APPCOR10179 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ ~ ~ ~i D. Daily Iron: - ~ The samples taken on 3/3/81 and 3/27/81 showed total iron in excess of applicable daily limita- tions. These discharges occurred because the pond had not yet been constructed. The pond has now been constructed and verification of construction has been accepted by the Division. 2. 3/9/82: Alleged violation is vacated (erroneously cited). E. Monthly Iron: 1. The samples taken at this discharge point in March, 1981, and March, 1982, showed monthly aver- ages in excess of applicable limitations. These discharges occurred because the pond had not yet been constructed at the time of the discharges. The ponds has now been constructed and verifica- tion of construction has been accepted by the Div- ision. In addition, total iron ie a major compon- ent of TSS. See information set forth in subpara- graph VII.D, above. XVII2. Precipitation Data and Rain Gauge Location. A. The information regarding the ten-year 24-hour event and location of CYCC's rain gauge provided on Octo- ber 22, 1982 is accepted. XIX. Mitigating Factors A. The net effect on receiving stream quality is negli- gible. in general, water quality downstream from dis- charge points is equal to or better than water quality upstream from the discharge points. Attached are dia- grams prepared by CYCC showing water quality in the receiving streams in its natural, undisturbed state up- stream from certain discharge points, as well as similar data downstream from the discharge points. These streams which receive discharge from active mining areas are Foidel Creek, Middle Creek, and Fish Creek. Speci- fically, discharge points 1-8 and 17 discharge into Foidel Creek (diagram A), discharge points 9-13 dis- charge into Middle Creek, (diagram S), and discharge points 14-16 discharge into Fish Creek (diagram C). The diagrams demonstrate that water quality in the receiving streams was not adversely affected by the suspect dis- charges during the period in question. -8-