REP32267 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Rule 4.05.13(4)(c)(ii) Water quality data obtained from each monitoring site during the water year,' and The report is in compliance with this rule. Rule 4.05.13(4)(c)(iii) If required by the Division, a written interpretation of the data and identification of mining related impacts to the hydrologic balance. The Division has made no such requirement, but interpretations are presented. A summa of monitorin and re ortin is as follows: Description of site and monitoring PAP, page number AHR, page numbers streams HGSD1 (upstream Dry Creek) Page 1, Tab 13 Page 3, pazagraph 3.2.2 and A endix C HGSD3 (downstream Dry Creek Page 1, Tab 13 Page 3, paragraph 3.2.2 and A endix C round water HGDAL3 (downstream alluvial) Page 2, Tab 13 Page 5, paragraph 3.3 and A endix D HGDAL4 (upstream alluvial) Pages 5 and 7, Tab 13 future, starts in 2005 CDPHE and dischar es ,CDPHE Permit COG-850000, Facili COG-850008 Outfall OOIA (Truck Loop Pond) Page 10, Tab 13 and Appendix 13- 1 Page 3, paragraph 3.2.1, and Appendices A and B Outfall 002A (Rail Loop Pond) Page 10, Tab 13 and Appendix 13- 1 Page 3, paragraph 3.2.1, and Appendices A and B Review of Predicted Probable Hydrologic Consequences Surface Water Impacts to surface waters are predicted to be unmeasurable and insignificant (Page 1, Tab 15). There was no discharge from the sedimentation ponds. These two ponds collect all surface runoff from disturbed areas except those for which small azea exemptions have been granted. Thus there was no impact to surface waters quality from surface runoff. Pond 2 was dry during most of the year (Division inspections). Pond 1 was frequently nearly full, but only has the capacity to retain up to 1.7 acre feet (Exhibit 12-4, PAP). The watershed of both ponds is approximately 0.0006% of the Dry Creek watershed (PAP, page 1, Tab 15). Page 4 of 5 pages, 2004 AHR Review, November 9, 2005