My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
C150073 Final Feasibility Study
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
DayForward
>
1001-2000
>
C150073 Final Feasibility Study
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/13/2010 3:33:07 PM
Creation date
4/23/2009 10:05:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C150073
Contractor Name
Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District - Water Activity Enterprise
Contract Type
Grant
Water District
14
County
Pueblo
Bill Number
SB 01-157
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Feasibility Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
183
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Feasibility Evaluation of the Arkansas Valley Pipeline <br />Water Works! Committee <br />June 2003 <br />through non-point sources, which leach these metals from the subsurface and carry them to <br />the river. <br />TABLE 3.6 <br />AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS FROM USGS <br />WATER QUALITY DATA, 1990-2000 <br /> Average Average Average Concentration <br /> Concentration Concentration at at LaJunta with <br />Constituent above Pueblo LaJunta Exchange Stream Standard <br /> (5% increase) <br />Iron, Dissolved 29.5 ug/I 47.5 ug/I 49.9 ug/I 300 ug/I <br />Iron, Total 177.7 ug/l 22,734.3 ug/I 23,871.0 ug/I 1,900 ug/I <br /> <br />Selenium, 4.7 ug/I 11.4 ug/I 12.0 ug/I 17.0 ug/I <br />Dissolved <br />Sulfate, Dissolved 139.4 ug/I 720.8 ug/I 756.9 ug/I 1,090 ug/I <br />From Table 3.6 it is apparent that selenium, iron, and sulfate increase in concentration along <br />the river from Pueblo Reservoir to LaJunta. Based on our analyses, it can be assumed that <br />during an exchange scenario, these constituents would occur in even higher concentrations, <br />due to decreased dilution flows from Pueblo Reservoir. Because selenium, iron, and sulfate <br />make up part of TDS, it is reasonable to assume that this concentration increase would be <br />approximately 5 percent for the peak month. <br />Comparing the stream standards in Table 3.6 with: 1) the average existing concentration at <br />LaJunta and 2) the estimated concentrations with the exchange (5 percent increase), it is <br />apparent that the exchange did not increase water quality constituent concentrations <br />sufficiently to raise the estimated concentrations with the exchange over the standard (with <br />the exception of total iron, which already exceeds the standard). Therefore, based on the <br />available data and the calculations, it appears that the proposed exchange should not increase <br />concentrations sufficiently to warrant an objection from the Colorado Department of Health <br />and Environment. However, the standards listed in Table 3.6 reflect the Temporary <br />Modification in place until July 2008. It is unknown at this time what the future stream <br />standards for these constituents will be after this date. <br />There are additional water quality constituents that are regulated by the state to protect <br />beneficial uses along the lower Arkansas River. Inspection of the stream standards and <br />recent water quality data do not indicate that these other constituents, such as nitrate, <br />chlorides, and other metals, are a problem, as their concentrations are well below stream <br />standards. A potential increase of 5 percent resulting from the exchange would still not cause <br />exceedance of stream standards. It is not anticipated that the proposed exchange will cause <br />any regulated water quality constituents that are not problems now, to become constituents of <br />25 <br />GEI Consultants, lnC. 0128403-06-30 Feasibility Evaluation Final <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.