My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-10-08_REVISION - C1982056
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1982056
>
2008-10-08_REVISION - C1982056
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:36:59 PM
Creation date
10/8/2008 12:00:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
10/8/2008
Doc Name
Adequacy Concerns
From
DRMS
To
Twentymile Coal Company
Type & Sequence
MR230
Email Name
JHB
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.
/
2
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
3. Permit text discussion of flow directions on some of the sections of pipeline, both existing and <br />proposed are somewhat confusing. Some sections seem to have the ability to carry flow in both <br />directions. Please provide a map, as requested in #2 above and provide minor text edits to resolve <br />questions on flow direction through the waterline system. <br />4. The applicable standards for Region 12, Yampa River are shown on current tables provided through <br />the Water Quality Control Division web site. The two segments of interest are Of on Trout Creek <br />from the confluence with Fish Creek to the Yampa River, and segment 13c, from the confluence with <br />Fish Creek upstream to a point closer to the Edna Mine. Both of these segments have a "WS" <br />designation for sulfate, meaning "water supply". The "WS" abbreviation means that the less <br />restrictive of ambient quality on January 1, 2000 or sulfate of 250 mg1l shall be the applicable in- <br />stream standard. However, for all surface waters with a "water supply" classification that are not in <br />actual use as a water supply, no water supply standards are applied for iron, manganese, and sulfate, <br />unless the Commission determines as a result of a site-specific rulemaking hearing that such <br />standards are appropriate. TC has provided documentation in the form of agreements with the one <br />and only domestic water user downstream on Trout Creek. Based on this agreement, TCC reports that <br />there are no domestic water users on either of these segments downstream of TCC's mine water <br />discharge. Therefore, the Division believes that a sulfate standard does not limit TCC's volume or <br />quality of mine discharge. However, other stream standards do apply as shown in the tables for other <br />constituents. Permitting changes may be appropriate for that section of the permit that deals with <br />discharge limits imposed on TCC based on conductivity and sulfate ratios. The Division is currently <br />reviewing the permit for permit renewal (RN5). These changes may be appropriate to handle in the <br />permit renewal. <br />5. Page 2.05-87 was submitted with no changes, but it should be renumbered 2.05-88 to insert correctly. <br />Please provide the requested information to the Division for our review. If you have any questions, please <br />contact me. <br />Sincerely, <br />J et H. nns <br />E vironme tal Protection Specialist II <br />(30 944 <br />(303) 866-3567 ext. 8107 <br />Cc: Dan Hernandez <br />Kent Gorham
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.