2010-02-15_HYDROLOGY - M2007044 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

discharge facility is operational and no permanent, uncorrectable damage to the fishery would result. AMAX was concerned with issues relating to the procedures and methodology used to develop the proposals. They believed that the standards could result in treatment costs approaching several hundred million dollars assuming that technology was available which they content most likely is not. To avoid this potential, AMAX offered seasonal standards which they felt were more reflective of the ambient qualities of the mainstem of Ohio Creek. The Commission decided to keep the record open to allow the Division as well as AMAX to pool additional data for both Coal Creek and Ohio Creek in order to test AMAX's claim that their additional data and a change in the hardness/alkalinity would alter the standards and thus the potential for debilitating economic impact. The additional data from AMAX was folded into the Division's calculations and most of the metals of concern did evidence higher ambient levels. The standards were changed to reflect these higher levels. The Commission found these amended standards to be acceptable on economic terms because no clear and present threat of economic impact was in evidence and they there are administrative options available to consider future impact if they develop. Through evaluation of expert testimony and careful deliberative consideration, the Commission has taken steps to minimize the economic impact of these classifications and standards upon the private sector. As adopted, these classifications and standards will have a negligible impact upon the private sector while protecting current and achievable beneficial uses. It is concluded that the Commission has strenuously considered the economic factors at issue in this basin and that this regulation is economically reasonable both in terms of potential costs that may result, and in terms of the beneficial uses to be protected. 35.12 STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE REGARDING THE ADOPTION OF MINOR CORRECTONS AND CLARIFICATIONS FOR THE BASIC STANDARDS AND METHODOLOGIES AND CORRECTIONS TO THE NUMERIC STANDARDS FOR THE SAN JUAN AND DOLORES, GUNNISON, AND LOWER DOLORES,RIO GRANDE,AND THE SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASINS. BASIS AND PURPOSE: In accordance with the requirements of 24-4-103(4), C.R.S. 1973,the Commission makes these findings and adopts this Statement of Basis and Purpose. The Commission at a public rulemaking hearing November 14, 1983, and December 12, 1983, adopted minor and editorial corrections to clarify the Commission's current regulations numbered respectively 3.1.0, 3.4.0, 3.5.0, 3.6.0, and 3.8.0. These regulations are contained in Article 3, Water Quality Standards and Classifications, of the Policies, Regulations, and Guidelines of the Water quality Control Commission. (5 CCR 1002-8) In adopting these corrections and clarifications,the Commission considered the economic reasonableness of its action. The scientific or technological rationale of the Commission in justifying the changes to its rules was that it made the classifications and standards which it had previously assigned more technically correct and accurate. The consolidated changes adopted by the Commission are provided with this Basis and Purpose. The Secretary of State is being provided corrected pages for each of the regulations as replacements for pages previously published in those regulations. An issue raised during the hearing, was whether or not the table or organic parameters should be moved from the Appendix to the text. The Commission included standards for organic parameters in the regulations it adopted for each of the River Basins of the State. Thus, 23