My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HYDRO25437
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Hydrology
>
HYDRO25437
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:45:12 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 5:34:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996084
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
9/5/2002
Doc Name
Summary of Rationale CDPS Permit Number CO 0045080
From
Lorencito Coal Company
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
NPDES
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Table VI-1-- E,/J2uent Limitations for All Outfalls <br />Dischargeb~imitations <br />Parameter Maximum Concentrations Rationale <br />30-Day Avg. D'ai[y Max. <br />Flow, MGD Report Report Design Capacity <br />TSS, mg/1* 35 70 Federal Effluent Guidelines <br />Totallron, mg/1* 3.0 6.0 Federal Effluent Guidelines <br />Settleable Solids, ml/l * Report Report Federal Effluent Guidelines <br />Oi[ and Grease, mg/l Report 10 State EJfluent Regulations <br />pH, s. u. (minimum-maximum) N/A 6.5-9.0 Water Quality Standards <br />* Total Suspended Solids and Total Iron limitations are Primary Limitations, and Settleable Sa[ids limitations are Alternate Limitations. Exemption from these <br />limitations due m storm events is subject to burden ofproaf requirements -see section VLA.3.b) ofpreviaus permit rationale. <br />a) Antidegradation: Since the receiving waters are Use Protected, an antidegradation review is not required for these <br />dischargespursuanttosection31.8(2)(b)ofTheBasicStandardsandMethodologies or Su ace Water. Further, the Division <br />has determined that the antidegradation presumption was overcome because discharge does not occur during low flow <br />periods. <br />b) Whole Effluent Toxicity 1WET1 Testing: Acute WET testing is not required for a[I the outfalls. Since the mine drainagesource <br />was eliminated from this permit, and that the new and existing discharges from these outfalls contain surface runoflsolely and <br />do not contain toxicpollutants in toxic amounts. On this basis, WET testing is not a requirementfar these autfalls. However, <br />the Division reserves the right to reopen the permit to include WET testing, should facility conditions change ar if new <br />information becomes available. <br />B. Monitoring <br />_~ I. .Effluent Monitoring: Effluent monitoring wi116e required as shown in Tables YI-2. Refer to the permit for locations of monitoring <br />points. <br /> Table VI-2 -Monitoring Requirements for All Outfalls <br />Parameter i11easurementFrequenep Sample Type <br />Flow, MGD Weekly Instantaneous or Continuous <br />TSS, mg/1 Monthly Grab <br />Total iron, mg/1 Monthly Grab <br />Settleable Solids, ml/1 Monthly Grab <br />Oil and Grease, mg/l Weekly Visual a/ <br />pH, s.u. Weekly In-situ <br />VII PERMIT CHANGES AS A RESULT OF THIS PERMIT AMENDMENT <br />As a result of this amendment, pages 1 through 5, and Figure 1, were amended to include the outfalls listed in table 7I-1 as well as those <br />eliminated from this permit. <br />Christopher L. Gates <br />September 14, 2001 <br />VIII. PUBLIC NOTICE COMMENTS <br />No comments were received during the public notice period. <br />Christopher L. Gates <br />October 22, 2001 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.