My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-08-24_HYDROLOGY - M1977300
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Hydrology
>
Minerals
>
M1977300
>
2010-08-24_HYDROLOGY - M1977300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:19:57 PM
Creation date
8/25/2010 1:59:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977300
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
8/24/2010
Doc Name
Comments for your Consideration to Public Notice No. CO-07-10 Permit No. CO-0001244 Cotter
From
Denver Water
To
WQCD
Permit Index Doc Type
Hydrology Report
Email Name
AJW
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.
/
25
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
Comments Submitted by Denver Water <br />August 20, 2010 <br />9. Table A-9. How was the mass loading in lbs/day determined for Radium 226 & 228 if the <br />conversion from pCi/L to ug/L is unknown? Verify that the loading is calculated <br />correctly. <br />10. Determination of Baseline Water Quality (BWQ). In this instance, the use of <br />downstream water quality is inappropriate for the determination of baseline water quality <br />because it is influenced by decades of mining and recently failed reclamation approaches. <br />A BWQ determination based on upstream water quality would have a significant impact <br />on the magnitude of the term SCT, Significant Concentration Threshold. <br />11. Determination of ADBAC Concentrations. Similar to comment 5. The mass balance <br />equation in this section is appropriate for a single point of discharge. Consider the <br />appropriateness of this equation for the multiple points or areas of discharge. The <br />ADBAC concentration needs to be re-calculated based on 1) a correctly determined value <br />of SCT (SCT should be based on upstream BWQ) and 2) would be different if there <br />were additional terms in the mass balance calculation incorporating pollutant loadings <br />from the mine pool, seeps, and waste rock pile areas. If WQCD believes that information <br />does not exist to expand the terms of the mass balance, it would be appropriate to require <br />the permittee to acquire this information and submit it in response to a compliance <br />schedule requirement incorporated into the permit. <br />CDPS Permit No. CO-0001244 <br />1. Part I A (2 reQardina the number of outfalls. Only one outfall is identified when at least <br />two treatment needs are known; 1) treatment of sumps and alluvial water and 2) treatment <br />of mine pool water. Have effluent limits been properly prepared considering both needs <br />or will there be multiple outfalls? Has the permittee requested only one outfall or <br />identified that both needs will be addressed by one treatment system and one outfall? <br />Will runoff and stormwater be routed to the same outfall or need a separate outfall?
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.