Laserfiche WebLink
iiiiuiiiiiiiiuiii <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />pF' COQ <br />Department o(Namral Resources a~> ~ b <br />Nc ~ O <br />1313 Sherman 51., Room 215 ' ~>'j . <br />Denver, CO 80203 •' <br />Phone: 13031 866-3567 • retc <br />FAX: 1303)83?-8106 <br />Roy Rnmer <br />Governor <br />September 28, 1993 Dm'sion Direc or <br />To: Erica Crosby <br />From: Janet Binns <br />Re: Surface Wate Sampling of the Colorado River at the Roadside and Cameo <br />Mines. (C-81-041) <br />I did some follow up on the Colorado River sampling question for the Roadside and Cameo <br />Mines. I spoke with Larry Routten and Randy Price. I believe you conferred with Barbara <br />Pavlik as well. <br />The general consensus seems to be what significance do the Roadside and Cameo discharge <br />inputs have to the Colorado River overall? In other words Powderhorn should be able to <br />provide us with the volume of flow of the river so we know what percentage of flow they <br />are adding to the river. If this information is available from the USGS slightly upstream of <br />the mine (irrigation canal diversion?) this should be applicable to the mine area. Other <br />parameters we feel would be of use to assess the impacts to the river are EC and pH. Once <br />again if the operator can obtain this data from USGS or another reputable source even <br />slightly upstream of the mine we would be able to assess impacts. <br />A consideration in all of this is the accuracy of measurement by the laboratory or <br />instrumentation. If the lab's accuracy is <br />+/- 10% but the additional salt load to the river is <0.1% basically any sampling would <br />insignificant. <br />What I would pass on to the operator is provide the Division with low flow of the Colorado <br />River, EC, and pH, what the source is (USGS, CDOH,...) and location of sampling. <br />If you have further questions, please let me know. <br />m:\jhb\COriver.sam <br /> <br />