Laserfiche WebLink
i <br />that spring #1 required independent sampling in accordance with the spring and seep survey <br />protocol since it was already being monitored on a more frequent basis (weekly; although for <br />different purposes and for the most part different parameters) as an NPDES discharge point. <br />According to P&M's records, monitoring protocol for springs and seeps with discharges less <br />than 20 gpm was incorporated into the approved permit via Technical Revision 20. TR-20 <br />was approved July 23, 1994 in accordance with the July 13, 1994 proposed approval <br />decision correspondence from the Division to P&M. As such, the monitoring protocol for <br />smaller springs and seeps at the Edna Mine was not approved by the Division for <br />implementation at the time the May 1994 spring and seep survey was performed. Therefore, <br />no data was collected for springs and seeps with discharges less than 20 gpm. <br />Sincerely, <br />~~~ ~~~ <br />Brian D. Gontarek <br />Environmental Engineer <br />Enclosure <br />cc: David Beverlin -Edna Mine <br />