Laserfiche WebLink
for review and comment prior to submission to DRMS for review and approval as TR-18. This <br /> consultation consumed many months in 2011. As part of this consultation, Climax met with <br /> representatives of EPRC and LRE and exchanged comments and responses on several separate <br /> occasions before and after the plan was submitted to DRMS to ensure that the appropriate protective <br /> measures were included. DRMS concurred that the plan was protective of EPR and approved the <br /> plan as part of TR-18. That approval was not challenged by EPRC. <br /> As a result of the consultation with EPRC representatives, the WQMP contains monitoring and <br /> reporting conditions specific to the monitoring sites above EPR in addition to those that would be <br /> required under DRMS rules. Also addressed in the plan are additional data evaluation and reporting <br /> procedures specific to the new POC well established above EPR and surface water monitoring at the <br /> EPR Outlet and the East Fork Eagle River. <br /> EPRC conducts periodic sampling of EPR and annual reports are prepared (formerly by Golder <br /> Associates and now by LRE). These annual reports and EPRC's own sampling data support a <br /> conclusion that the EPP measures in place are adequate and there is no threat to EPR. In fact, <br /> EPRC sampling data reveal positive trends in water quality. <br /> LRE and EPRC worked with Climax in the development of TR-18, and neither objected to DRMS's <br /> approval of the WQMP. The NPLs and POCs were developed consistent with the plan's provisions. <br /> Section 5.1 of the WQMP refers to the CBSG Interim Narrative Statewide Standard(CBSG Section <br /> 41.5(C)(6)(b)(i))which provides that groundwater quality shall be maintained for each parameter at <br /> the least restrictive of existing ambient quality as of January 31, 1994 or the most stringent criteria <br /> set forth in Tables 1 through 4 of the CBSG. Hard Rock Metal Mining Rule 3.1.7(2)(c) also <br /> requires the use of the groundwater quality table values in the CBSG as a guide for establishing <br /> numeric protection limits or permit conditions. In situations where ambient groundwater exceeds <br /> groundwater table values, the rule requires establishing permit conditions to protect existing and <br /> reasonably potential future uses against further lowering of groundwater quality. Consistent with <br /> DRMS rules,NPLs are to be established for POC groundwater wells using the CBSG Table Value <br /> Standards as a guide with consideration given to baseline data, where available. In instances where <br /> the existing groundwater quality exceeds a CBSG table value, an alternate NPL is selected, based <br /> on the Interim Narrative Standard, to protect against the further lowering of groundwater quality. <br /> The LRE letter is essentially a series of general expressions of concern over the possibility of <br /> potential future water quality developments perceived as adverse. Notably, there is no evidence in <br /> the LRE letter to suggest the WQMP is not protective of EPR water quality. The data show the <br /> WQMP has been effective. EPRC's own data indicate that water quality in the reservoir has <br /> improved since the time of the sale to EPRC in 1998. LRE simply lacks a technical basis for its <br /> suggestion that use of CBSG values for NPLs at POC wells, coupled with other provisions of the <br /> WQMP, are inadequate to protect downstream water quality. The special monitoring, data analysis <br /> and notification provisions in Section 6 of the WQMP provide the necessary safeguards for <br /> immediate action and ensure collaboration between Climax, DRMS and EPRC in the event that <br /> changing water quality is detected. Climax has demonstrated that the WQMP is effective for <br /> protecting EPR. <br /> 2 <br />