Laserfiche WebLink
1111111111111111111 <br />DATE: March 13, 1995 <br />TO: Barbara Pavlik <br />FROM: Dan Mathews <br />RE: McClane and Munger AHR <br />Barb, I did a preliminary review of the enclosed AHR's to try to <br />verify that all required sampling was done and required analyses <br />reported. I had a difficult time with that task, apparently <br />because the application volumes I have may not be entirely updated. <br />The enclosed draft letter (which I never sent out) identifies some <br />of the apparent deficiencies I identified. <br />I spoke with John Walters today and he assured me that he has been <br />following the same monitoring program for a number of years now, <br />and that he is in full compliance with permit requirements. With <br />respect to deficiency Item 1, he says that the Stipulation No. 2 <br />from the 1985 renewal findings document does indeed describe the <br />approved surface water monitoring plan for the McClane permit. <br />This would appear to be the case. My permit application copy is <br />apparently outdated. <br />With respect to Munger Canyon permit surface water and ground water <br />monitoring requirements (Items 2 and 3), the monitoring programs <br />described in the permit application do not apply because of the <br />temporary cessation status of the mine. John Walters says that <br />during temporary cessation, Surface water monitoring is required <br />only at site SW-3, and Ground water monitoring] is required only at <br />Site GW-6. This is one interpretation which could be drawn from <br />the applicable pages of the 1993 Renewal findings document, but you <br />may want to double check with Janet to verify. <br />Let me know if you have any questions (just don't expect too many <br />answers). Thanks. <br />