Laserfiche WebLink
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED <br /> BY THE COLORADO WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION <br /> REGARDING THE CONSENT DECREE AND ASSOCIATED CDPS PERMITS IN <br /> SUNNYSIDE GOLD CORPORATION v. <br /> COLORADO WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION <br /> The Water Quality Control Division (WQCD) thanks the individuals and organizations <br /> that took the time and effort to read and respond to the Consent Decree (CD) and associated <br /> permits in the Sunnyside Gold Corporation (SGC) case. The Division and SGC have spent <br /> over a year negotiating this CD, and know how complicated it and its appendices are to read <br /> and comprehend. The WQCD received many good and thoughtful comments. Although <br /> many comments were supportive, many questions and concerns were raised. The following <br /> is a summary of questions and comments received by the WQCD, and its responses to those, <br /> organized by paragraph and appendix of the CD. Some comments caused the Division to <br /> negotiate changes in the documents. Many comments were on issues that the WQCD <br /> examined carefully during its deliberations and negotiations, and an explanation is provided <br /> of how the issue is addressed. <br /> A letter of support was received from the United States Environmental Protection <br /> Agency, and its individual comments are addressed in a separate document. The Animas <br /> River Stakeholders, sent a comment letter "support[ing] this innovative agreement as a step <br /> toward preventing further degradation and possible improvement of stream water quality in <br /> the basin." The letter stated that "[t]he nature of this agreement is consistent with the <br /> process and intent of the goals of the Animas River Stakeholders Group which hopes to <br /> improve water quality and aquatic life throughout the Animas watershed." Letters of <br /> support were received from groups dedicated to protecting the environment and from mining <br /> associations. <br /> Paragraph 3. A commentor questions the consistency of the CD's requirement that <br /> the water quality be maintained with the policy of the Colorado Water Quality Act (State <br /> Act) to protect, maintain, and improve water quality. The commentor confuses the <br /> overriding policy of the Act with the obligations that the federal and state statutes impose on <br /> individual dischargers. SGC currently is regulated under CDPS permits that contain the <br /> limitations on its discharge that the state has the authority under the law to impose. Under <br /> the CD, the water quality in the Animas River will, at a minimum, be maintained near its <br /> current level, and may be improved. <br /> Paragraph 4g. A commentor requests that all Mined Land Reclamation Board rules, <br /> including those regarding water, be incorporated. These sites are not subject to permits by <br /> the Division of Minerals and Geology (DMG), and thus are not subject to those rules. The <br /> CD incorporates certain of DMG's reclamation rules because standards for those aspects of <br /> the mitigation projects were needed. Water quality is addressed in the CD pursuant to the <br /> State Act and its implementing regulations. <br /> Paragraph 6. A commentor questions the use of A-72 as the only reference point. <br /> The location at A-72 as the reference point was selected because of the substantial amount of <br />