APPCOR10265 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-3- The applicant was requested to carry the analysis downstream to the point where changes in water quality and quantity become insignificant, including an assesssment of effects on Middle Creek and Trout Creek, if appropriate. The applicant's aseesement indicated that in his worst case scenario "the contribution of TDS one mile downstream was computed to be approximately 1,100 mg/1". The assessment was carried no further downstream. The applicant must carry this analysis (and the analysis of other effects) downstream to the point where the effects become insignificant. This may require an assessment of effects upon the stream/alluvial aquifer systems of Middle Creek and Trout Creek. 3)and4j These items concern mining effects upon the ground water system and possible secondary effects upon the surface water system. Roy should perform the primary review on these sections. Unce he is satisfied, we can consider surface water effects. 5) This item requested that the applicant demonstrate that its effluent would meet the Colorado Department of Health's receiving stream standards, or provide a plan for the treatment of the effluent for those standards which are exceeded. The applicant has responded that the Department of Health is requiring CYCC only to meet the normal effluent limitations (TSS, total iron, oil and grease, and pH), and not the receiving stream standards. The Division should consult with the Department of Health to determine which water quality standards apply to the water discharged from the underground workings and the spoils well. Surface and Ground Water Monitorin 1) The applicant was requested to commit to establishing its own upstream monitoring station on Foidel Creek should the USGS discontinue their station. The applicant has identified his own monitoring station on upper Foidel Creek. The applicant's response is satisfactory. 2) The applicant has corrected the inconsistances in the identification of surface water monitoring stations. 3) The applicant was requested to expand his proposed effluent water quality monitoring to include those water quality constituents for which the Colorado Department of Health has established numerical stream standards. The applicant has responded that the Department of Health is requiring CYCC only to meet the effluent limitations of their existing NPDES Permits. The applicant has, however, added all of the water quality parameters included in the Division's September 1982 Baseline Water Quality Guideline. This guideline includes many of the same water quality parameters. The Division should consult with the Department of Health to determine which water quality standards the applicant must meet.