Laserfiche WebLink
In their objection to Four States' application, Plaintiffs Akin and Stepe asserted that the <br />proposed sand and gravel mining operation would essentially introduce toxins and heavy metals <br />into the Dolores River. Vol. 1, pp. 179-183. The Division had concluded that Four States' <br />proposed mining operation would not introduce toxins or heavy metals because these potential <br />pollutants do not naturally occur at the mine site and would not result from mining activities. <br />Vol. 2, pp. 776-777. <br />Apparently, Plaintiffs intended to prove that the Division's conclusion was based on <br />faulty water quality data. Another party had subpoenaed the same personnel with the intent to <br />discredit data from another mining operation, the Tam Koenig Pit. That party believed the <br />Division had relied heavily on this data and, therefore, its conclusions were mistaken. Vol. 3, pp. <br />1079-1081. Apparently, Plaintiffs had the same strategy. Vol. 3, p. 1098. The flaw in this <br />strategy is that the Division did not rely on the data from the Tam-Koenig Pit to evaluate <br />potential heavy metals or toxins discharges from the pit, as Plaintiffs would have the Court <br />believe. <br />The Division assigned its geochemist, Dr. Harry Posey, to evaluate potential impacts on <br />water quality caused by Four States' mine. Dr. Posey reviewed several sources of information. <br />He reviewed water quality data from the United States Geological Survey, WQCD data from two <br />gravel pits in the vicinity, including the Tam-Koenig pit, water quality data from the Bureau of <br />Reclamation, and data gathered by the Division. Vol. 3, pp. 1136-1137. <br />Dr. Posey concluded that Four States' proposed mining operation would not threaten to <br />pollute the river with heavy metals and toxins. .Dr. Posey did not rely on data from the Tam- <br />11 <br />