Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Christine Johnston <br />Mountain Coal Company <br />Page 2 <br />September 6, 1996 <br />analysis can be utilized for comparison with stream standards. The dissolved analyses (Fe <br />and Mn) were not presented in the report as required by the approved monitoring program. <br />Please provide and explanation for the omission of these data. For future sampling efforts, <br />please ensure that the required analyses per the approved monitoring program are collected <br />and presented in the AHR. <br />Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) limitations were exceeded for TSS at two <br />discharge points (MB-1 and MB-2R). All other CDPS discharge effluent limitations were <br />met. <br />Water quantity and quality data presented in the 1995 AHR will require some clarification <br />as described below. The Division has the following specific comments regarding the 1995 <br />AHR. <br />1. Please clarify the third sentence of the last paragraph on page 1 and provide <br />a revised report page. It is not clear to the Division what is meant by "this <br />site is approximately .25 miles south of the B-Seam East Mains, and is not <br />projected to be impacted:' <br />2. The second sentence of the first paragraph on page 2 needs clarification. The <br />first sentence of the third paragraph on page 2 directly conflicts with the first <br />sentence of the fourth paragraph on page 2. Please provide clarification to <br />the above comments and provide a revised report page. <br />3. On page 3, the second to last sentence in the second paragraph states 'TR 71 <br />was initiated and approved in 1994:' TR 71 was not approved until April <br />1995. Please rephrase this sentence and provide a revised report page. <br />4. Please provide the baseline minimum and maximum flow data for the North <br />Fork Upper and the North Fork Lower surface water monitoring stations. <br />Please provide revised report pages for Tables D-8 and D-9. If these data are <br />available, provide them in all future AHRs along with the other baseline data <br />presented. <br />5. The Division recommends that flow data for the North Fork Lower station be <br />collected and presented in the AHR. It appears that these data have not <br />been collected in the past. Footnote 6 of Table 1.2-1 shows the North Fork <br />Lower station as "No flow measurement". However, Table D-9 in Appendix <br />D shows flow measurements for three sample periods, which are the same <br />values shown for the North Fork Upper station (Table D-8). Table D-9 <br />