Laserfiche WebLink
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />cl54h <br />DATE: May 27, 1996 <br />TO <br />FROM: <br />RE: <br />ff Penh l or gout ~~'~yk~s, <br />~ /~l aY 6 e / m o rP t'f 7-tiey/'P <br />rep guy yo~~ ~) <br />~JZ <br />Michael B, Long <br />Larry Routten and Erica Crosby <br />Colowyo Mine (C-81-019) <br />Request to Vacate NOV C-96-011 <br />/t5sP5fsxEr»fi fo.'f is 'i-c~1C~~~/p/ <br />pt fia 6/s <br />Colowyo has requested that you vacate NOV C-96-011. A copy of their request and the <br />NOV are attached. The NOV was issued following collection of a sample of water leaking <br />through the headgate of a sediment pond on March 20, 1996 by Erica. Approximately 1-2 <br />gallons per minute was discharging. Lab analysis indicated the discharge had 25,000 mg/l <br />of suspended solids and 290 mg/l of Fe. The CDPS effluent limits applicable to the <br />discharge are 70 mg/I of suspended solids and 7.0 mg/1 of Fe. The NOV cited failure to <br />minimize disturbance to the hydrologic balance, and failure to operate and maintain <br />facilities to treat water discharged from the disturbed area to meet effluent limits in the <br />CDPS permit. <br />We recommend that you deny the request for vacation. The following reasons for not <br />vacating the NOV correspond to the three points in Colowyo's request. <br />1. The discharge was not an "upset". <br />Colowyo contends that DMG ignored the mine's CDPS permit conditions in determining <br />that the water which was sampled was an illegal discharge. That permit includes four <br />conditions "necessary for a demonstration of upset". Colowyo failed to meet two of those <br />conditions. One of the conditions is that the permittee must notify the Water Quality <br />Control Division (WQCD) of an upset within 24 hours of occurrence. Colowyo only notified <br />WQCD of the discharge from this pond on March 22, following receipt of lab analysis of a <br />sample collected by the permittee on March 18. That lab analysis indicated a suspended <br />solids effluent exceedance. The gate had reportedly been leaking at least since March 18. <br />There was no discussion of an upset at that time. <br />The second CDPS condition for upsets which Colowyo did not address is a requirement that <br />the permitted facility (the pond) was being properly operated at the time of the upset. At <br />the time the DMG sampled was collected, the headgate on the pond's discharge structure <br />