Laserfiche WebLink
Annette (~uil; <br />l7avc i\'.:crs <br />Past 7 <br />scttlcmcnt) .topcarcd to Uc discharged iron::he ••vcst pit to tit;. , aundwater bee~nning in <br />1991: <br />04/23/') l ~l l I sul fart 120 mg/l ^' (~ ~ <br />10/11/91 h41 I sulfate l40 mg/1 <br />01/29/92 Ali 1 sulF.uc 1 GO mg/l <br />04/22/92 ~tl l sulfate 130 mg/l <br />9/3/92 (dcwtucring well) sulfate l58 mg!I <br />7/20/94 ~111R sulfate l03 mg/1 <br />G/ l U/96 Vl l 1 R sul fart l93 mg/1 <br />7/9/9G (dcwatcring well) 31 l mg/1 <br />S/13/9G SFI sulfate 31G mg/l <br />] 0/2/9G (dcwatcring well) 330 mg/I . <br />(c) Cl)PFfL•. Ieoks only :tt "clevaled levels'' of sulfates at RS-~. Because the statutory <br />standard is the rlischnrge ojuny~olhrta~us, CDPlIC should have looked to the :first <br />appearance of clcvated levels of any pollutant at RS-5. The BV] monitoring data show <br />that such clcvated levels appeared at RS-) as• early as 1992: <br />4/3Ul92 RSS 0.12 tnangaacsc <br />8!G/92 RSS .07 manganese <br />8/19/92 RSS 4.G manganese <br />9/4/92 RS5 .11 manganese <br />] L/23/92 RSS -dissolved alutntnum .21 ~,~ <br />5/27/941tS~ .09 mall cyanide c-~-9~-~G'°1`' ~~°"'~ <br />02/25/97 RSS .017 tng/1 total cyanidc~ ~~^~'¢`~ <br />pot' the foregoing reasons, CDPHE has not properly calculated days of violation. <br />9. 1)ischat•ge Points <br />The scttlcmcnt fails to account for the significance of ground water discharges and their <br />effect on the Rito Seco. The settlement fails to identify the volume of seepage which (i} <br />has occurred or (ii) is still occuaing. 1Ja Swtat=r~c,e S~ P5 5 ~~Jc.Q Mrs a0aa~ <br />r vn~ ~Y iYmmM alNr n CMaY.,naTl <br />