DERR-2024-007708

NRD Trustee – Comment Response Summary – Response to Common Comment No. 10 10-1
SOUTHWEST JORDAN VALLEY GROUND WATER CLEANUP PROJECT
STATE OF UTAH NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE TRUSTEE

COMMENT RESPONSE SUMMARY
AUGUST 31, 2004

Response to Common Comment No. 10 – Well Owner Concerns

A number of comments expressed concerns that the project outlined by the Joint Proposal will
interfere with well owners’ rights in the Affected Area by drawing down the aquifer or by
adversely affecting quality, and that well owners are not protected. The project is designed to
cleanup contamination in the deep aquifer and keep contamination from spreading to other parts
of the aquifer. The project utilizes water rights of Kennecott and Jordan Valley Water
Conservancy District. Neither the Consent Decree nor the Joint Proposal settles claims of third
parties for interference with water rights. However, in order to address well owner concerns in a
timely manner, Kennecott and JVWCD have provided procedures to streamline resolution of any
claims.

Consent Decree
The groundwater contamination located under the southwest Jordan Valley caused injury to a
natural resource (groundwater) that otherwise would have been available to the public. The
Consent Decree was entered into in settlement of the Trustee’s claim for the damages associated
with the groundwater contamination, and requires that monies for the damages be placed in a
Trust Fund be used to “restore, replace, or acquire the equivalent” of the lost resource for the
benefit of the public in the Affected Area. As stated in Section VIII.C of the Consent Decree, the
Consent Decree does not settle claims by third parties, who are not parties to the Consent Decree,
with regards to alleged quantity or quality impacts. Furthermore, the Trustee does not have the
authority to resolve third party claims.

Joint Proposal
The available data, which has been reviewed by the Trustee, indicates that implementation of the
Joint Proposal is not likely to adversely impact the water quantity or quality of private well
owners. Prior to the initiation of the remediation project by Kennecott in the early 1990’s,
Kennecott began a groundwater monitoring program to measure the water level elevations of the
aquifer in the southwest Jordan Valley. Additional information on the aquifer studies and on
groundwater modeling is provided in Response to Common Comment No. 2 above. Future
monitoring data will be compared to the baseline representation to evaluate the effectiveness of
the remediation and its impacts on water levels and groundwater quality in the valley. This
information is reported on an annual basis to the Technical Review Committee (TRC), including
the EPA and DEQ, and is available to the public. Such information will continue to be used to
evaluate potential quantity or quality impacts, including reduction in contaminants and prevention
of migration of the plumes.

Data collected through this monitoring program, as well as other data, have shown that the
aquifer has historically been over extracted and continues to drop as a function of current
extractions unrelated to Kennecott’s remediation program. Based on the data, it has been
determined that drawdown of the aquifer in the immediate area of the Zone A plume is

NRD Trustee – Comment Response Summary – Response to Common Comment No. 10 10-2
unavoidable and necessary to contain the contamination. In the absence of this extraction, the
acid contaminated water could spread to contaminate other areas of the aquifer. This concern is
recognized in the Salt Lake Valley Groundwater Management Plan. As described in Response to
Common Comment No. 5 above, management of the acid-contaminated water associated with the
Zone A Plume is part of the CERCLA remedial response as described in the CERCLA Record of
Decision dated December 13, 2000; it is not being independently evaluated by the Trustee as part
of the Joint Proposal.

The project outlined by the Joint Proposal pursuant to the Natural Resource Damage Consent
Decree, is not expected to cause unreasonable interference with existing water rights. As
described in the Joint Proposal, the project uses existing water rights of Kennecott and JVWCD.
The project also is not expected to adversely affect the quality of the groundwater withdrawn by
others with groundwater rights in the Affected Area. The project not only provides a restoration
of the lost natural resource to the public in the form of a treated public water supply, but it also
accelerates a cleanup and remediation of the groundwater, while preventing further migration.

Procedures to Address Well Owner Concerns
The project outlined by the Joint Proposal is not intended to nor does it resolve concerns well
owners in regards to alleged quantity or quality impacts. Utah water law and the Salt Lake Valley
Ground Water Management Plan will govern issues of unreasonable interference. In addition,
both Kennecott and JVWCD have procedures in place to assess the validity of quality or quantity
concerns. Each procedure is intended to provide an inexpensive and timely avenue for water
rights owners to have their concerns addressed. If an affected water rights owner chooses not to
participate in this process, or if the owner disagrees with the determination in this informal
process, there is no prohibition on pursuing other available legal avenues to address the claim or
concern. In addressing impacts, Kennecott or JVWCD will include an evaluation involving the
water rights holder and consultation with the Division of Water Quality and/or the Division of
Water Rights, depending upon the type of impact.

Information has been prepared and presented to well owners to assist with an understanding of
these procedures. Kennecott will address suspected water quantity impacts from the project
activities for Zone A that specifically relate to Kennecott. The District will address suspected
water quantity impacts due to the project activities for Zone B. Kennecott has also indicated in
all of the public meetings that it will address suspected impacts to individual well owners based
on water quality issues in Zone A and B that specifically related to Kennecott. Mitigation or
reconciliation for determined impacts may include replacement water, deepening of the well,
under-sink reverse osmosis treatment units, or other appropriate means to be determined on a
case-by-case basis.

Included at the end of this response are two figures, entitled Zone B/Lost Use Groundwater
Interference Mitigation Plan (for wells east of 4000 West) and Zone A Water Quantity/Quality
and Zone B Water Quality Well Owner Concern Evaluation Process. These figures portray the
procedures referenced in this response. The procedures are voluntary, are not required by the
Consent Decree, and are not a part of the project’s implementing agreements or Joint Proposal.
The existence of these procedures does not affect the rights of the well owners or the rights of
Kennecott or JVWCD. The procedures are designed to provide a voluntary avenue to resolve
potential well owner claims.
Well Owner
with ConcernDivision of
Water Rights
(DWR)
JVWCD
(Tel: [phone] –
Richard Bay)
ZONE B/LOST USE
GROUNDWATER INTERFERENCE MITIGATION PLAN
(For wells east of 4000 West)

Potential Remedies:

• Reduced pumping
• Deepen affected well
• Connect well owner to municipal
water system
• Compensation
1. JVWCD gives written notice of receipt of
concern to well owner, DWR and DEQ.

2. JVWCD evaluates drawdown impact
and SL Valley Groundwater
Management Plan, in consultation with
DWR.
JVWCD Conclusion:
Has drawdown created
unreasonable interference, and
is it caused by one or more
Zone B or Lost Use wells?
JVWCD notifies
well owner, DWR,
and DEQ in writing
JVWCD notifies well
owner in writing
If parties agree:
JVWCD implements
remedy. JVWCD
notifies DWR and
DEQ in writing.
JVWCD reviews
remedy with well
owner and DWR
No
Yes
If water quality issue,
refer to KUCC
If parties do not agree: Well
owner pursues own remedies
I:
\
S
O
U
R
C
E
\
S
W
G
R
\
Z
O
N
E

B

L
o
s
t

U
s
e

I
n
t
e
r
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

P
l
a
n

L
t
r

s
z
.
d
o
c

JVWCD
ZONE A WATER QUANTITY/QUALITY AND ZONE B WATER QUALITY
WELL OWNER CONCERN EVALUATION PROCESS
The process illustrated above is not a part of the Joint Proposal. It reflects a voluntary process designed to address concerns of private well owners regarding potential interference with pre-existing
water rights utilizing criteria consistent with Utah law. Nothing in the process is intended to create, modify, expand, limit or restrict the legal rights or remedies of either the well owner or Kennecott.
Well Owner Complaint
Referral to Independent Consultant
Consultant gathers and analyzes data
(quality, quantity, baseline, seniority)
Consultant
Report
Impacts
attributable to
KUCC?
Well
Owner KUCC
DEQ
&
DWR
Consultant
Evaluates Mitigation
Options
Mitigation
Recommendation
Mitigation
acceptable to
Well Owner?
Well Owner's legal
rights, if any, are
unaffected
Implement Mitigation
Written notification to
Well Owner, KUCC,
DEQ, and DWR
YESNO
Well
Owner KUCC
DEQ
&
DWR
NO YES