2008-12-04_PERMIT FILE - C1981033

Home Browse Search

COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBL/C HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, Water Quality Control Division Rationale -Page 2, Permit No. CO-0044377 IV. CHANGES RESULTING FROM THE AMENDMENT Response to Option 1: The seep is a discharge of pollutants to state waters and therefore, in accordance with Regulation 61.3(I)(a) i~ required to be covered by a permit. Further, as noted in the table provided by the permit and reproduced above, the concentrations of iron in the seep are often greater than the permit limitation of 3000 ug/l as a thirty day average and 6000 ug/1 as a daily maximum. Therefore, this discharge cannot be released from the permit based on quality. Response to Option 2: The previous permit required Acute WET testing on ceriodaphnia and fathead minnows, and the facility had problems passing the ceriodaphnia tests. The current permit also has Acute WET testing, however, in accordance with the Division's Biomonitoring Guidance, substitutes daphnia magna for the ceriodaphnia species. The facility has been able to pass all WET tests that were conducted using daphnia magna, in 8 WET tests completed since September 2006. On this basis, the Division will reduce the WET testing frequency from quarterly tosemi-annually. Under this second option, the facility has also requested to reduce the monitoring frequency, for other parameters (pH, oil and grease , andJlow) to monthly. The Division policy Baseline Monitoring Frequency. Sample Type and Reduced Monitoring Frequency PolieY,for /ndustrial and Domestic Wastewater Treatment Facilities (May 2007 allows for reduced monitoring consideration with certain caveats. One of these caveats is that the facility must be in compliance with all permit requirements including monitoring requirements and with DMR s:tbmittals. This facility failed to submit DMRs and even take any water quality samples from Apri1200S to August 2006, and was issued a Notice of Violation /Cease and Desist Order from the Division in January 2007. Therefore, the Division will not be reducing the monitoring frequency for these parameters at this time. As this permit expires on May 31, 2009, this may be reconsidered in the renewal permit if all aspects of the NOV/CDO are met. Response to Option 3: The permittee has requested that the seepage water be allowed to bypass the settling ponds and discharge directly to the river. The data provided by the permittee shows that this water does not consistently meet the limitations for total iron without the settling portc~ and therefore the Division does. not approve the direct discharge of this source to the river without treatment. Final Changes to the Permit: The permit has been amended [o reduce the monitoring frequency for WET testing to semi-annually Andrew Neuhart September 9, '1008• V. PUBLIC NOTICE COMMENTS No comments were received during the public notice period Andrew Neuhart October20, '1008 • , last Revised 10/29/2008