prohibiting disturbance of existing monitoring wells and restricting drilling and installation of
any new wells to withdraw shallow ground water (i.e., less than 100 feet deep) onsite were established
to ensure that the remedy at OU-1 remains protective of human health and the environment into the
future.

000770

-------
Protectiveness Statement(s)

Operable Unit:	Protectiveness Determination:

2	Protective

Protectiveness Statement:

The remedy at OU-2 is protective of human health and the environment.

Exposure pathways to contaminated soil have been controlled by the remedy. Institutional controls
prohibiting disturbance of the two on-site soil repositories are established to ensure that the remedy at
OU-2 remains protective of human health and the environment into the future.

Sitewide Protectiveness Statement

Protectiveness Determination:

Protective

Protectiveness Statement:

Remedial actions at both OUs are currently protective of human health and the environment. There is
no known human exposure for the ground water exposure pathway at OU-1. In addition, there is no
known human exposure for the contaminated soil exposure pathway at OU-2 and the established
institutional controls prohibit the disturbance of the on-site soil repositories. Therefore, the Site-wide
remedy is protective.

VIII. NEXT REVIEW

The next five-year review report for the Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site is required five years
from the completion date of this review.

000771

19

-------
APPENDIXES

000772

-------
APPENDIX A
LIST OF REFERENCES

000773

-------
Documents Reviewed

D. B. Stephens and Associates (DBS&A), 2008. "Supplemental Site Investigation and Evaluation of
Remedial Alternatives, Cimarron Mining Corporation Mill Site, Carrizozo, New Mexico". February
1, 2008.

DBS&A, 2014. "Plugging and Abandonment of Recovery Wells, Operable Unit 1, Cimarron Mining
Company Superfund Site, Carrizozo, New Mexico June 25, 2014.

DBS&A, 2014. "Summary Report for Drilling and Soil Sampling of the Vadose Zone at Operable
Unit 1, Cimarron Mining Company Superfund Site, Carrizozo, New Mexico June 25, 2014.

DBS&A, 2015. "Plugging and Abandonment of Monitor Wells, Operable Unit 1, Cimarron Mining
Company Superfund Site, Carrizozo, New Mexico". June 30, 2015.

New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), 2006. Table A-l, NMED Soil Screening Levels, Risk
Assessment Guidance for Site Investigations and Remediation. June 2006.

NMED, 2016. "2013-2015 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Cimarron Mining Corporation
Superfund Site, Operable Unit 1 and 2, Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico". March 2016.

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2003. "Performance Monitoring Report for Ground Water
Remediation, Cimarron Abandoned Mining Site, Carrizozo, New Mexico", prepared by AVM
Environmental Services, Inc., Grants, New Mexico and Applied Hydrology Associates, Inc., March 3,
2003.

U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, 1991. "Field Operations Plan for Remediation of Operable Unit 1 of
the Cimarron Mining Corporation Site, Carrizozo, New Mexico". August 27, 1991.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 1997. "Contaminated Soil Remediation Report, Sierra Blanca Unit,
Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site, Carrizozo, New Mexico". August 1997.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 6, 1990. "EPA Superfund Record of Decision,
Cimarron Mining Corp., EPA ID: NMD980749378, OU 01, Carrizozo, NM". EPA/ROD/R06-
90/060. September 12, 1990.

U.S. EPA, Region 6, 1991. "EPA Superfund Record of Decision, Cimarron Mining Corp., EPA ID:
NMD980749378, OU 02, Carrizozo, NM". EPA/ROD/R06-91/067. September 6, 1991.

U.S. EPA, Region 6, 2013. "Fourth Five-Year Review Report for the Cimarron Mining Corporation
Superfund Site Operable Unit 1 and 2, Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico". Document No.
691625. S eptember 2013.

U.S. EPA, 2017. "EPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) Resident Soil Table (TR=lE-06, HQ=1).
November 2017.

U. S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, 2012. "Geochemistry of Water Samples in
the United States from the National Uranium Resource Evaluation - Hydrogeochemical and Stream
Sediment Reconnaissance (NURE-HSSR) Program Database". Sixty-six records were downloaded
using a Geographic Information System (GIS) interface with Google Earth, December 20, 2012.

000774

-------
APPENDIX B
SITE CHRONOLOGY

000775

-------
Chronology of Events for Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site

Date

Event

1960- 1982

Iron and precious metal milling activities at Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1)

February 1980

NMEID field inspections of the Site

1982

Precious metal milling operations resumed at Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2)

June 1982

NMEID identified presence of cyanide and elevated metals in shallow ground water

June 22, 1982

NMEID sent a notice of violation to Cimarron Mining Corporation for discharge
into unpermitted discharge pit.

April, May-June 1984

NMEID Site Inspections at Cimarron Mill Site & Sierra Blanca Mill Site

February 1985

NMEID Site inspection report

January to October, 1987

Expanded Site Inspection (ESI) by EPA for HRS process at OU-1

March 1989

RI/FS commencement at OU-1

October 4, 1989

Cimarron Mining Corporation Site (OU-1 and OU-2) Placed on NPL

June 15, 1990

RI/FS Completed at OU-1

July 1990

Proposed Plan of Remedial Action for OU-1

September 21, 1990

EPA issued ROD for OU-1

June 1991

RI/FS completed at OU-2

June 1991

Proposed Plan of Remedial Action for OU-2

September 6, 1991

EPA issued a ROD for OU-2

December 1991

RD/RA Implementation at OU-2

September 24, 1992

Remedial Action Completion and Preliminary Close-out Report for OU-2

September 22, 1993

ESD for Revision of Recovery well installation (from three wells to seven wells) at
OU-1

January 1993

Ground Water Remedy (Extraction/Treatment) Action Construction Completed at
OU-1

April 1993

Ground Water Remedy Operational and Functional Period Complete at OU-1

September 1993

Interim Closeout Report, Construction activities completion for OU-1 and OU-2

July 1996

Additional soil contaminated with lead identified at OU-2

August 1996 - July 1997

Additional lead contaminated soil areas remediated

March - May 1998

General cleanup, disposal area caps re-vegetation and monitoring well
abandonment at OU-2

July 1998

First Five-Year Review completed

August 31, 2001

Partial deletion of Sierra Blanca Operable Unit 2

December 18, 2001

Suspension of Ground Water Pumping and Performance Assessment Monitoring
Implementation at OU-1

August 2002

Performance Assessment Monitoring Completion at OU-1

March 2003

Performance Assessment Monitoring Report for OU-1

July 2003

Second Five-Year Review completed

000776

-------
Chronology of Events for Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site

Date

Event

August 12, 2005

Final Close-out Report for OU-1

September 2005

Site management responsibility transferred from EPA to NMED

April 26, 2006

Prohibition Against Disturbance - Institutional Control was established for OUs 1
and 2

July 10, 2006

Restrictive Covenant - Institutional Control was established for OU-1

December 2007

Supplemental Site Investigation and Evaluation of Remedial Alternatives
performed by NMED at OU-1

December 2007

Operation & Maintenance Plan prepared by NMED for OU-2

April 2008

Operation & Maintenance Plan prepared by NMED for OU-1

July 2008

Third Five-Year Review completed

June 2009

Regrading Activities at OU-1, performed by NMED

February 2011

Annual Monitoring Reports, 2008-2009, and 2010 prepared by NMED

September 2013

2011 Annual Monitoring Report, prepared by NMED

September 2013

Fourth Five-Year Review completed

January 2014

2012 Annual Monitoring Report, prepared by NMED

May 2014

Plugging and Abandonment of Recovery Wells at OU-1, performed by NMED

June 2014

Drilling and Soil Sampling of the Vadose Zone at OU-1, performed by NMED

March 2015

2013-2014 Annual Monitoring Report, prepared by NMED

June 2015

Plugging and Abandonment of Monitor Wells at OU-1, performed by NMED

March 2016

2013-2015 Groundwater Monitoring Report, prepared by NMED

000777

-------
APPENDIX C
SITE INSPECTION CHECKLISTS

000778

-------
OU-1 Site Inspection Checklist

I. SITE INFORMATION

Site name:

Cimarron Mining Corporation
Superfund Site, Operable Unit (OU) - 1

Date of inspection: January 17, 2018

Location and Region:

Carrizozo, New Mexico, EPA Region 6

EPA ID: NMD980749378

Agency, office, or company leading the five-
year review:

New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)

Weather/temperature:

Mostly sunny, 40-45 °F, Winds-West at 5-10 mph

Remedy Includes: (Check all that apply)

Landfill cover/containment	Monitored natural attenuation

X Access controls	Groundwater containment

X Institutional controls	Vertical barrier walls

X Groundwater pump and treatment (specifically ground water extraction, ended in December 2001)
Surface water collection and treatment
Other

Attachments: Site map attached

II. INTERVIEWS (Check all that apply)

1. O&M site manager: Angelo Ortelli

Name

Interviewed: at site at office by phone
Problems, suggestions; Report attached	

NMED Project Manager January 17. 2018
Title	Date

Phone no.

2. O&M staff

Name Title
Interviewed at site at office by phone
Problems, suggestions; Report attached	

Date

Phone no.

000779

-------
3. Local regulatory authorities and response agencies (i.e., State and Tribal offices, emergency response office,
police department, office of public health or environmental health, zoning office, recorder of deeds, or other city
and county offices, etc.) Fill in all that apply.

Agency: Town of Carrizozo

Contact: Mr. Rick Hyatt	 Mayor	 1/18/2018 575-648-2371

Name	Title	Date Phone no.

Problems; suggestions; Report attached 	

Agency	

Contact	 	 	 	

Name Title Date Phone no.
Problems; suggestions; Report attached 	

Agency	

Contact	 	 	 	

Name Title Date Phone no.
Problems; suggestions; Report attached 	

Agency	

Contact	 	 	 	

Name Title Date Phone no.
Problems; suggestions; Report attached 	

4. Other interviews (optional) Report attached.

Mr. Tim Means, Property owner/resident at 6589 Hwy. 380, Carrizozo, NM
Mr. Alan (Buddy) Henderson, Property owner/resident

000780

-------
III. ON-SITE DOCUMENTS & RECORDS VERIFIED (Check all that apply)

O&M Documents

O&M manual X Readily available Up to date N/A
As-built drawings Readily available Up to date X N/A
Maintenance logs Readily available Up to date X N/A
Remarks: O&M Plans were developed bv NMED for OU-1 in April 2008. O&M activities completed over the

past five vears were regarding activities and around water monitoring.

Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan X Readily available Up to date N/A
Contingency plan/emergency response plan Readily available Up to date X N/A
Remarks: Site-Specific Health and Safetv Plan (SSHSP) has been developed for around water monitorina

activities. Emeraencv contacts are included in the SSHSP.

O&M and OSHA Training Records X Readily available Up to date
Remarks: NMED maintains OSHA trainina records for all staff

N/A

Permits and Service Agreements

Air discharge permit Readily available Up to date X N/A
Effluent discharge Readily available Up to date X N/A
Waste disposal, POTW Readily available Up to date X N/A
Other permits Readily available Up to date X N/A
Remarks: The around water extraction svstem has not operated since December 2001. and well purae water

discharae to the POTW has not been conducted since 2010. Cvanide concentrations in around water have been

below the 0.200 ma/L standard, durina the 2011-2015 around water samplina events, and did not warrant

discharae to the POTW.

Gas Generation Records Readily available Up to date
Remarks

XN/A

Settlement Monument Records Readily available Up to date
Remarks

XN/A

Groundwater Monitoring Records X Readily available Up to date N/A

Remarks: Ground water monitorina reports have been prepared from 2008-2015. which include the around

water samplina results for all monitorina wells.

Leachate Extraction Records Readily available Up to date
Remarks

XN/A

Discharge Compliance Records

Air Readily available Up to date
Water (effluent) Readily available Up to date
Remarks

XN/A
XN/A

10.

Daily Access/Security Logs Readily available Up to date
Remarks

XN/A

000781

-------
IV. O&M COSTS

O&M Organization

X State in-house
PRP in-house
Federal Facility in-house
Other

Contractor for State
Contractor for PRP
Contractor for Federal Facility

O&M Cost Records

Readily available Up to date
X Funding mechanism/agreement in place

Total annual cost by year for review period

From October 2013 to October 2014

Date

From October 2014 to October 2015

Date

From October 2015 to October 2017

Date

$140.000 Plug & Abandon Recovery Wells;

Total cost Drill & Sample Vadose Zone; and
Quarterly Ground Water Monitoring

$65.500 Plug & Abandon Monitoring Wells; and

Total cost Quarterly Ground Water Monitoring

$8.500 Ground Water Monitoring Event to

Total cost Support the Fifth Five-Year Review

3. Unanticipated or Unusually High O&M Costs During Review Period

Describe costs and reasons:

In May 2014. approximately $47.500 was spent on the plugging and abandonment of five recovery wells
(RW-1. RW-2. RW-3. RW-5. and RW-6) and the associated concrete vaults onsite.

In June 2014. approximately $48.000 was spent on the drilling and sampling of five vadose zone borings, each
to approximately a 50-foot depth; and surface soil sampling onsite.

In June 2015. approximately $15.500 was spent on plugging and abandonment of seven monitoring wells
(MW-11. MW-13. MW-14. MW-15. MW-16. MW-17. and MW-18).

V. ACCESS AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS X Applicable N/A

A. Fencing

1. Fencing damaged Location shown on site map Gates secured N/A

Remarks: Fencing and gates are intact, and property owner resides onsite and controls access.

B. Other Access Restrictions

1. Signs and other security measures

Remarks

Location shown on site map

XN/A

000782

-------
c.

Institutional Controls (ICs)



1.

Implementation and enforcement

Site conditions imply ICs not properly implemented Yes
Site conditions imply ICs not being fully enforced Yes

Tvpe of monitoring self-reporting, drive b\ ) Site inspections

XNo N/A
XNo N/A



Frequency Annual





Responsible partv/aaencv NMED





Contact Angelo Ortelli Project Manager

1/17/2018 505-827-2866



Name Title

Date Phone no.



Reporting is up-to-date

Reports are verified by the lead agency

Specific requirements in deed or decision documents have been met

Violations have been reported

Other problems or suggestions: Report attached

Yes No XN/A
Yes No XN/A
Yes No XN/A
Yes No XN/A



















2.

Adequacy X ICs are adequate ICs are inadequate N/A

Remarks: ICs were established to prohibit disturbance of the existing monitoring wells onsite and restricting



access to the shallow ground water to ensure that the remedv remains protective of human health and the



environment into the future.



D.

General



1.

Vandalism/trespassing Location shown on site map X No vandalism evident
Remarks







2.

Land use changes on site X N/A

Remarks









3.

Land use changes off site X N/A

Remarks









VI. GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS

A.

Roads Applicable X N/A



1.

Roads damaged Location shown on site map Roads adequate X N/A
Remarks







000783

-------
B.

Other Site Conditions





Remarks:

The land use at OU-1 is currently an auto repair shop and salvage vard. The owner of the auto repair shop has



resided onsite during the past 17 vears. Waste rock piles are still present in the southeast corner of the Site.



Rainfall accumulates in a topographically low area near monitoring well. MW-02; however, elevated cvanide



or metals concentrations have not been observed in this well based on historical around water sampling results.













VII. LANDFILL COVERS Applicable XN/A

A.

Landfill Surface



1.

Settlement (Low spots)
Areal extent
Remarks

Location shown on site map Settlement not evident
Depth







2.

Cracks

Lengths

Location shown on site map Cracking not evident
Widths Depths



Remarks









3.

Erosion

Areal extent
Remarks

Location shown on site map Erosion not evident
Depth







4.

Holes

Areal extent
Remarks

Location shown on site map Holes not evident
Depth







5.

Vegetative Cover Grass Cover properly established No signs of stress

Trees/Shrubs (indicate size and locations on a diagram)

Remarks







6.

Alternative Cover (armored rock, concrete, etc.) N/A

Remarks







7.

Bulges

Areal extent

Location shown on site map Bulges not evident
Height



Remarks















000784

-------
8.

Wet Areas/Water Damage Wet areas/water damage not evident
Wet areas Location shown on site map Areal extent
Ponding Location shown on site map Areal extent
Seeps Location shown on site map Areal extent
Soft subgrade Location shown on site map Areal extent
Remarks

Slope Instability Slides Location shown on site map No evidence of slope instability

Areal extent

Remarks

Benches Applicable X N/A

(Horizontally constructed mounds of earth placed across a steep landfill side slope to interrupt the slope in
order to slow down the velocity of surface runoff and intercept and convey the runoff to a lined channel.)

Flows Bypass Bench

Remarks

Location shown on site map N/A or okay

Bench Breached

Remarks

Location shown on site map N/A or okay

Bench Overtopped

Remarks

Location shown on site map N/A or okay

Letdown Channels Applicable X N/A

(Channel lined with erosion control mats, riprap, grout bags, or gabions that descend down the steep side slope
of the cover and will allow the runoff water collected by the benches to move off of the landfill cover without
creating erosion gullies.)

Settlement

Areal extent
Remarks

Location shown on site map No evidence of settlement
Depth

Material Degradation

Material type

Location shown on site map No evidence of degradation
Areal extent

Remarks

Erosion

Areal extent

Location shown on site map No evidence of erosion
Depth

Remarks

000785

-------
4.

Undercutting Location shown on site map No evidence of undercutting

Areal extent Depth

Remarks







5.

Obstructions Type No obstructions

Location shown on site map Areal extent

Size

Remarks







6.

Excessive Vegetative Growth Type





No evidence of excessive growth
Vegetation in channels does not obstruct flow
Location shown on site map Areal extent
Remarks









D. Cover Penetrations Applicable X N/A

1.

Gas Vents Active Passive
Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
Evidence of leakage at penetration Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A







2.

Gas Monitoring Probes

Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
Evidence of leakage at penetration Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A







3.

Monitoring Wells (within surface area of landfill)

Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
Evidence of leakage at penetration Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A







4.

Leachate Extraction Wells

Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
Evidence of leakage at penetration Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A







5.

Settlement Monuments Located Routinely surveyed
Remarks

N/A







000786

-------
E.

Gas Collection and Treatment

Applicable X N/A

1.

Gas Treatment Facilities

Flaring Thermal destruction Collection for reuse
Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks









2.

Gas Collection Wells, Manifolds and Piping

Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks











3.

Gas Monitoring Facilities (e.g., gas monitoring of adjacent homes or buildings)
Good condition Needs Maintenance N/A
Remarks









F.

Cover Drainage Layer

Applicable

XN/A

1.

Outlet Pipes Inspected

Remarks

Functioning

N/A









2.

Outlet Rock Inspected

Remarks

Functioning

N/A









G.

Detention/Sedimentation Ponds

Applicable

XN/A

1.

Siltation Areal extent



Depth N/A



Siltation not evident
Remarks













2.

Erosion Areal extent

Depth



Erosion not evident
Remarks













3.

Outlet Works Functioning N/A
Remarks











4.

Dam Functioning N/A
Remarks











000787

-------
H. Retaining Walls Applicable

XN/A

1. Deformations Location shown on site map Deformation not evident
Horizontal displacement Vertical displacement

Rotational displacement
Remarks



2. Degradation Location shown on site map
Remarks

Degradation not evident



I. Perimeter Ditches/Off-Site Discharge Applicable

XN/A

1. Siltation Location shown on site map
Areal extent Depth
Remarks

Siltation not evident



2. Vegetative Growth Location shown on site map
Areal extent Type
Remarks

N/A Vegetation does not impede flow



3. Erosion Location shown on site map
Areal extent Depth

Erosion not evident

Remarks





4. Discharge Structure Functioning N/A
Remarks



VIII. VERTICAL BARRIER WALLS

Applicable X N/A

1. Settlement Location shown on site map
Areal extent Depth

Settlement not evident

Remarks





2. Performance Monitoring Type of monitoring
Frequency
Head differential
Remarks

Performance not monitored
Evidence of breaching



000788

-------
IX. GROUND WATER/SURFACE WATER REMEDIES X Applicable N/A

Groundwater Extraction Wells, Pumps, and Pipelines Applicable X N/A

Pumps, Wellhead Plumbing, and Electrical

Good condition All required wells properly operating Needs Maintenance X N/A
Remarks: Recovery/extraction wells have not operated since December 2001. except for the purpose of
collecting around water samples. Since the extraction svstem has been inoperative, the submersible pumps and

piping in recovery wells RW-5. RW-6. and RW-7 were removed as of October 2011.

In Mav 2014. NMED completed the plueeine and abandonment of five recovery wells (RW-1. RW-2. RW-3.
RW-5. and RW-6) and the associated concrete vaults onsite. One recovery well (RW-7) continues to be used
only for periodic around water monitoring.

Extraction System Pipelines, Valves, Valve Boxes, and Other Appurtenances

Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks: The recovery/extraction svstem has not operated since December 2001 (see remarks above).

Spare Parts and Equipment

Readily available Good condition Requires upgrade Needs to be provided
Remarks

B. Surface Water Collection Structures, Pumps, and Pipelines Applicable X N/A

Collection Structures, Pumps, and Electrical

Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Surface Water Collection System Pipelines, Valves, Valve Boxes, and Other Appurtenances

Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Spare Parts and Equipment

Readily available Good condition Requires upgrade Needs to be provided
Remarks

000789

-------
c.

Treatment System Applicable XN/A

1.

Treatment Train (Check components that apply)

Metals removal Oil/water separation Bioremediation
Air stripping Carbon adsorbers
Filters

Additive (t\.e. chelation agent, flocculent)

Others

Good condition Needs Maintenance
Sampling ports properly marked and functional
Sampling/maintenance log displayed and up to date
Equipment properly identified
Quantity of groundwater treated annually
Quantity of surface water treated annually
Remarks

2.

Electrical Enclosures and Panels (properly rated and functional)
N/A Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks

3.

Tanks, Vaults, Storage Vessels

N/A Good condition Proper secondary containment Needs Maintenance
Remarks

4.

Discharge Structure and Appurtenances

N/A Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks

5.

Treatment Building(s)

N/A Good condition (esp. roof and doorways) Needs repair
Chemicals and equipment properly stored
Remarks

6.

Monitoring Wells (pump and treatment remedy)

Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled Good condition
All required wells located Needs Maintenance N/A
Remarks

D. Monitoring Data

1.

Monitoring Data
Is routinely submitted on time X Is of acceptable quality

2.

Monitoring data suggests:

Groundwater plume is effectively contained X Contaminant concentrations are declining

000790

-------
D.

Monitored Natural Attenuation

Monitoring Wells (natural attenuation remedy)

X Properly secured/locked X Functioning X Routinely sampled Good condition
All required wells located Needs Maintenance N/A

Remarks: Nine monitoring wells were used for around water sampling: MW-02. MW-03. MW-04. MW-05.
MW-06. MW-07. MW-08. MW-10. and MW-12. Monitoring wells were sampled auarterlv in 2013-2015 to
satisfV the NMWOCC requirements.

OTHER REMEDIES

If there are remedies applied at the site which are not covered above, attach an inspection sheet describing the
physical nature and condition of any facility associated with the remedy. An example would be soil vapor
extraction.

XI. OVERALL OBSERVATIONS

Implementation of the Remedy

Describe issues and observations relating to whether the remedy is effective and functioning as designed. Begin
with a brief statement of what the remedy is to accomplish (i.e., to contain contaminant plume, minimize
infiltration and gas emission, etc.).

The around water extraction svstem has reduced cvanide concentrations to the extent practicable.
The recoverv/extraction svstem has not operated since December 2001. The around water pumpina remedv
sianificantlv decreased cvanide concentrations in around water, and cvanide concentrations have remained
below the 0.200 ma/L standard in all monitorina wells since 2011.

Adequacy of O&M

Describe issues and observations related to the implementation and scope of O&M procedures. In particular,
discuss their relationship to the current and long-term protectiveness of the remedy.

000791

-------
C. Early Indicators of Potential Remedy Problems

Describe issues and observations such as unexpected changes in the cost or scope of O&M or a high frequency
of unscheduled repairs that suggest that the protectiveness of the remedy may be compromised in the future.

Since the extraction system has been inoperative, the submersible pumps and piping in extraction/recovery wells
RW-5. RW-6. and RW-7 were removed as of October 2011.

Furthermore, five extraction wells were no longer effective for ground water sampling since thev had gone dry
due to declining water levels in the shallow aquifer.

D. Opportunities for Optimization

Describe possible opportunities for optimization in monitoring tasks or the operation of the remedy.

During the 2013 through 2018 review period, the following optimization measures were implemented for
ground water monitoring tasks:

1) The extent of cyanide contamination in the shallow aquifer was evaluated using a focused monitoring
network consisting of nine monitoring wells (MW-02. MW-03. MW-04. MW-05. MW-06. MW-07.
MW-08. MW-10. and MW-12) and one inactive recovery well (RW-07).

2) Greater consistency in ground water sampling was achieved by adhering to low-flow sampling methods
(i.e. Barcad and low-flow purging).

3) Based on historical data, cyanide occurs in a relatively stable form and biodegradation has slowed
significantly over the past decade; therefore, sampling and analysis was limited to total cyanide by EPA
Method 335.4. and dissolved metals by EPA Methods EPA 200.7 and 200.8.

4) Cyanide concentrations had decreased significantly, and nitrate concentrations also had decreased and
remained below the standard over the past decade. Therefore, sampling for nitrate and other nitrogen
components was discontinued.

000792

-------
OU-2 Site Inspection Checklist

I. SITE INFORMATION

Site name:

Cimarron Mining Corporation
Superfund Site, Operable Unit (OU) - 2

Date of inspection: January 17, 2018

Location and Region:

Carrizozo, New Mexico, EPA Region 6

EPA ID: NMD980749378

Agency, office, or company leading the five-
year review:

New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)

Weather/temperature:

Mostly sunny, 40-45 °F, Winds-West at 5-10 mph

Remedy Includes: (Check all that apply)
Landfill cover/containment
X Access controls
X Institutional controls

Groundwater pump and treatment
Surface water collection and treatment

Monitored natural attenuation
Groundwater containment
Vertical barrier walls

X Other: Two lead-contaminated soil repositories with soil/vegetation cover_

Attachments: Site map attached

II. INTERVIEWS (Check all that apply)

1. O&M site manager: Angelo Ortelli

Name

Interviewed: at site at office by phone
Problems, suggestions; Report attached	

NMED Project Manager January 17. 2018
Title	Date

Phone no.

2. O&M staff

Name Title
Interviewed at site at office by phone
Problems, suggestions; Report attached	

Date

Phone no.

000793

-------
3. Local regulatory authorities and response agencies (i.e., State and Tribal offices, emergency response office,
police department, office of public health or environmental health, zoning office, recorder of deeds, or other city
and county offices, etc.) Fill in all that apply.

Agency: Town of Carrizozo

Contact: Mr. Rick Hyatt	 Mayor	 1/18/2018 575-648-2371

Name Title Date Phone no.
Problems; suggestions; Report attached 	

Agency	

Contact	 	 	 	

Name Title Date Phone no.
Problems; suggestions; Report attached 	

Agency	

Contact	 	 	 	

Name Title Date Phone no.
Problems; suggestions; Report attached 	

Agency	

Contact	 	 	 	

Name Title Date Phone no.
Problems; suggestions; Report attached 	

4. Other interviews (optional) Report attached.

Mr. Alan (Buddy) Henderson, Property owner/resident

000794

-------
III. ON-SITE DOCUMENTS & RECORDS VERIFIED (Check all that apply)

O&M Documents

O&M manual X Readily available Up to date
As-built drawings Readily available Up to date
Maintenance logs Readily available Up to date
Remarks: O&M Plans were developed bv NMED for OU-2 in December 2007.

N/A
XN/A
XN/A
O&M activities completed

over the past five vears were annual around water monitoring.

monitorina activities. Emeraencv contacts are included in the SSHSP.

O&M and OSHA Training Records X Readily available
Remarks: NMED maintains OSHA trainina records for all staff

Up to date

N/A

Permits and Service Agreements

Air discharge permit Readily available
Effluent discharge Readily available
Waste disposal, POTW Readily available
Other permits Readily available
Remarks

Up to date
Up to date
Up to date
Up to date

XN/A
XN/A
XN/A
XN/A

Gas Generation Records Readily available
Remarks

Up to date

XN/A

Settlement Monument Records Readily available
Remarks

Up to date

XN/A

Groundwater Monitoring Records X Readily available Up to date N/A

Remarks: Annual monitorina reports have been prepared for the past five vears. which include the around water

samplina results for all monitorina wells.

Leachate Extraction Records Readily available
Remarks

Up to date

XN/A

Discharge Compliance Records

Air Readily available
Water (effluent) Readily available
Remarks

Up to date
Up to date

XN/A
XN/A

10.

Daily Access/Security Logs Readily available
Remarks

Up to date

XN/A

000795

-------
IV. O&M COSTS

1.

O&M Organization

X State in-house Contractor for State
PRP in-house Contractor for PRP
Federal Facility in-house Contractor for Federal Facility
Other

2.

O&M Cost Records

Readily available Up to date
X Funding mechanism/agreement in place
Original O&M cost estimate

Total annual cost by year for review period

From October 2013 to October 2014 $2,500 Annual Ground Water Monitoring
Date Date Total cost

From October 2014 to October 2015 $2,500 Annual Ground Water Monitoring
Date Date Total cost

From October 2015 to October 2017 $2,500 Ground Water Monitoring Event to
Date Date Total cost Support the Fifth Five-Year Review

3.

Unanticipated or Unusually High O&M Costs During Review Period

Describe costs and reasons:

V. ACCESS AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS X Applicable N/A

A.

Fencing

1.

Fencing damaged Location shown on site map Gates secured N/A
Remarks: Fencing and gates are intact. Site is located on Town of Carrizozo propertv. Access is controlled
through a locked gate on the west side of the propertv.

B.

Other Access Restrictions

1.

Signs and other security measures Location shown on site map N/A
Remarks

000796

-------
C. Institutional Controls (ICs)

1. Implementation and enforcement

Site conditions imply ICs not properly implemented Yes



XNo N/A



Site conditions imply ICs not being fully enforced Yes



XNo N/A



Type of monitoring (e.g., self-reporting, drive by) Site inspections







Frequency: Annual







Responsible partv/agencv: NMED

Contact: Angelo Ortelli Project Manager



2/8/2013

505-827-2866

Name Title



Date

Phone no.

Reporting is up-to-date

Yes

No

XN/A

Reports are verified by the lead agency

Yes

No

XN/A

Specific requirements in deed or decision documents have been met

Yes

No

XN/A

Violations have been reported

Yes

No

XN/A

Other problems or suggestions: Report attached







2. Adequacy	X ICs are adequate ICs are inadequate	N/A

Remarks: On April 25. 2006. a "Prohibition Against Disturbance" was signed by the Mayor of Carrizozo and
registered with the Lincoln County Clerk requiring that no excavation is to occur in the soil repository areas or
in any manner that could potentially breach or disturb the repository cells.

D. General

1. Vandalism/trespassing Location shown on site map	X No vandalism evident

Remarks

2. Land use changes on site	XN/A

Remarks

3. Land use changes off site XN/A
Remarks

VI. GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS

A. Roads Applicable XN/A

1. Roads damaged	Location shown on site map Roads adequate XN/A

Remarks

000797

-------
B.

Other Site Conditions





Remarks:

Debris piles that contain mostly demolition refuse remain onsite. The debris piles are located close to the



westernmost repository, but the cover remains intact.













VII. LANDFILL COVERS X Applicable N/A

A.

Landfill Surface



1.

Settlement (Low spots) Location shown on site map X Settlement not evident

Areal extent Depth

Remarks







2.

Cracks

Lengths

Location shown on site map X Cracking not evident
Widths Depths



Remarks









3.

Erosion

Areal extent
Remarks

Location shown on site map X Erosion not evident
Depth







4.

Holes

Areal extent
Remarks

Location shown on site map X Holes not evident
Depth







5.

Vegetative Cover Grass X Cover properly established No signs of stress

Trees/Shrubs (indicate size and locations on a diagram)

Remarks: Grass and shrub vegetation on soil covers has made the repository boundaries not noticeably



different from the surrounding area onsite.







6.

Alternative Cover (armored rock, concrete, etc.) N/A

Remarks







7.

Bulges

Areal extent
Remarks

Location shown on site map X Bulges not evident
Height













000798

-------
8.

Wet Areas/Water Damage X Wet areas/water damage not evident
Wet areas Location shown on site map Areal extent
Ponding Location shown on site map Areal extent
Seeps Location shown on site map Areal extent
Soft subgrade Location shown on site map Areal extent
Remarks

Slope Instability Slides Location shown on site map X No evidence of slope instability

Areal extent

Remarks

Benches Applicable X N/A

Flows Bypass Bench

Remarks

Location shown on site map X N/A or okay

Bench Breached

Remarks

Location shown on site map X N/A or okay

Bench Overtopped

Remarks

Location shown on site map X N/A or okay

Letdown Channels Applicable X N/A

Settlement

Areal extent
Remarks

Location shown on site map No evidence of settlement
Depth

Material Degradation

Material type

Location shown on site map No evidence of degradation
Areal extent

Remarks

Erosion

Areal extent

Location shown on site map No evidence of erosion
Depth

Remarks

000799

-------
4.

Undercutting Location shown on site map No evidence of undercutting

Areal extent Depth

Remarks







5.

Obstructions Type No obstructions

Location shown on site map Areal extent

Size

Remarks







6.

Excessive Vegetative Growth Type





No evidence of excessive growth
Vegetation in channels does not obstruct flow
Location shown on site map Areal extent
Remarks









D. Cover Penetrations Applicable X N/A

1.

Gas Vents Active Passive
Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
Evidence of leakage at penetration Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A







2.

Gas Monitoring Probes

Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
Evidence of leakage at penetration Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A







3.

Monitoring Wells (within surface area of landfill)

Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
Evidence of leakage at penetration Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A







4.

Leachate Extraction Wells

Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
Evidence of leakage at penetration Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A







5.

Settlement Monuments Located Routinely surveyed
Remarks

N/A







000800

-------
E.

Gas Collection and Treatment

Applicable X N/A

1.

Gas Treatment Facilities

Flaring Thermal destruction Collection for reuse
Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks









2.

Gas Collection Wells, Manifolds and Piping

Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks











3.

Gas Monitoring Facilities (e.g., gas monitoring of adjacent homes or buildings)
Good condition Needs Maintenance N/A
Remarks









F.

Cover Drainage Layer

Applicable

XN/A

1.

Outlet Pipes Inspected

Remarks

Functioning

N/A









2.

Outlet Rock Inspected

Remarks

Functioning

N/A









G.

Detention/Sedimentation Ponds

Applicable

XN/A

1.

Siltation Areal extent



Depth N/A



Siltation not evident
Remarks













2.

Erosion Areal extent

Depth



Erosion not evident
Remarks













3.

Outlet Works Functioning N/A
Remarks











4.

Dam Functioning N/A
Remarks











000801

-------
H. Retaining Walls Applicable

XN/A

1. Deformations Location shown on site map Deformation not evident
Horizontal displacement Vertical displacement

Rotational displacement
Remarks



2. Degradation Location shown on site map
Remarks

Degradation not evident



I. Perimeter Ditches/Off-Site Discharge Applicable

XN/A

1. Siltation Location shown on site map
Areal extent Depth
Remarks

Siltation not evident



2. Vegetative Growth Location shown on site map
Areal extent Type
Remarks

N/A Vegetation does not impede flow



3. Erosion Location shown on site map
Areal extent Depth

Erosion not evident

Remarks





4. Discharge Structure Functioning N/A
Remarks



VIII. VERTICAL BARRIER WALLS

Applicable X N/A

1. Settlement Location shown on site map
Areal extent Depth

Settlement not evident

Remarks





2. Performance Monitoring Type of monitoring
Frequency
Head differential
Remarks

Performance not monitored
Evidence of breaching



000802

-------
IX. GROUND WATER/SURF ACE WATER REMEDIES Applicable XN/A
A. Groundwater Extraction Wells, Pumps, and Pipelines	Applicable	N/A

1. Pumps, Wellhead Plumbing, and Electrical

Good condition	All required wells properly operating Needs Maintenance X N/A

Remarks

2. Extraction System Pipelines, Valves, Valve Boxes, and Other Appurtenances

Good condition	Needs Maintenance

Remarks

3. Spare Parts and Equipment

Readily available Good condition Requires upgrade Needs to be provided
Remarks

B. Surface Water Collection Structures, Pumps, and Pipelines	Applicable X N/A

1. Collection Structures, Pumps, and Electrical

Good condition	Needs Maintenance

Remarks

2. Surface Water Collection System Pipelines, Valves, Valve Boxes, and Other Appurtenances

Good condition	Needs Maintenance

Remarks

3. Spare Parts and Equipment

Readily available Good condition Requires upgrade Needs to be provided
Remarks

000803

-------
c.

Treatment System Applicable XN/A



1.

Treatment Train (Check components that apply)

Metals removal Oil/water separation Bioremediation
Air stripping Carbon adsorbers
Filters

Additive (t\.e. chelation agent, flocculent)

Others

Good condition Needs Maintenance
Sampling ports properly marked and functional
Sampling/maintenance log displayed and up to date
Equipment properly identified
Quantity of groundwater treated annually
Quantity of surface water treated annually
Remarks

2.

Electrical Enclosures and Panels (properly rated and functional)
N/A Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks



3.

Tanks, Vaults, Storage Vessels

N/A Good condition Proper secondary containment
Remarks

Needs Maintenance

4.

Discharge Structure and Appurtenances

N/A Good condition Needs Maintenance
Remarks



5.

Treatment Building(s)

N/A Good condition (esp. roof and doorways)
Chemicals and equipment properly stored
Remarks

Needs repair

6.

Monitoring Wells (pump and treatment remedy)

Properly secured/locked Functioning Routinely sampled
All required wells located Needs Maintenance
Remarks

Good condition
N/A

D. Monitoring Data

1.

Monitoring Data
Is routinely submitted on time X Is of acceptable quality



2.

Monitoring data suggests:

Groundwater plume is effectively contained Contaminant concentrations are declining

000804

-------
D.

Monitored Natural Attenuation

Monitoring Wells (natural attenuation remedy)

X Properly secured/locked Functioning X Routinely sampled Good condition
All required wells located Needs Maintenance N/A

Remarks: Monitoring well (MW-8) located northward and downgradicnt of the soil repository areas had
alreadv gone drv as of 2008.

OTHER REMEDIES

XI. OVERALL OBSERVATIONS

Implementation of the Remedy

Remedial activities at OU-2 included excavation, stabilization, and onsite disposal of surface soils, sediments,
and waste rock. The disposal areas were capped with clean fill and vegetated.

On April 25. 2006. a "Prohibition Aaainst Disturbance" was sianed bv the Mavor of Carrizozo and registered
with the Lincoln Countv Clerk requiring that no excavation is to occur in the soil repository areas or in anv
manner that could potentially breach or disturb the repository cells.

However, this IC does not preclude the construction of facilities or improvements above the repositories, as lona
as the repositories themselves are not disturbed.

Adequacy of O&M

Describe issues and observations related to the implementation and scope of O&M procedures. In particular,
discuss their relationship to the current and long-term protectiveness of the remedy.

Although the nearest downgradient monitoring well (MW-8) has gone drv. inactive supplv well (6AG) located
approximately 100 feet east of the soil repositories serves to identify contamination to the shallow aquifer.
Based on future water level measurements, if there is sufficient around water recharae to the shallow aquifer
svstem and monitorina well (MW-8) is not drv. it will be sampled durina future inspections to determine
whether anv contaminant release from the repositories to around water has occurred.

000805

-------
Early Indicators of Potential Remedy Problems

Describe issues and observations such as unexpected changes in the cost or scope of O&M or a high frequency
of unscheduled repairs that suggest that the protectiveness of the remedy may be compromised in the future.

D. Opportunities for Optimization

Describe possible opportunities for optimization in monitoring tasks or the operation of the remedy.

000806

-------
APPENDIX D

SITE MAPS &

DATA SUMMARY TABLES

000807

-------
000808

-------
Figure 2: Site Layout and Wells at Cimarron Mill Site, OU-1

IMW-08

\MW-06

\RW-03

\MW-05

Site Layout and Wells
Cimarron Mill Site, OU-1

000809

H

Monitoring Wells
I Recovery Wells

New Mexico Environment Department
Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site
Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico

-------
Figure 3: Site Layout and Wells at Sierra Blanca Mill Site, OU-2

M

'

1997 Repository

MW-8 (downgradient)



6AG (inactive)

"• ^Jii " VQBMVm'v ^ *+¦"

Sl 7 % Vffc
\

-

1992 Repository

V	' 1&

yK - sS • Vv^ -j •-

- ' . \S r* •« • f
HMCxT Vw vv

• ^'\ ""J

I ¦	- 75X 5ft, ;«

•Vu-Vf "fc"»	- *

SWJ" • A*A- '.nS, v

MW-7 (upgradient)



0K: vv,.j
\. • ¦

<3SsSg&&S!>ii

JU>^t " ' JVr- aK3

1	r • ^.UL>f vj

fir9B

-•*.5

-T^s

; |wsd»r.i^K

i.jf-.'»• /" ; '. V

> JvoC. V "_2V><*• - Pr~^ Al ry^.V - „
S-* . \	«sf -

M

r 'i''

-S

' UilC 1^.	*- '»«*-£	-r : ,

jTOitf • * B3jr« ?>, i*>»
r- 7> t ¦%,: 'li *0 (y T-iZm ^
¦ • - > \ vTl
<* Vr" ¦ « X? i c
^:5^tS£|C -5r- V * a



SSExSrce

X . j ¦ "0

H, . 'J I

W3a

ii 7

-. ¦£» . ¦ ¦

2$

^CV\#u

Image © 2013 GeoEye
(£>,2013 Google

Site Layout and Wells
Sierra Blanca Mill Site, OU-2

" wr:

v.y?V ?

New Mexico Environment Department
Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site
Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico

000810

-------
Figure 4: Potentiometric Surface Contours (October 30,2013) and Historical Trends, OU-1





MW-16:B

MW-06:B



5.418.0

5,431.0

5.417.5

5.417.0

5 <30 0





5.416.5

5.429.0

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

MW-08:B

WW-17:B

5.430.5

5.413.5

s 5

5.412.5

5.428 ••

5.411.5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15



5.433.5

5,426.5

5.432.5
5.431.5
5.430.5

5.426.0

5.425.5

5 4?5 0

5 4.'.I 5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

¦ :y- - • ...

MW-07:B

MW-15:B

5 -'-'5 b

•• 431 •'

5.430.5

5,425.0

429 5

5 4 24 5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

MW-03B

5.434.

5.434.5
5.433.5
5.432.5
5,431.5
5.430.5

MW-05 B

5.431 D

5.4 30 5

5.430.0

MW-02 B

MW-04:B

5.431.5

5.446.0
5.445.5
5.445.0
5,444.5

5,429.5

:> ¦ 1'

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

430 '>

4 -I !,

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7115

Static Water Level Elevations at OU-1
Potentiometric Surface Contours (October 30, 2013)
& Historical Trends (October 2012 - August 2015)

WL (ft-MSL)

Static Water Level Elevations
October 2012 - August 2015

New Mexico Environment Department
Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site
Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico

000811

-------
MW-05:B



MW-17:B

5.413.5
5.412.5
5.411.5

A



/ \



/ *









1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15 I



5.426.5
5.426.0
5.425.5

MW-12:B I





r \







5.425.0

/



/



5,4245











1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15 |

5.425.5

MW-15:B





5.425.0









5,424.5











1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15 1

5.431.0
5,430.0
5,429 0

5.431.5
5.430.5
5.429.5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

5.418.0

MW-16:B





5.417.5









5.417.0









5.416.5





•-V'





1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15



MW-06:B

5.431.0
5.430.0
5.429.0





r\..













1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

BM&L

a?

¦¦¦¦

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

5.446.0
5.445.5
5.445.0
5.444 5

MW-02:B

;

MW-08:B

430 5

5.429 5

5.428.5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

MW-01 :B

5.433 5

5.432 5

5.431 5

' 4 !0 •

1 13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

MW-07.B

5.431.5

5.430.5

5.429 5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15
MW-03:B

'J 34

5 -5 33 5

• •• 7.. 5

5 431

5.430 5

WL (ft-MSL)

I Static Water Level Elevations
October 2012 - August 2015

Figure 5: Potentiometric Surface Contours (August 4, 2014) and Historical Trends, OU-1

Static Water Level Elevations at OU-1
Potentiometric Surface Contours (August 4, 2014)
& Historical Trends (October 2012 - August 2015)

New Mexico Environment Department
Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site
Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico

000812

-------
MW-07:B

MW-03:B

MW-05:B

Figure 6: Potentiometric Surface Contours (August 26, 2015) and Historical Trends, OU-1

Static Water Level Elevations at OU-1
Potentiometric Surface Contours (August 26, 2015)
& Historical Trends (October 2012 - August 2015)

New Mexico Environment Department
Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site
Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico

HI

5.418.0
5.417.5
5.417.0
5,416.5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

MW-06:B

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

5,430.5
5,429.5
5,428.5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

MW-01 :B

5.433.5
5.432.5
5.431.5



/ U









1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15



MW-02:B

5.446.0









5.445.5









5,444 5

®s,'









1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15



5.431.5



5.430 5



5.429.5



V



5.434.5



5.433.5
5,432.5
5.431.5
5,430 5

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

WL (ft-MSL)

Static Water Level Elevations
October 2012 - August 2015

5.413.5
5.412.5
5.411.5 i

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

Hi

M JZ

5.426.5
5.426.0
5.425.5
5.425.0
5.424.5

MW-12:B

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

5.424,5

000813

-------
MW-12
0.005 U

MW-06:B

IMW-08
10.005 U

| MW-07
\0.005U

Figure 7: Total Cyanide Isoconcentrations (October 2013) and Historial Trends, QU-1

RW-07:A



oi0 075
E,

15 0.050

J 0.025
O

0 000









»———•



1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15



0.150
5*0.125
EO 100

MW-10:B



>

" »-*

loMO

9





Q 0.025
0.000

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

0.100 .



MW-04:B .





o,0.075 |
E

» 0.050

s

5 0-025







	/ 	II

U

0.000

1/13

7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15 1

Ground Water Sampling Results at OU-1
Total Cyanide Isoconcentrations (October 2013)
& Historical Trends (October 2012 - August 2015)

0.125

I =7oioo
¦ ¦»

5.0.075

I % 0 050

| z 0.025
" '3

0.000

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

0.100

MW-03:B



a»0.075
E

5 0.050

5 o 025
O









* *



1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

CN-total (mg/L)
Remediation Goal
0.200 mg/L

¦	0.050 -0.075
0.075-0.100

¦	0.100-0.150

New Mexico Environment Department
Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site
Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico

000814

-------
IMW-08
\ 0.020 U

\MW-07
\0.020U

MW-05

0.020 U

MW-03:B

\MW-02
\0.020 U



0.100

o,0.075
E

MW-04:B





on r)u°

z 0 025

I °

0.000



——i 	

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15



Figure 8: Total Cyanide Isoconcentrations (October 2014) and Historial Trends, OU-1

Ground Water Sampling Results at OU-1
Total Cyanide Isoconcentrations (October 2014)
& Historical Trends (October 2012 - August 2015)

New Mexico Environment Department
Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site
Carrizozo, Lincoln County, New Mexico

RW-07:A

"3,0.075

J —

I q 0.050
¦ o

I 0.025
J

0.000

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15

o,0.075

1/13 7/13 1/14 7/14 1/15 7/15 I

100

CN-total (mg/L)
I Remediation Goal
0.200 mg/L

¦ 0.050 -0.075

0.075 -0.100

¦ 0.100-0.150

000815

-------
Table 1: Groundwater Monitoring Well Details, OU-1 and OU-2

Groundwater Monitoring Well Details

Well ID

Coordinates 1

Current Condition 2

Well Casing
Elevation
(ft-msl)3

Screen
Interval
(ft-bgs) 4

Completio
n Depth
(ft-bgs) 4

Northing

Easting

Type

Function & Status

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-01

12214593.919

1377564.437

2" ID PVC

SWL - Crossgradient

5475.19

30-50

55

MW-02

12214230.138

1377475.897

2" ID PVC

SWL/GWS - Upgradient

5483.74

30-50

55

MW-03

12214428.908

1377415.791

BarCad

SWL/GWS - Upgradient

5477.13

30-50

55

MW-04

12214478.315

1377163.049

BarCad

SWL/GWS - Plume Area

5474.84

29-54

54

MW-05

12214390.281

1376858.344

BarCad

SWL/GWS - Plume Area

5471.67

31-51

56

MW-06

12214607.668

1377181.779

BarCad

SWL/GWS - Plume Area

5473.73

31-49

56

MW-07

12214570.123

1377321.126

BarCad

SWL/GWS - Plume Area

5473.48

30-50

55

MW-08

12214702.448

1377332.577

BarCad

SWL/GWS - Plume Area

5470.46

30-50

55

MW-10

12214523.722

1377127.525

BarCad

SWL/GWS - Plume Area

5473.30

33-53

55

MW-11 *

12214518.703

1377118.659

BarCad

Monitoring Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

147-157

160

MW-12

12214743.974

1376978.451

BarCad

SWL/GWS - Downgradient

5467.50

58-68

68

MW-13*

12213950.051

1378082.110

2" ID PVC

Monitoring Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

48-58

58

MW-14*

12214280.252

1377225.594

BarCad

Monitoring Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

42.4-47.5

48

MW-15*

12214540.005

1376660.301

BarCad

Monitoring Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

53-63

64

MW-16*

12215014.145

1377037.002

4" ID PVC

Monitoring Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

49.5-59.5

60

MW-17*

12215125.477

1376558.107

4" ID PVC

Monitoring Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

69-79

80

MW-18*

12214514.254

1377128.663

BarCad

Monitoring Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

49-59

60

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-01

**

12214393.123

1376866.583

4" ID PVC

Recovery Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

39-44

44

RW-02

**

12214435.909

1376926.883

4" ID PVC

Recovery Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

39-44

44

RW-03

**

12214490.776

1376978.156

4" ID PVC

Recovery Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

36-41

41

RW-05

**

12214583.304

1377093.641

4" ID PVC

Recovery Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

36-41

41

RW-06

**

12214627.391

1377129.001

4" ID PVC

Recovery Well (Plugged & Abandoned)

NA

36-41

41

RW-07

12214718.617

1377182.708

4" ID PVC

GWS - Plume Area

NA

40-45

45

000816

-------
Table 1: Groundwater Monitoring Well Details, OU-1 and OU-2 (continued)

Groundwater Monitoring Well Details

Well ID

Coordinates 1

Current Condition 2

Well Casing
Elevation
(ft-msl)3

Screen
Interval
(ft-bgs) 4

Completion
Depth
(ft-bgs)4

Northing

Easting

Type

Function & Status

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07

12209715.516

1374741.607

2" ID PVC

GWS - Upgradient

NA

unknown

66

MW-08

12209869.110

1374732.861

2" ID PVC

Not Sampled - Downgradient (Dry)

NA

unknown

61

6AG

12209850.117

1374914.378

6" ID Steel

GWS - Crossgradient
(Inactive Supply Well)

NA

unknown

101

Notes:

1	Coordinates are provided in Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), Zone 13

2	Wells used for Static Water Level (SWL) measurements and/or Groundwater Sampling (GWS) and their location/function in the groundwater monitoring network
3Top of well casing elevations are expressed in feet above mean sea level (ft-

msl)

4 Well screen intervals and total depths are expressed in feet below ground surface (ft-bgs)

* Monitoring wells that were plugged and abandoned in June 2015.

** Recovery wells that were plugged and abandoned in May 2014.

NA- Not Available (Not Surveyed - Not used for SWL measurements)

000817

-------
Table 2: Hydrologic Data for Monitoring Wells at OU-1

Monitoring Well

Static Water Level Elevations (feet-MSL)*

October 30, 2013

January 28, 2014

May 20, 2014

August 4, 2014

Elevation

D.T.W.

Elevation

D.T.W.

Elevation

D.T.W.

Elevation

D.T.W.

MW-01

5433.48

41.71

5433.71

41.48

5433.04

42.15

5432.22

42.97

MW-02

5445.97

37.77

5445.64

38.10

5445.17

38.57

5445.23

38.51

MW-03

5434.37

42.76

5433.78

43.35

5433.32

43.81

5432.46

44.67

MW-04

5431.50

43.34

5431.42

43.42

5431.06

43.78

5430.09

44.75

MW-05

5431.28

40.39

5431.28

40.39

5430.84

40.83

5429.93

41.74

MW-06

5430.02

43.71

5430.82

42.91

5430.96

42.77

5430.32

43.41

MW-07

5431.98

41.50

5431.98

41.50

5431.43

42.05

5430.49

42.99

MW-08

5430.56

39.90

5430.80

39.66

5430.46

40.00

5429.51

40.95

MW-10

5431.60

41.70

5431.44

41.86

5431.01

42.29

5430.14

43.16

MW-11

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

MW-12

5425.18

42.32

5426.22

41.28

5426.04

41.46

5425.89

41.61

MW-13

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

MW-14

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

MW-15

5425.01

44.79

5425.17

44.63

5425.39

44.41

5425.32

44.48

MW-16

5417.27

47.09

5417.75

46.61

5417.60

46.76

5417.31

47.05

MW-17

5413.79

45.06

5412.94

45.91

5412.48

46.37

5412.23

46.62

MW-18

5431.81

42.09

5431.82

42.08

5431.84

42.06

5431.81

42.09

Gradient (feet/foot) &
Compass Direction

0.0265 - NW

0.0262 - NW

0.0251 - NW

0.0253 - NW

Notes:

* Static Water Level Elevations are expressed in feet above mean sea level (feet-MSL).

DTW Depth to Water - reference point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing
NM Not Measured

000818

-------
Table 2: Hydrologic Data for Monitoring Wells at OU-1 (continued)

Monitoring Well

Static Water Level Elevations (feet-MSL)*

October 28, 2014

January 28,2015

April 27, 2015

August 26, 2015

Elevation

D.T.W.

Elevation

D.T.W.

Elevation

D.T.W.

Elevation

D.T.W.

MW-01

5432.32

42.87

5432.15

43.04

5431.87

43.32

5431.32

43.87

MW-02

5445.51

38.23

5445.23

38.51

5445.91

37.83

5444.92

38.82

MW-03

5432.09

45.04

5432.32

44.81

5431.92

45.21

5431.25

45.88

MW-04

5430.14

44.70

5430.68

44.16

5430.37

44.47

5429.57

45.27

MW-05

5429.95

41.72

5430.56

41.11

5430.22

41.45

5429.41

42.26

MW-06

5429.86

43.87

5430.05

43.68

5430.22

43.51

5429.75

43.98

MW-07

5430.66

42.82

5431.12

42.36

5430.73

42.75

5429.94

43.54

MW-08

5429.40

41.06

5430.03

40.43

5428.80

41.66

5428.80

41.66

MW-10

5430.18

43.12

5430.73

42.57

5430.39

42.91

5429.62

43.68

MW-11 *

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

MW-12

5425.47

42.03

5425.39

42.11

5425.86

41.64

5425.05

42.45

MW-13 *

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

MW-14 *

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

NM

MW-15 *

5425.17

44.63

5425.13

44.67

5427.18

42.62

NM

NM

MW-16 *

5417.00

47.36

5416.99

47.37

5417.17

47.19

NM

NM

MW-17 *

5412.55

46.30

5412.42

46.43

5412.70

46.15

NM

NM

MW-18 *

5431.78

42.12

5431.78

42.12

5431.75

42.15

NM

NM

Gradient (feet/foot) &
Compass Direction

0.0251 - NW

0.0254 - NW

0.0255 - NW

0.0261 - NW

Notes:

Static Water Level Elevations are expressed in feet above mean sea level (feet-MSL).

* Monitoring wells that were plugged and abandoned in June 2015.

DTW Depth to Water - reference point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing
NM Not Measured

000819

-------
Table 1: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - October 2013

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

10/30/2013

37.77

Bailer *

7.5 gal

7.08

15.24

2496

1672

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

11.0

0.013

0.008

MW-03

10/30/2013

42.76

52-53

600 ml

7.50

16.83

3012

2018

0.061

<0.01

<0.01

<0.02

0.39

<0.001

MW-04

10/30/2013

43.34

53-54

750 ml

7.06

15.86

3533

2367

0.012

<0.01

<0.01

0.32

1.0

<0.001

MW-05

10/31/2013

40.39

53-54

1,100 ml

7.22

13.91

3036

2034

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

0.59

0.066

<0.001

MW-06

10/30/2013

43.71

53-54

750 ml

7.19

16.54

2733

1831

0.115

0.019

<0.01

0.13

0.039

<0.001

MW-07

10/30/2013

41.50

53-54

750 ml

7.42

16.73

2196

1471

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

1.6

0.3

<0.001

MW-08

10/30/2013

39.90

54-55

1,000 ml

7.25

16.71

2608

1747

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

0.31

0.49

<0.001

MW-10

10/30/2013

41.70

53-54

800 ml

7.17

16.32

3327

2229

0.129

0.021

<0.01

0.024

0.22

0.002

MW-12

10/31/2013

42.32

65-66

1,800 ml

7.37

15.15

1928

1292

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

0.29

0.21

<0.001

MW-1022

10/30/2013

41.70

53-54

800 ml

7.17

16.32

3327

2229

0.144

0.025

<0.01

0.03

0.21

0.001

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-07 3

10/31/2013

40.20

Bailer

14 gal

6.75

14.91

4675

3132

0.044

<0.01

0.014

0.055

0.038

<0.001

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07
(OU2)

10/31/2013

61.85

Bailer

1.5 gal

7.31

16.42

1502

1006

NA

NA

NA

0.330

0.049

<0.001

6AG

10/31/2013

60.84

Bailer

15 gal

7.43

18.34

1918

1285

NA

NA

NA

1.5

0.150

<0.001

6AG-2 4

10/31/2013

60.84

Bailer

15 gal

7.43

18.34

1918

1285

NA

NA

NA

1.3

0.150

<0.001

Notes:

* Dedicated polyethylene bailers were used due to malfunction of the low-flow pump during the October 2013 sampling event. Iron staining was apparent on the bailer associated with MW-02.
'TDS estimated by multipling conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	MW-102 is a field duplicate sample for MW-10.

3	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault..

4	6AG-2 is a field duplicate sample for 6AG.

Total cyanide were analyzed by EPA Method 335.4; filtered samples (0.45u filter) were also analyzed fortotal CN, where concentrations were consistently lowerthan the unfiltered sample results (posted).
Cyanide amenable to chloride (AtC) and weak acid dissociable (WAD) forms were analyzed by Methods SM4500CNG & SM4500CNI
Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.8.

Dissolved metals, Iron and Manganese (Fe & Mn) were detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.

Seven dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Ni, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.

"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit.

ft-bTOC: measuring point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride PVC) well casing.

000820

-------
Table 1: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - October 2013

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NM WQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Table 2: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - January 2014

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NM WQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

1/28/2014

38.10

46-48

10 gal

7.38

15.70

2282

1529

0.011

0.011

<0.01

<0.02

0.023

<0.001

MW-03

1/29/2014

43.35

52-53

600 ml

7.60

16.19

2944

1972

0.058

<0.01

<0.01

<0.02

0.34

<0.001

MW-04

1/28/2014

43.42

53-54

750 ml

7.04

15.53

3625

2429

0.043

<0.01

<0.01

0.46

1.2

<0.005

MW-05

1/28/2014

40.39

53-54

1,100 ml

7.08

15.75

3277

2196

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

0.31

0.03

<0.001

MW-06

1/28/2014

42.91

53-54

750 ml

7.16

15.53

2712

1817

0.107

0.02

<0.01

0.08

0.027

<0.001

MW-07

1/29/2014

41.50

53-54

750 ml

7.42

15.71

2102

1408

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

1.1

0.27

<0.001

MW-08

1/29/2014

39.66

54-55

1,000 ml

7.42

16.33

2623

1757

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

0.49

0.49

<0.001

MW-10

1/28/2014

41.86

53-54

800 ml

7.03

16.19

3490

2338

0.113

0.048

<0.01

0.034

0.2

<0.005

MW-12

1/28/2014

41.28

65-66

1,850 ml

7.22

16.04

1935

1296

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01

0.61

0.22

<0.001

MW-206 2

1/28/2014

42.91

53-54

750 ml

7.16

15.53

2712

1817

0.132

0.055

<0.01

0.07

0.28

<0.001

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-07 3

1/29/2014

NA

38-40

10 gal

6.98

15.50

4530

3035

0.046

0.046

<0.01

0.057

0.021

<0.005

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

6AG

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Notes:

'TDS estimated by multiplying conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	MW-206 is a field duplicate sample for MW-06.

3	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault..

Total cyanide samples were analyzed by EPA Method 335.4. Cyanide amenable to chloride (AtC) and weak acid dissociable (WAD) forms were analyzed by Methods SM4500CNG & SM4500CNI
Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.8, using field-filtered samples (0.45^ filter)

000821

-------
Table 1: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - October 2013

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Dissolved metals, Iron and Manganese (Fe & Mn) were detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.
Seven dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Ni, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.
"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit. NA: Not Analyzed

ft-bTOC: measuring point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing

Table 3: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - May 2014

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(pS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

5/20/2014

38.57

46-48

12 gal

NA

18.98

2790

1869

<0.01

NA

<0.01

0.053

0.05

<0.001

MW-03

5/21/2014

43.81

52-53

550 ml

NA

18.35

3214

2153

0.037

0.02

<0.01

<0.02

0.32

0.001

MW-04

5/21/2014

43.78

53-54

650 ml

NA

19.30

4030

2700

0.027

0.009

<0.01

0.32

1.3

<0.001

MW-05

5/21/2014

40.83

53-54

1,000 ml

NA

18.02

3508

2350

<0.01

NA

<0.01

0.57

0.15

<0.001

MW-06

5/21/2014

42.77

53-54

750 ml

NA

18.38

2923

1958

0.082

0.033

<0.01

0.18

0.083

<0.001

MW-07

5/21/2014

42.05

53-54

750 ml

NA

18.01

2313

1550

<0.01

NA

<0.01

1.1

0.26

<0.001

MW-08

5/21/2014

40.00

54-55

800 ml

NA

18.35

2802

1877

<0.01

NA

<0.01

0.23

0.4

<0.001

MW-10

5/21/2014

42.29

53-54

800 ml

NA

18.53

3743

2508

0.081

0.028

<0.01

<0.02

0.19

0.002

MW-12

5/21/2014

41.46

65-66

1,800 ml

NA

17.85

2084

1396

<0.01

NA

<0.01

0.46

0.21

<0.001

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-07 2

5/21/2014

NA

38-40

13 gal

NA

18.49

5166

3461

0.037

0.012

<0.01

0.036

0.02

<0.001

RW-207 3

5/21/2014

NA

38-40

13 gal

NA

18.49

5166

3461

0.043

0.017

<0.01

0.032

0.019

<0.001

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

000822

-------
Table 1: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - October 2013

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

6AG

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Notes:

'TDS estimated by multiplying conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault..

3	RW-207 is a field duplicate sample for RW-07.

Total cyanide samples were analyzed by EPA Method 335.4. Cyanide amenable to chloride (AtC) and weak acid dissociable (WAD) forms were analyzed by Methods SM4500CNG & SM4500CNI
Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.8, using field-filtered samples (0.45^ filter)

Dissolved metals, Iron and Manganese (Fe & Mn) were detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.

Seven dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Ni, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.

"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit. NA: Not Analyzed

ft-bTOC: measuring point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing

Table 4: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - August 2014

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to
Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

8/5/2014

38.51

46-48

20.75 gal

7.13

17.52

2586

1733

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

0.25

0.032

<0.005

MW-03

8/5/2014

44.67

52-53

500 ml

7.37

18.14

3035

2033

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.3

<0.005

MW-04

8/5/2014

44.75

53-54

650 ml

6.90

19.07

3834

2569

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

1.3

<0.005

MW-05

8/5/2014

41.74

53-54

1,000 ml

6.97

18.87

3407

2283

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.18

<0.005

MW-06

8/5/2014

43.41

53-54

750 ml

7.15

18.99

2844

1905

0.09

0.09

<0.04

<0.1

0.064

<0.005

MW-07

8/5/2014

42.99

53-54

800 ml

7.05

18.20

2207

1479

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

0.22

0.25

<0.005

MW-08

8/5/2014

40.95

54-55

900 ml

6.89

17.60

2634

1765

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.27

<0.005

MW-10

8/5/2014

43.16

53-54

750 ml

7.07

19.93

3706

2483

0.08

0.08

<0.04

<0.1

0.2

0.007

MW-12

8/5/2014

41.61

65-66

2,600 ml

7.33

18.96

2040

1367

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.21

<0.005

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

000823

-------
Table 1: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - October 2013

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

RW-07 2

8/5/2014

NA

38-40

16.5 gal

6.61

17.48

4833

3238

0.05

0.05

<0.04

<0.1

0.018

<0.005

RW-207 3

8/5/2014

NA

38-40

16.5 gal

6.61

17.48

4833

3238

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.019

<0.005

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

6AG

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Notes:

'TDS estimated by multiplying conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault..

3	RW-207 is a field duplicate sample for RW-07.

Total cyanide (unfiltered) and weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide were analyzed by Method SM4500CN-E. Cyanide amenable to chloride (AtC) was analyzed by EPA Method 9014.
Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.8, using field-filtered samples (0.45^ filter)

Dissolved metals, Iron and Manganese (Fe & Mn) were detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.

Seven dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Ni, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.

"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit. NA: Not Analyzed

ft-bTOC: measuring point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing

000824

-------
Table 5: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - October 2014

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

10/30/2014

38.23

46-48

17.5 gal

7.23

17.46

2552

1710

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

<0.02

<0.01

MW-03

10/30/2014

45.04

52-53

300 ml

7.43

19.53

3175

2127

0.05

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.3

<0.01

MW-04

10/29/2014

44.70

53-54

550 ml

7.08

17.65

3771

2527

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

1.5

<0.01

MW-05

10/29/2014

41.72

53-54

1,000 ml

7.07

17.76

3406

2282

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.31

<0.01

MW-06

10/29/2014

43.87

53-54

700 ml

7.22

18.26

2822

1891

0.10

0.07

<0.04

3.7

0.087

<0.01

MW-07

10/29/2014

42.82

53-54

800 ml

7.25

18.99

2302

1542

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

0.45

0.19

<0.01

MW-08

10/29/2014

41.06

54-55

875 ml

7.07

18.35

2713

1818

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.35

<0.01

MW-10

10/30/2014

43.12

53-54

775 ml

7.20

18.48

3606

2416

0.07

0.07

0.05

<0.1

0.26

<0.01

MW-12

10/30/2014

42.03

65-66

1,675 ml

7.39

17.92

2050

1374

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.26

<0.01

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-07 2

10/29/2014

39.9

38-40

13.0 gal

6.78

17.35

4769

3195

0.04

0.04

<0.04

<0.1

<0.02

<0.01

RW-207 3

10/29/2014

39.9

38-40

13.0 gal

6.78

17.35

4833

3238

0.05

0.05

<0.04

<0.1

<0.02

<0.01

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07

10/30/2014

62.00

Bail

2.8 gal

7.41

16.49

1458

977

NA

NA

NA

<0.1

<0.02

<0.01

6AG

10/30/2014

61.02

75-80

0.6 gal

7.31

18.82

1639

1098

NA

NA

NA

4.5

0.31

<0.01

206AG 4

10/30/2014

61.02

75-80

0.6 gal

7.31

18.82

1639

1098

NA

NA

NA

4.9

0.32

<0.01

Notes:

'TDS estimated by multiplying conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault..

3	RW-207 is a field duplicate sample for RW-07.

4	206AG (OU-2) is a field duplicate sample for 6AG (OU-2).

Total cyanide (unfiltered) and weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide were analyzed by Method SM4500CN-E. Cyanide amenable to chloride (AtC) was analyzed by EPA Method 9014.
Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.8, using field-filtered samples (0.45^ filter)

Dissolved metals, Iron and Manganese (Fe & Mn) were detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.

Seven dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Ni, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.

"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit. NA: Not Analyzed

ft-bTOC: measuring point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing

000825

-------
Table 6: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - January 2015

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

1/29/2015

38.10

46-48

15 gal

7.33

17.25

2539

1701

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.02

<0.01

MW-03

1/28/2015

43.35

52-53

580 ml

7.55

16.63

2820

1889

0.05

0.05

<0.04

<0.1

0.35

<0.01

MW-04

1/28/2015

43.42

53-54

600 ml

7.28

16.64

3481

2332

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

1.13

<0.01

MW-05

1/28/2015

40.39

53-54

1,000 ml

7.52

16.55

3225

2161

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.32

<0.01

MW-06

1/28/2015

42.91

53-54

700 ml

7.44

16.87

2597

1740

0.08

0.08

<0.04

<0.1

0.04

<0.01

MW-07

1/29/2015

41.50

53-54

850 ml

7.24

16.55

2067

1385

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.21

<0.01

MW-08

1/29/2015

39.66

54-55

950 ml

7.34

16.56

2447

1639

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

0.54

0.25

<0.01

MW-10

1/28/2015

41.86

53-54

900 ml

7.77

17.55

3333

2233

0.08

0.08

<0.04

<0.1

0.17

<0.01

MW-12

1/28/2015

41.28

65-66

1,800 ml

8.12

16.60

1917

1284

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.18

<0.01

MW-2122

1/28/2015

41.28

65-66

1,800 ml

8.12

16.60

1917

1284

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

0.21

0.19

<0.01

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-07 3

1/28/2015

NA

38-40

15 gal

6.89

17.02

4587

3073

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.01

<0.01

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07
(OU2)

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

6AG

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Notes:

'TDS estimated by multiplying conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	MW-212 is afield duplicate sample for MW-12.

3	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault..

Total cyanide (unfiltered) and weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide were analyzed by Method SM4500CN-E. Cyanide amenable to chloride (AtC) was analyzed by EPA Method 9014.
Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.8, using field-filtered samples (0.45^ filter)

Dissolved metals, Iron and Manganese (Fe & Mn) were detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.

Seven dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Ni, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.

"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit. NA: Not Analyzed

ft-bTOC: measuring point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing

000826

-------
Table 7: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - April 2015

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

4/27/2015

37.83

46-48

15 gal

7.28

17.26

2602

1743

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.02

<0.015

MW-03

4/28/2015

45.21

52-53

400 ml

7.84

15.51

2977

1995

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.39

<0.015

MW-04

4/28/2015

44.47

53-54

500 ml

7.57

16.59

3757

2517

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

1.49

<0.015

MW-05

4/28/2015

41.45

53-54

810 ml

7.60

15.88

3285

2201

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.27

<0.015

MW-06

4/28/2015

43.51

53-54

700 ml

7.67

16.48

2687

1800

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.06

<0.015

MW-07

4/28/2015

42.75

53-54

800 ml

7.84

16.38

2152

1442

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.26

<0.015

MW-08

4/28/2015

41.66

54-55

775 ml

7.66

16.11

2577

1727

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.33

<0.015

MW-10

4/28/2015

42.91

53-54

600 ml

7.68

15.97

3461

2319

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.20

<0.015

MW-12

4/28/2015

41.64

65-66

1,600 ml

8.08

15.54

1919

1286

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.22

<0.015

MW-202 2

4/27/2015

37.83

46-48

15 gal

7.28

17.26

2602

1743

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.02

<0.01

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-07 3

4/28/2015

NA

38-40

15 gal

6.83

17.06

4831

3237

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.001

<0.015

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07
(OU2)

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

6AG

Not
Sampled

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Notes:

'TDS estimated by multiplying conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	MW-202 is afield duplicate sample for MW-02.

3	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault..

Total cyanide (unfiltered) and weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide were analyzed by Method SM4500CN-E. Cyanide amenable to chloride (AtC) was analyzed by EPA Method 9014.
Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.8, using field-filtered samples (0.45^ filter)

Dissolved metals, Iron and Manganese (Fe & Mn) were detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.

Seven dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Ni, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.

"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit. NA: Not Analyzed

ft-bTOC: measuring point on the north side of the well is measured in feet (to nearest hundredth) below top of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well casing

000827

-------
Table 8: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - August 2015

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-
total
(mg/L)

CN-
AtC
(mg/L)

CN-
WAD
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2





1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

8/26/2015

38.82

46-48

16 gal

7.11

17.57

2645

1772

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.03

<0.015

MW-03

8/26/2015

45.88

52-53

400 ml

7.42

22.02

3499

2344

0.033

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

<0.002

<0.015

MW-04

8/26/2015

45.27

53-54

550 ml

7.54

21.48

4650

3116

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

1.32

<0.015

MW-05

8/26/2015

42.26

53-54

950 ml

7.52

19.61

4111

2754

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.31

<0.015

MW-06

8/26/2015

43.98

53-54

690 ml

7.65

20.27

3326

2228

0.037

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.05

<0.015

MW-07

8/26/2015

43.54

53-54

800 ml

7.47

19.67

2654

1778

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

0.70

0.27

<0.015

MW-08

8/26/2015

41.66

54-55

835 ml

7.43

19.52

3210

2151

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.29

<0.015

MW-10

8/26/2015

43.68

53-54

710 ml

7.65

20.62

4347

2912

0.022

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.18

<0.015

MW-12

8/26/2015

42.45

65-66

1,500 ml

8.08

18.99

2419

1621

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

0.15

0.19

<0.015

MW-12D 2

8/26/2015

42.45

65-66

1,500 ml

8.08

18.99

2419

1621

<0.04

<0.04

<0.04

0.14

0.21

<0.015

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-07 3

8/26/2015



38-40

15 gal

6.65

17.46

4856

3254

0.039

<0.04

<0.04

<0.1

0.001

<0.015

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07
(OU2)

8/27/2015

62.46

Bail

2.5 gal

7.30

17.05

1465

982

NA

NA

NA

<0.1

<0.002

<0.015

6AG
(OU-2)

8/27/2015

61.50

Bail

9.0 gal

7.48

16.91

1649

1105

NA

NA

NA

1.30

0.21

<0.015

206AG
(OU-2) 4

8/27/2015

61.50

Bail

9.0 gal

7.48

16.91

1649

1105

NA

NA

NA

1.40

0.21

<0.015

Notes:

'TDS estimated by multiplying conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	MW-12D is a field duplicate sample for MW-12.

3	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault..

4	206AG (OU-2) is a field duplicate sample for 6AG (OU-2).

Total cyanide (unfiltered) and weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide were analyzed by Method SM4500CN-E. Cyanide amenable to chloride (AtC) was analyzed by EPA Method 9014.
Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Methods 200.7 and 200.8, using field-filtered samples (0.45^filter)

Dissolved metals, Iron and Manganese (Fe & Mn) were detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.

Seven dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Ni, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.

"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit. NA: Not Analyzed

000828

-------
Table 9: Summary of Groundwater Sampling Results - August 2017

Well ID

Sample
Date

Depth to

Water
(ft-bTOC)

Sample
Intake
Depth
(ft-bTOC)

Purge
Volume

Field
PH

Temp
(°C)

Conductivity
(|jS/cm)

Total
Dissolved
Solids 1
(mg/L)

CN-total
(mg/L)

Fe
(mg/L)

Mn
(mg/L)

Pb
(mg/L)

NMWQCC









6-9





1000

0.2

1.0

0.2

0.05

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Monitoring Wells

MW-02

8/26/2015

38.75

46-48

21 gal

7.28

17.28

2546

1706

<0.005

<0.044

0.043

<0.00016

MW-03

8/26/2015

43.91

52-53

550 ml

7.14

19.46

2199

1473

0.047

<0.044

0.48

0.00072

MW-04

8/26/2015

44.92

53-54

600 ml

7.25

20.07

2944

1972

0.047

0.67 J

1.3

<0.00016

MW-05

8/26/2015

41.53

53-54

1000 ml

7.30

18.30

2598

1741

<0.005

0.73 J

0.21

<0.00016

MW-06

8/26/2015

44.58

53-54

650 ml

7.06

19.73

2277

1526

0.068

<0.044

0.19

<0.00016

MW-07

8/26/2015

43.03

53-54

800 ml

7.10

18.92

2060

1380

<0.005

0.87

0.37

<0.00016

MW-08

8/26/2015

41.80

54-55

800 ml

7.05

18.55

2113

1416

<0.005

0.38

0.58

0.00025

MW-10

8/26/2015

43.22

53-54

750 ml

7.25

19.68

2707

1814

0.064

<0.044

0.2

<0.00016

MW-12

8/26/2015

42.92

65-66

1.600 ml

7.66

18.66

1936

1297

<0.005

0.48

0.21

<0.00016

Cimarron Mill Site (OU-1) Recovery Wells

RW-07 2

8/26/2015



38-40

17.5 gal

6.92

17.41

4517

3026

0.035

<0.044

0.0011 J

<0.00016

RW-207 3

8/26/2015



38-40

17.5 gal

6.92

17.41

4517

3026

0.034

<0.044

0.0096J

<0.00016

Sierra Blanca Mill Site (OU-2) Wells

MW-07
(OU2)

8/27/2015

62.46

Bail

5.0 gal

7.13

17.15

1210

811

NA

<0.044

<0.0006

<0.00016

6AG
(OU-2)

8/27/2015

61.50

Bail

9.0 gal

7.58

17.39

1455

975

NA

0.7

0.2

<0.00016

206AG
(OU-2) 4

8/27/2015

61.50

Bail

9.0 gal

7.58

17.39

1455

975

NA

0.72

0.2

<0.00016

Notes:

'TDS estimated by multiplying conductivity values by a factor of 0.67 (http://www.stevenswater.com/water quality sensors/conductivity info.html)

2	RW-07 top of PVC well casing is approximately 4-5 feet below ground surface inside a raised concrete vault.

3	RW-207 is a field duplicate sample for RW-07.

4	206AG (OU-2) is afield duplicate sample for 6AG (OU-2).

Total cyanide (unfiltered) cyanide was analyzed by Method SW9014.

Dissolved metals were analyzed by EPA Method 200.8, Revision 5.4, using field-filtered samples (0.45^ filter).

Dissolved manganese (Mn) was detected at concentrations that exceed the NMWQCC standards, which are shown in bold-font values.

Nine dissolved metals (As, Ba, Co, Cu, Fe, Ni, Pb, Se, & Zn) were detected at concentrations below the NMWQCC water quality standards.

Other dissolved metals (except Ca, K, & Na) were detected above the laboratory reporting limits; however, water quality standards have not been established.

"<" denotes not detected at concentrations above the specified laboratory reporting limit. "J" denotes an estimated concentration below the laboratory reporting limit. NA: Not Analyzed

000829

-------
APPENDIX E
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

000830

-------
Photograph 1: OU-1. Southwest view.

Gated gravel access road to the automobile salvage shop.

000831

-------
Photograph 3: OU-1. Northwest view. Property owner's automobile salvage/repair shop and
residence (green building with flat roof).

Site Boundary

Photograph 4: OU-1, North view. Property owner has improved housekeeping and access to monitoring wells
by re-grouping automobiles onsite.

000832

-------
Photograph 5: OU-1. Northeast view. Bollards (bright yellow steel posts) were installed to protect
monitoring wells from surrounding salvage operations.

Photograph 6: OU-1, East view. Upgradient monitoring well (MW-02, with bright yellow bollards) is
separated by a fence. Site boundary extends to the distant fence line.

Site Boundary

000833

-------
Photograph 7: OU-1, Southeast view. Waste rock piles remaining on the southeast side of the Site.

Site Boundary

Photograph 8: OU-1. South view. Waste rock piles remaining on the south side of the Site.

Site Boundary

000834

-------
Photograph 9: OU-2, Northeast view. Sagebrush and buffalo grass vegetation on the ground surface
across the cover of the lead-contaminated soil repositories (1992 and 1997).

Photograph 10: OU-2. West view. Six-inch steel-casing supply well 6AG (inactive) is located
approximately 100 feet east of the 1992 soil repository.

000835

-------
Photograph 11: OU-2, Northeast view. Steel rebar markers with yellow caps were installed and
paired with metal fence posts to identify the corners of the soil repositories.

Photo graph 12: OU-1, Southeast view. Vegetation encroached and covered the 1997 repository
corner marker. Construction debris/demolition refuse remaining onsite in the background.

000836

-------
APPENDIX F
INTERVIEW RECORDS

000837

-------
INTERVIEW RECORD

Site Name: Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site

EPA ID#: NMD980749378

Subject: Fifth Five-Year Review

Time:
1:45PM

Date: 1/17/18

Type: Visit
Location of Visit: On-site

Contact Made By:

Name: Mr. Mark Purcell

Title:

Remedial Project Manager

Organization:
EPA Region 6

Name: Mr. Angelo Ortelli

Title: Project Manager

Organization: NMED

Individual Contacted:

Name:

Mr. Tim Means

Title:

Property Owner/Resident

Organization:

Telephone No:
Fax No:

E-Mail Address:

Street Address: 6589 Hwy. 380, Carrizozo,
NM

Summary of Conversation

Question 1: What is your overall impression of the project? (general sentiment)

It's taken very long.

Would like to see site closure/delisting to enable redevelopment of the property.

Question 2: What effects have the site operations had on the surrounding community?

None. Initially, a local contractor was hired to remove steel/metal prior to Mr. Mean's ownership.

000838

-------
Question 3: Are you aware of any community concerns regarding the site or its operation and
administration? If so, please give details.

None.

Question 4: Are you aware of any complaints, incidents or activities at the Site such as vandalism,
trespassing, or emergency response from local authorities? If so, please provide details.

No incidents observed/reported.

Question 5: Do you feel well informed about the Site's activities and progress?

Very much so. Yes, very pleased.

Question 6: Do you have any comments, questions, or recommendations regarding the Site's
management or operation?

Excellent job. Thanks for protecting our health and well-being.

000839

-------
INTERVIEW RECORD

Site Name: Cimarron Mining Corporation Superfund Site

EPA ID#: NMD980749378

Subject: Fifth Five-Year Review

Time:
9:45AM

Date: 1/18/18

Type: Visit

Location of Visit: Carrizozo Town Hall

Contact Made By:

Name: Mr. Mark Purcell

Title:

Remedial Project Manager

Organization:
EPA Region 6

Name: Mr. Angelo Ortelli

Title: Project Manager

Organization: NMED

Individual Contacted:

Name:

Mr. Rick Hyatt

Title:
Mayor

Organization:
Town of Carrizozo

Telephone No:
Fax No:

E-Mail Address:

Street Address:

Summary of Conversation

Question 1: What is your overall impression of the project? (general sentiment)

See comments associated with the response to Question No. 6.

Question 2: What effects have the site operations had on the surrounding community?

None noted.

000840

-------
Question 3: Are you aware of any community concerns regarding the site or its operation and
administration? If so, please give details.

None.

Question 4: Are you aware of any complaints, incidents or activities at the Site such as vandalism,
trespassing, or emergency response from local authorities? If so, please provide details.

No complaints or incidents noted.

Question 5: Do you feel well informed about the Site's activities and progress?

Not applicable. This was the first interview conducted.

Question 6: Do you have any comments, questions, or recommendations regarding the Site's
management or operation?

When will the Site be delisted from the NPL?

How much longer will ground water monitoring activities be conducted at the Site (OU-2)?

Recommend installing fences and signage around the OU-2 soil repositories, since they will need to be
inspected periodically for some time into the future.

000841

-------