Laserfiche WebLink
<br />•e <br />total dissolved solids to Dry Creek than is found naturally in <br />the creek water at both high and low water levels. <br />2. Background water quality is poor to begin with. <br />3. It will be very hard to locate water monitoring sites so as to <br />correctly delineate upstream from downstream water quality. <br />3. Dennis believes that we can assume that TDS increases upstream <br />to downstream regardless of contributions from the loadout and <br />that therefore natural background levels will mask any <br />influences from the loadout. <br />4. Change in monitoring locations will result in a loss of <br />continuity between pre and post utilization of the loadout to <br />load coal. <br />The following options can be considered: <br />1. No monitoring of surface and ground water other than required <br />NPDES monitoring. <br />2. Continued monitoring using the current monitoring regime. <br />3. Periodic sampling of the coal in the stockpile and/or full <br />suite sampling of any discharge from the two sediment ponds. <br />4. Some different sampling regime. <br />The following things need to be kept in mind: <br />Dry Creek is currently considered an AVF by the Division and <br />water is being withdrawn from Dry Creek below the loadout for <br />use in irrigating crops. <br />The Rail Loop Pond has relatively high TDS values which may be <br />a result of evaporation or contact with its salty environment. <br />This pond seldom discharges. Discharge usually corresponds <br />with high water levels in the creek (ie lower TDS values and <br />higher volumes for dilution). <br />