My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP02978
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP02978
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:33:51 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 10:23:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981071
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
7/7/1988
Doc Name
REVIEW ANNUAL HYDROLOGIC REPORT WATER 1986-1987 C-81-071
From
MLRD
To
COLO YAMPA COAL CO
Permit Index Doc Type
HYDROLOGY REPORT
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.
/
10
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
<br />Mr. Rick Mills - 6 - July 7, 1988 <br />Data Presentation and Analysis <br />This section discusses the results of the 1986 to 1987 sampling program. Some <br />general questions are presented, followed by a more specific discussion <br />categorized by sample site type and location. <br />General Questions <br />1) Our review of the various data indicates that water quality samples and <br />discharge measurements are not always taken concurrently. It is <br />imperative that quality and discharge are collected at the same time and <br />at the same location to allow proper analysis of trends in the data. For <br />example, increased total dissolved solids may occur solely as a result <br />of decreased discharge;however, the possible relationship cannot be <br />analyzed correctly if water quality and discharge data collected at <br />different times. Please verify that all discharge and water quality data <br />fora specific time and site will be collected concurrently. <br />2) The detection limit used for mercury is consistently above the material <br />damage standard. The detection limit should be lowered to allow <br />comparison with the .00005 mg./1. (total recoverable) standard. Please <br />discuss this problem, and if a lower detection limit is not possible due <br />to some laboratory analysis constraint, an explanation must be provided. <br />3) We note that the total values for calcium and sodium (Site R); and, <br />calcium, magnesium and sodium (Site D), are less than the dissolved <br />values for these constituents. Please review this problem and adjust <br />analytical procedures as needed. <br />4) The TR 86-8-1 (Map 14A) indicates a possible bedrock well (solid blue <br />dot) located in Section 31, northeast of Pinnacle Peak. The dot is not <br />labeled, it also appears on Figure 3. Is this indeed a well location? <br />Please explain and revise the maps if necessary. <br />5) Alluvial wells 009-5-10 and 001-5-5 are depicted on Map l4A by the solid <br />dot (bedrock well) symbol. Please revise the map to indicate the correct <br />(hollow dot) symbols for these wells. <br />6) Please plot the locations of springs EP-87-1, EP-87-2, and M-2-87 on the <br />spring location map. <br />Bedrock Wells <br />Four wells are monitored at the Eckman Park and Mine 1 area. Well OD9-79-4 <br />indicates the greatest impact from mining as represented by elevated total <br />dissolved solids and electrical conductivity values. The other three wells do <br />not indicate such pronounced impacts; however, values above receiving stream <br />standards for EC and/or TDS have been reported for water samples from each of <br />the wells during the past few years. <br />Well 006-82-74C - <br />Are there any water quality data available for this well prior to <br />Iday 1987? If so, please incorporate the data into the data base. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.