My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP23878
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP23878
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:56:05 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 3:50:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981071
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
7/8/1988
Doc Name
1ST AND 2ND QUARTER 1987-1988 WATER YEAR HYDROLOGY REPORTS MINE NO 1 & 2 ECKMAN PARK 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.
/
4
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 /> <br />Mr. Richard Hughes - 3 - July 8, 1988 <br />4. Springs B-1, B-2 and C-2 also appear in the printout without any <br />data entry. Please explain this situation. <br />5. Spring E should be sampled according to Table 101 of the Permit <br />C-81-071. Why is the data missing for the first and second quarter? <br />Surface Water - <br />1: The data indicate that although several of the sites were frozen, <br />precluding a valid discharge measurement, field parameters were <br />measured. We assume that the surface ice can be penetrated to <br />obtain a sample. Is this correct or have we misinterpreted the <br />printout? Please explain. <br />2: Please explain the difference between surface sites 8 and 2005. <br />All discharge measurements and water quality samples for a <br />particular monitoring occurrence must be collected at the same time <br />and location: <br />3. Site 8/2005 (Foidel Creek) was apparently frozen during March 1988 <br />and a full suite water quality sample was not obtained; however, <br />field parameters were measured: The approved monitoring plan is <br />flexible for this site and it allows sample collection in April <br />instead of March: We assume that the April sampling occurred. If <br />not; please notify us to discuss a remedial plan to avoid a <br />sampling shortage at the end of the year. This recommendation also <br />applies to Sites 16 and 1002 (Fish Creek): <br />4. The USGS/CYCC sites 800 and 900 were apparently not sampled during <br />the first and second quarters of the 1987 to 1988 water year. We <br />understand that the approved plan allows a variable schedule as <br />long as the total number of samples and analyses are achieved: We <br />note that USGS/CYCC site 700 was sampled for field parameters <br />(except February 1988): A large number of samples and analyses <br />were missed for these sites during the 1986-1987 winter year, and <br />depending upon the operator's pending response to our review of the <br />Annual Hydrology Report of last water year, enforcement action may <br />result: <br />Please develop a p'(an to ensure that all required monitoring is <br />achieved at the USGS/CYCC sites: The operator should contact the <br />USGS each month to determine the USGS schedule, and if it appears <br />that their schedule does not allow complete monitoring, CYCC must <br />collect the samples and measurements. Notify us of your plan to <br />correct this situation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.