Laserfiche WebLink
<br />You asked me to look at the monitoring suite and see if there are any sites that can possibly be <br />eliminated from the program. There are some that 1 personally don't see a compelling need Yor. <br />They are as follows: <br />1) Well GW-Nl 1, in the underburden between Mines #l and #2; <br />2) Well GW-N25, right at the old pit (or so it appears;.) <br />3) Well GW-N26, a well in the Mine #2 spoils that leas historically been dry; <br />4) Well GW-N28, same as N26; <br />5) Surface Water Site SW-N4, one of two sites on Lower Tuttle Draw. <br />As always, I would feel better if I understood the rationale for designing these sites into the <br />program to begin with. I don't have the arrogance to think that I have all the answers - I give <br />somebody credit for having a reason for putting them there in the first place. If they only <br />recorded that reason, then I could definately decide if I thought i[ was a good reason or not. My <br />request to you, in the future, when adding monitoring sites or designing new programs, document <br />the reasons and rationale for each site. Then someone l0 or 20 years from now won't have [o sit <br />and wonder. <br />Thanks for the soap box!!! <br />