REP07597 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

text discussion of the AHR which references mine inflow field parameter monitoring will need to be eliminated. Please advise. Surface Water Monitorino Although I have a few questions, it appears that in general the operator complied with the monitoring plan, and analyzed all specified parameters. Numerous parameters were denoted as "analyzed but not detected". Should some explanation regarding detection limits for those parameters be provided? 1) Surface water monitoring at 7 ephemeral drainage crest stage gages and stock pond grab sample sites is described on p. 2 and 3 of the AHR, and the data is reported in Appendix B. The sites were apparently monitored quarterly. Monitoring at three of the sites (6-1, 31-1, and 33-1 had been previously suspended, with monitoring to be resumed "one year before surface related disturbance in Lease C-8424". Monitoring was resumed at these sites in April, 1996. At four of the sites, SW23-1 (Red Wash Tributary below Pond RP-1), SW31-1 (Scullion Gulch above Lincoln Reservoir), SW33-1 (Raven Park Dam), and SW6-1 (Fossil Reservoir), the sites were dry when monitored, and so no water quality data was obtained. At the other three sites, SW1-1 (Lower Red Wash), SW11-1 (Lower Scullion Gulch), and SW24-1 (Upper Red Wash), flow was present and data collected only during the April, 1996 monitoring. Problems with monitoring of these sites are described in the AHR. The text states that the crest stage gages/samplers are monitored quarterly, but, for several of the sites "runoff events contain such high quantities of suspended solids that sampler tubes are plugged and the gaging device silted in. Constant servicing of these stations is necessary with no guarantee that the next runoff event will be measured and a sample collected." There appear to be several discrepancies. a) The Division findings document on page 14 and the application text on p. II.C-50, indicate that "crest gage and sample collection samples will be monitored quarterly", which is apparently what has occurred. However, Appendix A, page A-2 of the AHR, indicates that the sites would be monitored monthly, as soon as possible following significant rainfall events, for crest stage and field parameters. This discrepancy needs to be resolved. b) The application text indicates on page II.C-50, that "water quality data collected from surface water monitoring stations will be submitted quarterly to the regulatory authority." This has not been done, but I assume that submittal of the monitoring data in the annual report is sufficient, and that this commitment is a relict from pre-AHR times. If you agree, I will advise the operator to amend the text accordingly. The same commitment is made for ground water data submittal on page II.C-77.