Laserfiche WebLink
MCC does not understand why the Division did not give us the opportunity to <br />locate and provide this data prior to writing the NOV. It appears that MCC <br />was presumed guilty until proven innocent. <br />•While it is true that the lab did not complete the analyses of some parameters <br />as had been specified by MCC, in many cases the parameters were collected in <br />the field or the missing parameter would not preclude (given the period of <br />record for some resources) the Division from assessing impacts of mining on the <br />hydrologic balance in the mining area. Furthermore, the few missing parameters <br />does not impact the overall effectiveness of the monitoring program. <br />•The Division's directive to change the monitoring program in our permit was <br />made after the completion of the 1996 water year; therefore, the information <br />desired by the Division, and apparently part of the NOV, could not have been <br />included in the 1996 Annual Hydrology Report. <br />Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me at (970) 929-2217. <br />Sincerely, <br />i~k:D Sc1~~(J,~• <br />Phil G. Schmidt <br />Engineering Manager <br />cc: David Berry, CDMG <br />Susan McCannon, CDMG <br />Christine Johnston <br />Kirk Mueller <br />Kathy Welt <br />Hw~v~ozo.ao~ <br />