Laserfiche WebLink
J.E. Stayer <br />August 14, Z0?9 <br />Page 3 <br />Discharge and shows a TDS value of 1,9a1 rrigll, but this appears to be ? one-time grab <br />sample franc u?.derground during the ? ?t quarter 2o?S. The quantity and quality of the <br />mine inflow is required by the approved monitoring program and needs to be reported and <br />discussed, but this is probably not the best data for determining the TDS in the actual <br />n?i.e water discharge. Further, it does not appear to bean average value as indicated in <br />test on page 4. The mine discharge to East Salt Creek is repar?ed on Colorado <br />Department of Health discharge monitoring reports ?DMRs}. From the DRS the mine <br />discharged four times during the water yeas and TDS was reported twice March ?aaS <br />with a value of 2,4?? rngll and June ?aaS with a value of Z,45? mgll}. Since the actual <br />discharge is sampled and reported, wouldn't it be mare appropriate when evaluating <br />impacts to East Salt Creek to use an average of the DMR reported values for TDS as <br />opposed to TDS values} from an underground sample of the mine inflow`s The Division <br />believes that it would be appropriate to separate the mine inflow discussion Pram the <br />mine water discharge discussion at the bottom of page 4 and provide an average TDS <br />value from actual mine water discharge samples when evaluating impacts to East Salt <br />Creek. Please clarify page 4 of the AHI? accordingly. <br />4. The approved water quality monitoring program requires that the annual hydrology report <br />include baseline water quality data, in addition to the quarterly monitoring data to allow <br />far comparison of baseline and "during ?ninxn" conditions. Baseline data was not <br />included on Table 4 for surface water sites Sw-?, Sw?4, Sw-5, and Sw??. If available, <br />please update Table ? to include the baseline information far these sites, Baseline data <br />was also not included far monitoring well Cw?9. This is a newly installed well and the <br />baseline information may not have been fully established. In next year's AHR report for <br />water year ?aaS?2?a9 please develop the baseline information for w-9 and report it <br />similar to the information that is currently presented for w-1 and w-3. <br />Please let me know if you have any questions regarding my review of the ?aDB AHR for the <br />McGlone and Munger Canyon Mines. <br />Sincerely, <br />Michael P, Baulay <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />C: Denver File