My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL54973
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL54973
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:40:05 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 9:58:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
8/20/1996
Doc Name
CDPS General Permit
From
Stormwater Permit Folder
Permit Index Doc Type
Reclamation Project
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT -Water Quality Control Division <br />Rationale -Page 13 Permit No. COR-040000 <br />VII. CHANGES AFTER PUBLIC NOTICE (cont.) <br />modified to specify that waste products include any acid generating material exposed by the mining activity, <br />and the vegetative cover criteria addresses sediment production. The Division believes that this will address <br />the concerns of both the Division and the permittees. <br />Reeardine isolation or removal of mine waste.• The regulations clearly require that stormwater discharges <br />from mine and mill sites that are contaminated by the contact list of materials, must be authorized by a <br />permit. Permittees must decide whether isolation or removal of the material is practical, feasible or <br />economically possible. Continued permit coverage is available if permittees decide not to attempt to isolate or <br />remove the material. <br />5. The Division's burden of proof regardine water auality impacts. <br />Many commenters objected to the latitude that is reserved to the Division regarding such things as requiring <br />subsequent monitoring, requiring an individual permit, and deciding whether or not to terminate a <br />certification. In general, commentary expressed the feeling that the Division should have a greater burden of <br />proof than "has reason to believe" that there is a water quality problem. Commenters assert that several of <br />the Division's decisions are too subjective and the vague language does not provide permittees with the kind of <br />certainty that they need for decision making. <br />Response The Division is aware that several of the decisions can be subjective. Once greater experience is <br />gained by the Division and permittees, the subjectivity can probably be reduced. At this time, however, the <br />Division believes the permittees will benefit since we have the latitude to consider site-specific factors. Had <br />the Division elected to eliminate the subjectivity to a greater extern, the necessarily conservative nature of the <br />criteria would have greatly reduced the flexibility for the permitree and the Division, and imposed <br />requirements on all perneittees that may not be appropriate in all cases. <br />6. Disposal of water stored within mine waste <br />A few commenters had questions or comments regarding the restrictions on discharge of wafer stored within <br />the mine waste. "Disposal of water stared within the mine waste" is a phrase that is used in Part I. C. S. e. _ <br />This is a section that described the additional SWMP items for sires seeking permit termination. General <br />clarification is necessary. <br />Response: This general permit only authorizes stormwater discharges; stormwater is precipitation-induced <br />runoff. Water stored in railings impoundments or other areas of mine waste is not runoff: The characteristics <br />of these stored waters can vary dramatically on a, site-by-site basis and can have deleterious impacts if <br />discharged into receiving waters. Because of the nature of these waters (not runoff) and the potemial water <br />quality impacts, discharge is not authorized under this permit. An individual permit is required which allows <br />for site-specific assessment of the quality, quantity and impacts of the stored water. <br />7. Veeetarive termination criteria <br />Several commenters questioned the vegetative cover criteria in Part I.F.l.b. Some commemors thought that, <br />as written, the criteria are too onerous, may take too long, and require importing a soil matrix suitable for <br />plant growth. One commenter suggested that it be changed from a numeric criteria to a nanative criteria and <br />require "adequate" cover. One commemor suggested that the term "vegetative cover" be defined. <br />Response: The vegetative criteria states that "a minimum of 40 percent vegetative cover, or 70 percent of the <br />vegetative cover of a similar undisturbed site, whichever is higher" is required. That means that 40 percent <br />cover is the lowest level. This number was determined through assessmeht of the relationship between cover <br />and soil erosiors for a variety of conditions using the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Below 40 percent, a small <br />increase in vegetative cover makes a dramatic decrease in soil erosion; above 40 perceru, a small increase <br />does not have so large an impact. Long-term stabilization is the goal and self-sustaining vegetative cover is <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.