ENFORCE36250 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Extension Request Byron I received the final copy of the above-referenced NOV today, and was disappointed that several of the abatement provisions had been substantively changed subsequent to our on-site discussions. The changes result in conditions for two o£ the abatement provisions that we cannot realistically meet within the identified abatement timeframes. The following summarize our status and concerns re: the identified abatement provisions: Step 1: Cease discharge of Thickener underflow to Pond E - Discharge was cut-off at the time the coal fines discharge was discovered (prior to 10:00 AM on 09/11/06, as documented by your field observations. Step 2: Repair the Thickener Pipe - The thickener pipe was repaired later in the same day (09/11/06), as documented by your field observations. Step 3: Perform immediate damage control activities on Eoidel Creek - These activities were performed immediately after notification of the coal fines discharge on 09/11/06, as documented in my e-mail o£ 09/12/06 and confirmed by your field observations. Step 4: Notify the CDPHE-WQCD, CDOW, and USACE - These agencies were notified by phone on 09/12/06, with copies of follow-up communications provided to the CDRMS. A representative o£ CDOW visit the site on 09/14/06 Step 5: Notify downstream users from the Pond E discharge to the confluence of Trout Creek with the Yampa River - Based on a list from the CDWR provided on 09/19/06, attempts were made to contact the identified water users by phone, followed by mailing of a registered mail notification on the same date (copies of registered mail receipts attached). Step 6: Assess discharge and receiving water quality, contain the coal fines discharge, and assess potential toxicity. Provide an estimate of the slurry volume discharged. Submit a writted report of such assessments - Immediately on notification of the discharge, a sample of the coal fines discharge was obtained at the Pond E outlet prior to sealing the discharge structure. A sample was also obtained just beyond the identified downstream limit of coal fines migration (both of these samples were obtained on 09/11/06). We initiated a daily sampling program for several downstream points the next day (09/12/06), continuing through present. The coal fines discharge was contained through sealing of the Pond E discharge structure and the emerfgency containment activities identified under Step 3, on 09/11/06. Potential toxicity was assessed on 09/11/06 and 09/12/06 through review of the MSDS sheet for the flocculant used and through contacts with the flocculant manu£acturor re: any potential aquatic toxicity (copies of documentation provided to CDRMS). It is difficult to assess the volume of slurry discharged with any accuracy, after the fact. We can, however, work with our Wash-Plant statistics and Pond E capacity to come-up with an estimate. It is however, not practically feasible to complete a report by the.identi£ied abatement date since we need to complete the discharge calculations, and are waiting for water quality analysis results. Step 7: Submit plans for abatement, including the planned completion date. Include directions, concurrence, or approval from CDPHE, CDOW, and USACE - Clean-up plans were submitted to the CDRMS on 09/14/06 as MR06-211. The CDRMS subsequently notified TCC that concurrence from CDPHE and CDOW would be required. To meet this requirement, a copy of the clean-up plans was submitted to these agencies by e-mail on 09/19/06, with a request for their comments and/or concurrence. Effective clean-up is going to be weather- dependent, given practical access constraints to the stream area and the desire to avoid additional disturbance, so prediction of a firm clean-up completion date is difficult. We are targeting clean-up ASAP and currently 3