Laserfiche WebLink
<br />29. Before Technical Revision No. 36 was approved, the permit text, on page 2.05-ISb, stored <br />that a discharge grab snnrple would be taken from the mine water disdrarge pond, <br />analyzed and the restdts reported in the AHR. On page 2.05-33 of Volume / of the PR-04 <br />subnrittnl, that commitment no longer exists. Please explain x•hy this cormnitnrent was <br />deleted and submit a revised permit page containing the commitment, if appropriate. <br />The Division has no further concerns. OMLLC is correct in pointing out that, in the TR- <br />32 review process, the Division approved OMLLC's plan to only sample the initial <br />discharge from an SAE. As long as the SAE designs are maintained in the field according <br />to [heir designs, the Division finds this acceptable. The commitment to sample SAE's is <br />already on page 2.05-38 of the PR-04 submittal. <br />56. There are several discrepancies between the livdrologic monitoring frequency <br />infonnntion found in dre monitoring frequency srunnmry on proposed page 2 of Exhibit <br />2.05-7 of Voheme /2 of the PR-04 submittal arrd that in the approved nronitoring <br />frequency list_found in rlre footnotes of permit application page 2.05-46c. Please revise <br />proposed page 2 to reflect dre approved monitoring frequency. <br />OMLLC requested a reduction in the hydrologic monitoring frequency for all surface <br />water sites. The Division agreed that winter monitoring of all surface water sites, except <br />for those sites on the North Fork of the Gunnison, can be terminated. Please revise page 2 <br />of Exhibit 2.05-7 of Volume 12 to reflect Ihese changes. <br />If you have any questions, please let me know. <br />c:\ms97\san bom\pr4memo5 <br />