My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HYDRO28691
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Hydrology
>
HYDRO28691
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:47:50 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 9:44:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977424
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
8/5/1994
Doc Name
PUBLIC NOTICE
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.
/
17
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
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF I~AL7FI, Water Quality Control Division • <br />Rationale -Page S, Permit No. CO-0029947 <br />B. Compliance R'ith Terms and Conditions of Pnviorts Permit <br />1. EJlluem Limitations -The data shown in the Table V-1 indicates that the facility has maintained compliance with <br />the assotiatrd permit limits. Hox~, the facility has been incorrectly reporting phenol concentrations on their <br />monthly DMRs. A review of laboratory data sheets indicates that phenol concentrations of <0.050 mg/l had been <br />incorrectly transcribed on the monthly DMRs as S0.0 mg/l. This error occurred throughout 1993 and xas brought <br />to the attention of Occidental Oil Shale, Inc. representatives by telephone on June 8, 1994. <br />2. Other Permit Renuirtments <br />a. One time Analysis - In the previous permit the facility was required to conduct aone-time analysis to <br />determine the general quality of the discharges from OutfaUs 001 and 002. To comply with this requirement, <br />the facility reported the results of rite one-time analysts in a December !S, 19861etter to the Division. Only <br />the results for Outfall 002 were submitted as OutfaU 001 apparently had not been discharging for an extended <br />period of time. 7hc results of the analyses are provided below: <br />Parameter Value (m¢/ll <br />Total Recoverable Cadmium <0.005 <br />Chloride 32.0 <br />Total Cyanide G 0.005 <br />Dissolved Manganese <0.005 <br />Total Recoverable Manganese <0.005 <br />Total Mercury <O.000I <br />Total Recoverable Nickel <0.02 <br />Nitrite < 0.05 <br />Dissolved O.rygen 5.45 <br />Total Recoverable Selenium <O.OOS <br />Total Recoverable Silver <0.010 <br />A comparison of the given data with wttttr quality standards from Segment 2 of the Lower Colorado River, <br />as provided in die previous rationale, as well as Federal 'Gold Book" Fresh Water Acute Criteria indicates <br />that the results for all the Usted parameters, except for silver, are below dte estahlished standards. The <br />violation of the silver standard is questionable due to the detection limit being higher than the acute silver <br />standard of 0.006 mg/l. Additionally, the concentration of contaminants are below the established USEPA <br />Masimum Contaminant Levels (lllCLs) in Drinking Water for the applicable parameters. This dttmtinarion <br />is made without using the mass balance equation provided in Section VI.A.2, which accourus for dilution <br />provided by the rcceiving stream Instead, tlu comparisons are made at the 'end of pipe' and are therefore <br />quite conservative. Also, the incorporation of WET testing within the permit should indicate any tonic effects <br />of the discharges. Due ro the ephemeral nature of the receiving stream, compliance with Federal Fresh Water <br />Chronic Criteria were not evaluated. <br />Given the analytical results for the Outfall 002 discharge, the lack of such data for OutfaU 001 is acceptable <br />considering the discharges are assumed to be similar in nature. <br />b. Evaaoration Pond Leak Detection -The previous permit required that the evaporation pond area leak control <br />and detection system vault be visually checked on a weekly basis for the presence of any water (eakage. If <br />any retort water was determined to bt within the mule, Occidental was required to not{fy the Division with <br />an attachment to the discharge monitoring report. Acrnmpanying the notation must be a description of the <br />correction action taken as well as monitoring data for total amrtwnia, COD, fluoride, oil and grease, and <br />phenols. A review of the file indicates that although checks of the system occurred and naturally occurring <br />water from precipitation events and snow rrv!tr were periodically present, na retort water leakage was detected. <br />This requirement will remain in effect in the renewal permit to continue to protect against potential releases. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.