Laserfiche WebLink
baseline water quality information that exists for that location. This is the only point in the <br /> basin where enough information is available to do a statistical comparison between pre- <br /> closure and post-closure water quality. The reference point also needed to located at a point <br /> far enough downstream to capture manifestations of possible seeps and springs as well as of <br /> mitigation projects. <br /> A commentor asks the meaning of the sentence: "The Reference Point will not be a <br /> permit compliance point." The reference point was selected for the reasons stated in the <br /> above paragraph. A point of compliance, defined as "a vertical surface that is located at <br /> some specified distance hydrologically downgradient of the activity being monitored for <br /> compliance," is a point where an entity is responsible for the discharge under its permit. <br /> SGC, for instance, has a point of compliance at its treatment facility discharge, prior to that <br /> discharge entering the stream. It is not responsible under its permits for the instream water <br /> quality in the Animas River, where various sources contribute. The CD and SGC's <br /> discharge permits are separate documents with different enforcement mechanisms. The <br /> Reference Point is the point where it will be determined if the CD has been successful. <br /> During the duration of the CD, and afterward if it is not successful, SGC will remain <br /> responsible for the discharges under its permits. <br /> Paragraph 9a. A commentor questions the function, placement, expected outcomes <br /> of, and decision-making regarding the additional hydraulic seals downstream of the property <br /> line in the American Tunnel, and what will happen if the property owner doesn't agree to <br /> them. The purpose of these seals would be to eliminate flows from the American Tunnel, <br /> and they would have to be approved by the Mined Land Reclamation Board. If they are not <br /> implemented or are not successful, and discharges from the tunnel continue, a permit for <br /> those discharges would be required. <br /> Paragraph 9b. A commentor questions the future CERCLA liability of SGC. The <br /> WQCD has no authority over CERCLA liability, and so it is not addressed. <br /> Paragraph 9c. A commentor asks whether Cement Creek flows above the treatment <br /> plant approximate those from the American Tunnel. Although in certain times of year, in <br /> very low flow conditions, the Cement Creek flows are less, most of the year they are greater <br /> than can be treated by the American Tunnel treatment facility. Therefore, Cement Creek <br /> water, previously untreated, will add less loading to the system as the mine pool builds <br /> toward equilibrium. <br /> Paragraph 10. A commentor states that the amount and timing of the monitoring <br /> appears to be insufficient to determine the results of mitigation and mine closure efforts, and <br /> that it appears SGC will reap the benefits from other projects undertaken to clean up the <br /> basin. The amount of monitoring to be conducted by SGC was negotiated for purposes of <br /> the agreement. The WQCD believes that the monitoring which has been committed to in the <br /> CD will provide the appropriate level of information to determine the effectiveness of <br /> mitigation projects and any impacts associated with mine closure efforts. It is true that the <br /> 2 <br />