Laserfiche WebLink
'~ <br />Remainine Monitorine Points <br />6. In proposed revised Table 2, the monitoring of pond 10-12 is listed as having been <br />suspended. However, approval of TR-34 would remove location 10-12 from the <br />hydrologic monitoring program. Please revise Table 2 accordingly. <br />In proposed revised Table 3, the monitoring of springs 17, 20, 1-5 and 7-1 is listed as <br />having been suspended. However, the approval of TR03~ would remove these spring <br />locations from the hydrologic monitoring program. Please revise Table 3 accordingly. <br />8. Please explain why the reference to the 90° weir plates for surface water monitoring <br />points SW-5 and SW-6 was removed from revised text page 119 of Section 2.05. <br />9. The TR-34 submittal states, in the text and in Table 3, that springs 13-5 and 13-6 will be <br />retained in the hydrologic monitoring program. However, Map 4-1 from the 1999 Annual <br />Hydrologic Report shows that each of these two monitoring locations is depicted as a <br />combination of a spring and a pond. Please explain this discrepency. <br />If you have any questions, please call me. <br />Sincerely, <br />.~v~-a-Q <br />o eph . Du~h <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />cc: Jim Stover (J.E. Stover & Associates) <br />c:\ms97\bowie l \v34adeq 1 <br />