ENFORCE33959

• Permit No: C1980001
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 8/15/1994
• Doc Name: Memo on NOV
• From: DMG
• To: DAVID A BERRY
• Violation No.: CV1994016
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

1111111111111111111
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Depanmenl of Natural Resources
1311 Sherman 51 ,Room 215
Denver, Colorado 8W03
Phone: [phone]
FA%: U03) A32-P106
DATE: August I5, 1994
STATE OF COLORADO
~~~~~~
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES

TO: David A. Berry Roy Romer
cuvrrnor
Ken Salazar
FROM: Susan Burgmaier E.ermive DurUw
rnd+ael P long
RE: Edna Mine (C-80-001) Division Diieclu~
Notice of Violation No. C-94-016
Following is a brief summary of the circumstances surrounding issuance of the above mentioned
notice of violation.
P&M is required to measure the flow of Trout Creek at site TR-b on a monthly basis from April
to October. Over the last five years, P&M has either taken inaccurate measurements, or in
some instances, has failed to measure flow at TR-b entirely. The Division identified this
problem in July 1992, requiring that P&M commit to consistently accurate flow measurements
at TR-b. In December of 1992, P&M submitted a technical revision to the Edna Mine permit
which revised the hydrologic monitoring program, and relocated TR-b. The revision was m the
review process for 1'/z years, finally being approved July 8, 1994. During that time, flow
measurements were taken as required and data were reported, but the accuracy problems were
not addressed. We repeatedly stressed the importance of obtaining accurate flow measurements
at TR-b, stating that water quality information was of little value without them.
During my July 28 - 29 inspection of the site, the records check revealed that no flow
measurement was collected at TR-b in June of this year. I was informed that a stilling well and
continuous recorder were being installed at the new location for TR-b. The operator indicated
that since they were installing the well, the monitoring site was "in transition", and so no flow
measurements would be necessary. The operator also indicated that there were no plans to
collect a July measurement at the site. I infdnned the operator that I did not believe that
relocating TR-b would relieve them from their required monitoring at the old location, and that
I would be taking enforcement action for the missing June measurement, and would also take
action if no July measurement was taken. The operator measured flow at the new location of
TR-b that day.
I believe the operator was responsible for measuring the flow of Trout Creek in June, at the
then approved location of TR-b. Since there is a commitment to monthly flow monitoring in
the approved permit application, and no relief (during the transition of monitoring sites) had
been rec)uested or granted, P&M was not conducting the monitoring required by their approved
momtonng plan.
SLB\OBI599.WP