My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1993-11-15_PERMIT FILE - C1981017 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
1993-11-15_PERMIT FILE - C1981017 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2021 5:39:58 PM
Creation date
6/7/2012 11:10:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
11/15/1993
Doc Name
Request for federal Intervention (Part 2 of 2)
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
107
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
Mid-Continent Report; Nov. 15, 1993 <br /> Steve Renner/Harry Posey <br /> Page 7 <br /> Conductivity on the Crystal River ranges from 120 to 1200; on Coal Creek at station #20, <br /> conductivity ranges from 168 to 1900. The average on Coal Creek is 579; on the Crystal <br /> River it is 403. A single measurement below Carbondale is 220; the average of two samples <br /> on the Crystal above Coal Creek is 232. <br /> Although Coal Creek has a higher conductivity than the Crystal River, the Crystal River <br /> receives dissolved solids from sources other than Coal Creek. Flow in the Crystal above <br /> Avalanche Creek is about 15 times greater than Coal Creek; however, the conductivity of <br /> Coal Creek is only 1.4 times greater than the Crystal at that point. In order for the Crystal <br /> to have such high conductivity after a 15x dilution below Coal Creek, there must be a <br /> significant contribution of dissolved solids from other sources. <br /> COMMENTS: <br /> 1. It is not clear to me how the parameters that have been ordinarily measured were <br /> chosen. For instance, I would anticipate that water quality parameters would be <br /> chosen based on a priori knowledge about the composition of potentially deleterious <br /> components of the coal and waste that might contribute to a waste stream. For coal <br /> and the associated waste rocks, I would anticipate seeing analyses of certain metals <br /> associated with the coal and the associated sediment. Most of these analyses are not <br /> generally available. <br /> In addition, in order to monitor the general water quality over time one would need <br /> analyses of major cations and anions. In most natural waters, the major cations are <br /> Cat+, Mg2+, Na2+, and K+ and the major anions are CO32-, HCO3, SO42-, and Cl . <br /> Data for Cl- and K+ are not generally available. These parameters should be <br /> analyzed, given the probability that Cl-is likely to be present in and settings and that <br /> K+ is likely to be derived from clays. <br /> The parameters monitored for the NPDES discharge point fall short of the type of <br /> analysis that would allow one to conduct a proper evaluation of anything other than <br /> the specific suite of species dictated by the NPDES permit requirements. <br /> 2. Although the Crystal River has been classified as a Class 1 Cold Water Fishery by <br /> the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Health, the <br /> "Crystal River Drainage Study, August 1978 - May 1979" (author unknown) located <br /> no trout between the area above Coal Creek and below North Thompson Creek, and <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.