My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP20483
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP20483
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:49:03 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 2:54:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1984062
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
12/23/1997
Doc Name
1996 AHR REVIEW RESPONSE
From
COLO YAMPA COAL CO
To
DMG
Annual Report Year
1996
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
iii iuiiiiiiiiu iii <br />Colorado YamE _._ _ 999,,,..,E <br />COLORADO PAMPA 29515 Routt County Road #27 <br />~ COAL COMPANY Oak Creek, Colorado 80467 <br />A Cyprus Amax Company (970) 879-3800 <br />December 19, 1997 <br />Kent Gorham <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />RE: Response to Division's Comments on 1996 AHR <br />Permit No. C-84-062 <br />Dear Mr. Gorham: <br />RECEI\/ED <br />DEC 2 3 1997 <br />DIVISICn of iNineidi5 a Ueologg <br />The following respond [o the comments presented in your letter of September 12, 1997 on the above <br />referenced AHR. The responses follow the same numbering sequence presented in yoar letter. <br />Response No. 1 -Colorado Yampa Coal Company will follow the prescribed frequency designated in its <br />permit. <br />Response No. 2 - I discussed this issue with Karl Koehler, former CYCC employee responsible for this <br />monitoring program, and was advised that the reason for the perfect match is that during [he high flow <br />period (i.e. March Uvough July) [he data for site 29 was the result of summing [he flow data for sites 700 <br />and 900. This is due to the fact that during this period of the year the gauge at site 29 is not as accurate <br />for measuring high flows, therefore the use of the method of summing the hvo upstream sites. During the <br />low flow period the gauge measurement is used as CYCC is confident in the gauge and rating curve <br />established for this site. This explains why there is discrepancy of the data during these [vvo periods. <br />Also, given the fact that the monitoring program is focused on the low season it is CYCC's opinion that <br />use of the site 29 data during low flow periods is appropriate and accurately reflects the Flow at that time. <br />Response No. 3 - No response necessary. <br />If there are further questions, please contact me a[ your convenience. <br />Sin-c~erely, <br />Richard Mills <br />Environmental Manager <br />fi Ie:I: document\cycc\m3\97ahrres <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.