Laserfiche WebLink
involved a quantified prediction of the effect of mine water quantity and quality on <br />the Yampa River. <br />Trapper supplied revised pages 4-237 and 4-237a in their February I I, 1998 <br />submittal, which provided the requested data, showing that there would be an <br />exceedingly small effect on the Yampa River. The Division believes that Trapper <br />has resolved this issue. <br />3, Trapper had been requested to expand upon its discussion of springs, both natural <br />and spoil. The Division believes this concern has been resolved, as explained in <br />the December 9, 1997 letter. <br />4. Trapper had been requested to revise its water monitoring program for springs to <br />include natural as well as spoil springs, and to test for the full suite of parameters. <br />These issues were resolved, as detailed in the December 9, 1997 letter. <br />5. Trapper had been requested to add a discussion to the permit application that <br />detailed the procedures that Trapper uses to obtain water monitoring samples. The <br />Division believes this issue has been resolved, as stated in the December 9, 1997 <br />letter. <br />6. Trapper had been requested to include data from baseline up to the present in the <br />charts and graphs for future annual hydrology reports. <br />In its February 11, 1998 submittal, Trapper discussed their plans for including all <br />of the data on the charts and in the graphs. In some cases, these data were already <br />being presented in this way. In other cases, the data from a site might have to be <br />presented on two separate graphs, due to the quantity of data involved. In other <br />cases, the complete data for a site can be presented on one graph. The Division <br />considers this issue to have been resolved. <br />Trapper had been requested to include graphs of flow versus time for all of the <br />discharging NPDES sites in future annual hydrology reports. <br />Trapper, in its February 1 I, 1998 submittal, stated that such graphs will be <br />generated in the next annual report. The Division believes that this issue has been <br />resolved. <br />8. Trapper had been requested to use the term "no flow" for data entry, when <br />