REP23798

• Permit No: C1981013
• IBM Index Class Name: Report
• Doc Name: AHR REVIEW FOR 1988, 1990, 1991
• Permit Index Doc Type: HYDROLOGY REPORT
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

.,

AHR. TSS is down from 1991, 45.6 compared to 79. Important
trends showing an steady increase in sodium, TDS, hydroxide
and bicarbonate are impossible to determine if they are
continuing due to the lack of 1992 completed data. Please
provide an explanation why the data is absent from the report,
or provide the data required.
5. Likewise, CCS-1 data insufficiency makes it difficult to
determine trends occurring over time since 1988. CCS-2's data
insufficiency eliminates any knowledge of chemical parameters
being exceeded or steadily increasing for the water year 1992.
Potential impact to vegetation is between SAR 5 to 25 mhos,
and has been increasing over time. No SAR data is included in
this year's report. Please provide an explanation for the
insufficient data collection at these two sites.
6. Flow data utilize the unit of cfa while graph and tables use
gal/day to indicate discharge flow from the mine. This poses
a problem since the flow is the direct result of discharge in
an otherwise dry creek bed. Please attempt to make the units
consistent for ease of transfer of knowledge, or provide an
explanation for this method to continue.
7. In addition, use of one sample to obtain a mean average for
all the parameters is invalid statistically for this report.
Please discontinue calculating mean averages using one
sample's results.
8. There ie ~ mention of pond 005 discharge point as in previous
(1990-1991) reports. Ia monitoring of this point still
required? Please inform the Division ae to the current status
of this discharge point.
9. No data exists for surface water monitoring station PRS-4
downstream of New Elk before the confluence with the North
Fork. Has this station been dropped from monitoring?
10. According to Attachment 1 of NOV C-93-042 there exists several -
weekly NPDES monitoring deficiencies. More diligence by the
operator is advised on sites NE-033, NE-007, NE-004, NE-008,
NE-005, GE-045, GE-002, GE-003, and GE-004.
11. NOV C-93-042, attachment 2, also outlines deficiencies in
surface monitoring sites, PRS-1, PRS-2, and WCS-1.
12. Staff and treat gauge stations CHC-1 in Cherry Canyon and
WCS-1 located in wet Canyon are missing third quarter reports
for the following chemical parameters: selenium, hydroxide and
fluoride.
Ground Water Monitoring
A summary of groundwater monitoring deficiencies is found in
Attachment 5, NOV C-93-042 file. Below are highlighted
issues.
3