Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Richard A. Mills - 3 - March 21, 1986 <br />procedures for monitoring these metals to ensure that their equipment, or <br />instrumentation available in the marketplace, is capable of discriminating <br />concentrations of the magnitudes. If resolution of the standards is not <br />possible, the operator should submit documentation to this effect to the <br />Colorado Department of Health and apply fora waiver from the standards. The <br />Division can not stress enough the importance of evaluating this quickly, as <br />the water, as reported, currently is exceeding receiving stream standards. <br />Table 2: Comparison of Water Quality Standards <br />and CYCC Detechan Limits <br />Element Standard Detection Limit <br />Cd 1 ppb 5 ppb <br />Hg ,05 pp .5 ppb <br />Mo .Ol ppm .2 ppm <br />Cu .O1 ppm ,2 ppm <br />The Division requests that CYCC submit a compilation of the procedures used in <br />sampling and in the laboratory analyses to the Division by June 30, 1986, to. <br />accommodate our concerns about the quality of the hydrologic data. Laboratory <br />analyses may be documented by referencing standard procedures, as long as <br />these procedures are followed exactly. Information on holding times and <br />conditions, frequency of recalibration of the instrumentation, and model <br />numbers and manufacturers of equipment is requested. <br />Data Formatting <br />The Division has specific comments on the format of the data, which we would <br />like to see included in future AHRs. <br />1) A small scale map showing the location of all sampling sites is <br />requested. The large scale maps accompanying the report are often too <br />vague for us to identify whether a site is upstream or downstream of a <br />man-made structure, or on what side of the stream an alluvial ~+ell is <br />p1 aced. <br />2) We would like to see the table entitled 1985 CYCC Surface Water <br />Monitoring updated. Sites which are no longer being monitored should <br />be omitted, and it would be helpful if you correlated SDP numbers <br />(outfall 00X) with site numbers. <br />3) A table compiling specific information or monitoring sites (site <br />location description, monitoring objectives, completion data or permit <br />references to completion data on wells) would facilitate <br />interpretation of the data. <br />4) A tabulation of all monitoring data collected. We are interested in <br />observing trends over time and in comparing current data with <br />baseline. It would be helpful if the specific water quality data <br />could be compiled with previous data as the field parameters were <br />presented in the 1985 AHR, Additionally we would be interested in <br />