Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.2 Documentationc©Drv 1 BEFORE THE GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3 4 TRANSCRIPT REGARDING 5 JOHN POWERS REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION NON -CONFORMING 6 USE FOR GRAVEL PIT LOCATED ONE MILE NORTHEAST OF 7 CARBONDALE ON HIGHWAY 82 8 9 March 21, 1988 1 OCOUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO 2 TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD 3 DATE: MARCH 21, 1988 4 THOSE PRESENT: Commissioner Marian I. Smith, Chairman Pro Tem 5 Commissioner Larry Schmueser 6 Commissioner Robert (Bob) Richardson Absent 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Administrator Chuck Deschenes Attorney Don DeFord Clerk & Recorder Mildred Alsdorf Mark Bean, Director of Building, Planning & Sanitation Dick Martin Jerry Hartert, Attorney for John Powers 14 PERTAINING TO: John Powers Request for determination non -conforming 15 use for gravel pit located one mile northeast of Carbondale on 16 Highway 82. 17 18 WHEREUPON, the following proceedings before the Board of County 19 Commissioners was had and entered of record to wit: 20 (I certify that the following is true and accurate to the best of my 21 ability.) 22 23 Transcriptionist 24 At the request of County Clerk & 25 Recorder Mildred Alsdorf Page 1 1 CHAIRMAN PRO TEM SMITH: 10:15 is a request by John Powers for 2 determination non -conforming use of gravel pit located one mile 3 northeast of Carbondale on Highway 82. 4 MARK BEAN, DIRECTOR OF BUILDING, PLANNING & SANITATION: 5 Basically it was requested and I was advised by Don that this 6 particular request needs to be made to the Board of County 7 Commissioners since staff does not have the legal authority to make 8 this type of determination and in my disussions with Don and based on 9 this - did you get a copy of this letter? 10 CHAIRMAN PRO TEM SMITH: Well, Jerry was talking about it. 11 MARK BEAN: If not, maybe I could. 12 COMMISSIONER PRO TEM SMITH: No, I haven't seen this one. Have 13 you seen that one. 14 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: Yah, I think (unintelligible) came 15 through as a - well, what we are doing here is approving a continued 16 use 17 MARK BEAN: Confirming a non -conforming use status. 18 JERRY HARTERT: What we need and the reason for the request is 19 to get straight with the MLRB on an expansion of their permit. Let 20 me explain a little background on it. The owner of the permit, the 21 MLRB permit, was initially the Department of Highways and when they 22 no longer needed the permit, although they still use out of this pit, 23 they didn't need the permit any more uh to complete the extended 24 mining under the original permit, they assigned it to the landowner, 25 John Powers. He is now the permitee under the MLRB and when the Page 2 1 Highway Department applied for it, they only applied for a certain 2 area and so forth. And so we need to satisfy their requirements, 3 that is the MLRB's requirement that this is a valid non -conforming 4 use under Garfield County zoning. Obviously, they don't want to 5 permit any use that is illegal under your zoning laws. So that is 6 why we are here in a nutshell. Dick has prepared - Dick has been 7 the owner of this property for many years - I think going back to 8 what 9 DICK MARTIN: 1952 10 JERRY HARTERT: 1952 - he is here to let you know just what the 11 activity has been on - in this pit and it has been a continuous 12 activity for over 30 years and certainly was in existence at the time 13 zoning was imposed in that area of the county. We do have an 14 existing special use permit that was gotten by the then owner of a 15 concrete batch plant. That was not a prior or existing 16 non -conforming use and so they had to come in - that was back in the 17 days when Flash Concrete owned that operation up there. They came in 18 and got a special use permit from the County - gosh I don't know - in 19 the 70's some time and now that permit of course, is in effect 20 transferred to the present operator, Roaring Fork Redi-Mix. We are 21 here to tell you, first of all, I've got a plat that will show you 22 what we had in mind as the ultimate pit limits for this operation, 23 just so you will be aware of it. And we are here to present anything 24 that we can to inform you of the historical use of the permit - uhm 25 and to assure you that the level of activity in the pit is not going Page 3 1 to increase in any substantial way that would impact the surrounding 2 area by way of - by means of heavier traffic and so forth. It is 3 going to be about the same volume operation it has been in the past 4 years. If I may, I'll just lay this in front of you so that you can 5 - this is the existing 6 Can you see Don for a minute 7 Yes, I can (unintelligible). 8 JERRY HARTERT: This is the proposed ultimate limit of the pit. 9 This whole thing when it is done provides the - what we feel and land 10 use planner that has been retained - feels is the optimum area for 11 site rehabilitation. They have got a lot of good ideas about how 12 this whole thing will look when it is done. We are planning on the 13 ranch owner, Mr. Powers is planning on going well beyond the MLRB's 14 requirement for rehabilitation, you know, on the one slope, whatever 15 it is and actually wants to create some amenities on this - lakes and 16 so forth but that's really not germane to this hearing and we won't 17 bore you with all that because we are claiming as a non -conforming 18 use and so that really shouldn't enter into it but just to let you 19 know what the ultimate plan is here. Topography, other qualities of 20 the land up here and so forth, irrigated land and so on dictate that 21 this thing will, should end right here. 22 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: Mark, you're satisfied that this has 23 been a continuing non -conforming use. 24 MARK BEAN: I have no problem. My only question, I think Jerry 25 answered that in his previous statement and I believe Don confers is Page 4 that the issue of non -increasing the activities above the historic 2 levels. That might be a concern but that is not their intent here. 3 DON DeFORD: Mark's right. He and I have talked about this on 4 two or three occasions. The only question I guess I have is in the 5 original operation as of 1970, was there any limitation on the extent 6 of the gravel pit at that time? 7 JERRY HARTERT: Limitation imposed by (unintelligible) 8 DON DeFORD: Was there any type of - well had the ranch that 9 Powers represented that there was going to be limited to a certain 10 geographical area. 11 JERRY HARTERT: No, in fact the only opportunity for any 12 representations to have been made would have been when the Flash 13 Concrete operation came in and applied for a special use permit for 14 the concrete batch plant and 15 DON DeFORD: That was after 70 16 JERRY HARTERT: Yes, that was after 70, right, right but I am 17 saying that would have been, historically, that would have been the 18 only time when the Commissioners were even approached. I don't think 19 there's been, certainly since I have been representing Mr. Powers, 20 there hasn't been any uh need to come to the County Commissioners to 21 ask for these things and it's only inspired by the MLRB's requirement 22 that they have assurance that we are legal. That's what they want to 23 know. 24 DON DeFORD: That was my understanding of it. I just wanted to 25 make sure and then Mark's right that my only concern was that not Page 5 1 increasing the intensity of the use and the volume of production. 2 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: I am familiar with the pit, have been 3 and I am sure you are. 4 CHAIRMAN PRO TEM SMITH: Yes. 5 JERRY HARTERT: As part of our request, I should have added in 6 the letter, that we would like a letter if the County sees fit and 7 you are satisfied with the situation, we would like a written 8 confirmation so that we've got something to present to the MLRB, that 9 this is a valid non-conforming use. 10 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: Should we do this by resolution and a 11 copy of the resolution. 12 JERRY HARTERT: That would be 13 DON DeFORD: No, you should not do it by resolution because what 14 you do not want to appear that you are approving a non-conforming 15 use. And in fact, you don't want that to happen any way. 16 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: That's right. 17 DON DeFORD: So what you want to do is recognize through a 18 letter made directly from Mark or 19 MARK BEAN: Authorize me to write a letter on behalf to note 20 this disussion 21 DON DeFORD: saying that it is your understanding that this is 22 a non-conforming use, it is not approval or denial but recognition 23 that it exists and that's all. 24 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: That's my motion. 25 CHAIRMAN PRO TEM SMITH: I'll step down as Chair and second that Page 6 motion. 2 ADMINISTRATOR CHUCK DESCHENES: Concise and to the point. 3 CHAIRMAN PRO TEM SMITH: Further discussion? All those in 4 favor. 5 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: Aye. 6 CHAIRMAN PRO TEM SMITH: Aye. 7 MARK BEAN: I will write a letter with my signature on behalf of 8 the Board. 9 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: Okay, and since we're familiar with the 10 operators up there at that pit, we know that there is 11 (unintelligible). 12 DICK MARTIN: From what a couple gentlemen told me in 1952, I 13 moved up here from Grand Junction in the winter time and I lived 14 there on the old Seiver's place and that was the end of the route for 15 the Carbondale School Bus, of course, we had some small kids that 16 went to school and we hadn't any more got there and the wind came and 17 blew all the roads full. So I got on the phone and found out who the 18 County Road man was in that area and also the County Commissioner. I 19 asked them if they would consider plowing out my driveway and I 20 talked to the County Commissioner and he said you will have to talk 21 to Mr. James Duffy. He's the road foreman. So I called Mr. Duffy 22 and he said, we don't make it a habit but in an emergency we have 23 been plowing out a lot of other people's roads so we'll plow yours 24 out. That was my first acquaintance with Jim Duffy and it was all 25 good from there on and he was working for a Republican commissioner Page 7 who was (unitelligible) so there was some compatibility there and 2 since then that pit has been a mainstay for the upper valley for 3 gravel, both Pitkin, Eagle and Garfield counties and for the State 4 Highway Department. Freeman told me it went back to the time when 5 the Midland Railway used that pit run gravel for their tracks. 6 COMMISSIONER PRO TEM SMITH: and for their roadbeds. It has 7 been in use for a long time. It sure has. 8 DICK MARTIN: And Mr. Powers is going to require a lot more than 9 is required by the State and Mine Reclamation Board as Jerry can 10 attest to, he is going to require a much deeper cover and vegetation, 11 sprinkling system making it attractive. 12 COMMISSIONER PRO TEM SMITH: Great. 13 COMMISSIONER SCHMUESER: Thank you. Page 8 V I 0`•• N I O • 0 O f 1 ./ a a cE a O d 0_ 0 0 0 AFFECTED AREA z FIGURE 2 POWERS PIT COG -500227 PAGE 22 PART II Page 18 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 B. RESPONSIBILITIES (CONTINUED) 5. Modification, Suspension, or Revocation of Permits By the Division (Continued) (iv) The Division finds that the permittee has shown reasonable grounds consistent with the Federal and State statutes and regulations for such modification, amendment or termination; (v) Fee requirements of Section 6.16.0 of State Discharge Permit System Regulations have been met; and (vi) Requirements of public notice have been met. 6. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject to under Section 311 (0i1 and Hazardous Substance Liability) of the Clean Water Act. 7. State Laws Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant to any applicable State law or regulation under authority granted by Section 510 of the Clean Water Act. 8. Permit Violations Failure to comply with any terms and/or conditions of this permit shall be a violation of this permit. 9. Property Rights The issuance of this permit does not convey any property or water rights in either real or personal property, or stream flows, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations. Code: i - 33 Date: 1 - 84 PART II Page 19 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 B. RESPONSIBILITIES (CONTINUED) 10. Severability The provisions of this permit are severable. If any provisions of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances and the application of the remainder of this permit shall not be affected. 11. Renewal Application If the permittee desires to continue to discharge a permit renewal application shall be submitted at least one hundred eighty (180) days before this permit expires. If the permittee anticipates there will be no discharge after the expiration date of this permit, the Division should be promptly notified so that it can terminate the permit in accordance with Part 11.3.5. 12. Confidentiality Any information relating to any secret process, method of manufacture or production, or sales or marketing data, which may be acquired, ascertained, or discovered, whether in any sampling investigation, emergency investigation, or otherwise, shall not be publicly disclosed by any member, officer, or employee of the commission or the Division, but shall be kept confidential. Any person seeking to invoke the protection of this Subsection (2) shall bear the burden of proving its applicablility. This section shall never be interpreted as preventing full disclosure of effluent data. 13. Fees The permittee is required to submit payment and annual fee as set forth in the 1983 amendments to the Water Quality Control Act. Section 25-8-502 (1) (b), and State Discharge Permit Regulations 5CCR 1002-2, Section 6.16.0 as amended. Failure to submit the required fee when due and payable is a violation of the permit and will result in enforcement action pursuant to Section 25-8-601 et. seq., C.R.S. 1973 as amended. PART II Page 20 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 B. RESPONSIBILITIES (CONTINUED) 14. Requiring an Individual CDPS Permit The Director may require any owner or operator covered under this permit to apply for and obtain an individual CDPS permit if: a) The discharger is not in compliance with the conditions of this General Permit; or, b) Conditions or standards have changed so that the discharge no longer qualifies for a General Permit. c) Data becomes available which indicates water quality standards may be violated. The owner or operator must be notified in writing that an application for an individual CDPS permit is required. When an individual CDPS permit is issued to an owner or operator otherwise covered under this General Permit, the applicability of the General Permit to that owner or operator is automatically terminated upon the effective date of the individual CDPS permit. 15. Requesting an Individual CDPS Permit Any owner or operator covered by this General Permit may request to be excluded from the coverage by applying for an individual CDPS Permit. 16. Requesting Coverage Under the General Permit The owner or operator of a facility excluded from coverage by this General Permit solely because that facility already has an individual permit may request that the individual permit be revoked and that the facility be covered by this General Permit. Such request shall be evaluated by the Division per criterion specified in Part I of this permit. COLORADO-GARFIELD CO. r‘ • ; 001 C(' • : *.• • -G . • :4! ' .• • • .......... • 6.00 • c4,0P , 12% I n / • 1 9 ( -----\-71,2,.r. -• 1......,;,.. (j ;. •:‘,„„?..!.,\ .4- ? i 7 • Carbondale Water Supply Intake :.1 1 ..1. . • .. . 4 1' ...1--.. 1 ......, O. ..... .. a ,,ta I `-. \3. 4 • ti \'•,'• . .• \ '''''' .1 : 11 '.• Carbondlile 1 .....--..........,:... a I _ ... ...... , ..... .,.;,- •...c.._.-:,::„.1,...:4, ---- r -.- ..: • , -,•,••••i ••••• ..... - ..q ..Ti..... -111. --'----1.2---_1-- - • i ° . . .. . , 7 I- :I, A .1' ''.. -; - . \ \\ e., I ,,,/ ---,"...'r-7-:':-7---t5-1.-*C...--C47:: -'. --..... . , - - .. -_ = = -. • - === - ---- \ -..-___...• :::,_,....—. . . . ...7-t-1—.. •., . ,-- _... —,,_ . , I''''-'-'1"--...,••;'------'.. _ _ .....;:v., . ..,..-=',---,----'4••72...... ,,., 4_ , • !!: ' 1. ' :'!..' Jb-CWhil(te,. .! \ \ 1.--7-:-:''.... • - . - - - - - ' - - ' - - . - ' \ _,..*_• ' , ' ': AtAIL•:-.(••• .. 1,,, 1(1,46 fill : 1i :‘ ' • 1k \' ‘ \i"------:----\:..,.\-..7:' ...__::_.„H"':'" -----N.\ :;:-:. ' -!11.,.,. ---j,......,--_-__:-'4..- 1= : : : ..1-7-''' :„....„...:- ;- '7-..'----:-:..,;:=.' ----7-----r'E S.---;.4112-.1-12.-- -.:.: 4" '-'.---'----j.-- : - ';..---.;''';.'-:-.:-"----74-\;---.-'1'.'CV.-1:12-S-...q./;;;.- , ...-- -.,-....... 1, ,...... • i r. •' ' - ‘...1 Ao ',N,112 ,:,)( \A `... \ 1 , \\.„ i _.....2: :....:;._,,\_...,_L,/...s:_,..,,I• - '''' . " .-:--,....,--1---_:-----7::".,...:...,,... ....7..„________\..,. .......___...„________\_____\____________:_ji-;"----'%11, 1 \ :'.. /*A'. • - t \ • • 1 , 7- ''.0 \ • I V.----1 II i ---/i •. _ I t,/,' X 68 \ e.......7 / 1 •? --/C2 .....%:=7.".*\,,..., / / •-•.•1 1 1 - . .. ' ,--'7 ,i , 1 ,. I Note: There are no other known public water supply • _. • • \I:, ( ---1 intakes within 5 -miles downstream of the facility. , 0 ..,,,...... . ,, .0 . 1 ! -....-/ ' ,- • / (1 , ,, ....,-. •• \ WI 1 A 1 \•-: S' -, • ‘ • ? • ILI kC.'*1 , 7,, (c_..- -•••• (....... 1.... s \ \ .. I. - \ •-•(' % ' . z .or•-::. '-•• . .,..., * .t._:1 ms . 75ts •• (.; •••• ....... CN , 11. .,t"t I . ts;.( ''''• OR / =64 •.. 41 ............. Site ....... ; I -::-.....:::..7..., ' 'N• .... *.F..:4;'4::::.:... • .';'.. .....:!.11,-. ‘.., s• Ist.... . .1.,. .--..6 ........... 61.70 I. i. •'-35 .; • •••• .,. • . 123 \ 25 MILS \ 4,• / 13* 231 MILS Location Map _/ 1Z30' '10 , REDS TONE" l5 mt. 1 MARBLE 27 Mt FIGURE 1 POWERS PIT COG -500227 31 (MOUNT SOPRIS) '12 4567 SW '13 10 SCALE 1:24 000 0 MILC 10(f 0 10.'0 :MO 3Y) 4000 5000 1000 70,1,) I T ••••••):4L:t:k CON TO! c;r T f-RvAL O FFIT PART II Page 16 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 B. RESPONSIBILITIES (CONTINUED) 5. Modification, Suspension, or Revocation of Permits By the Division All permit modification, termination or revocation and.reissuance actions shall be subject to the requirements of the State Discharge Permit System Regulations, Sections 6.6.2, 6.6.3, 6.8.0 and 6.16.0, 5 C.C.R. 1002-2, except for minor modifications. Minor modifications may only correct typographical errors, require a change in the frequency of monitoring or reporting by the permittee, change an interim date in a schedule of compliance or allow for a change in ownership or operational control of a facility including addition, deactivation or relocation of discharge points where the Division determines that no other change in the permit is necessary. a) This permit may be modified, suspended, or revoked in whole or in part during its term for reasons determined by the Division including but not limited to, the following: (i) Violation of any terms or conditions of the permit; (ii) Obtaining a permit by misrepresentation or failing to disclose any fact which is material to the granting or denial of a permit or to the establishment of terms or conditions of the permit; or (iii) Materially false or inaccurate statements or information in the application for the permit; or (iv) Promulgation of a toxic effluent standards or prohibitions (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) which are established under Section 307 of the Clean Water Act, where such a toxic pollutant is present in the discharge and such standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation for such pollutant in this permit. Code: i - 31 Date: 1 - 84 PART II Page 17 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 B. RESPONSIBILITIES (CONTINUED) 5. Modification, Suspension, or Revocation of Permits By the Division (Continued) b) This permit may be modified in whole or in part due to a change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or elimination of the permitted discharge, such as: (i) Promulgation of Water Quality Standards applicable to waters affected by the permitted discharge; or (ii) Effluent limitations or other requirements applicable pursuant to the State Act or federal requirements; or (iii) Control regulations promulgated; or (iv) Data submitted pursuant to Part I.B indicates a potential for violation of adopted Water Quality Standards or stream classifications. c) The certification for the individual facility authorizing discharge under the general permit may be modified to allow for a change in ownership or operational control of a facility including addition, deactivation or relocation of discharge points where the Division determines no change in the general permit is necessary. d) At the request of the permittee, the Division may modify, or terminate this permit if the following conditions are met: (i) In the case of termination, the permittee notifies the Division of its intent to terminate the permit 90 days prior to the desired date of termination; (ii) In the case of termination, the permittee has ceased any and all discharges to state waters and demonstrates to the Division there is no probability of further uncontrolled discharge(s) which may affect waters of the State. (iii) The•Regional Administrator has been notified of the proposed modification or termination and does not object in writing within thirty (30) days of receipt of notification; Code: i - 32 Date: 1 - 84 PART II Page 14 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 A. MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED-) 14. Signatory Requirement All reports required for submittal shall be signed and certified for accuracy by the permittee in accord with the following criteria: a) In the case of corporations, by a principal executive officer of at least the level of vice-president or his or her duly authorized representative, if such representative is responsible for the overall operation of the facility from which the discharge described in the form originates; b) In the case of a partnership, by a general partner; c) In the case of a sole proprietorship, by the proprietor; d) In the case of a municipal, state, or other public facility, by either a principal executive officer, ranking elected official, or other duly authorized employee. Within sixty (60) days of certification the permittee shall file a statement with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Water Quality Control Division which shall contain the names of the person or persons who are designated to report conditions on discharge monitoring reports and as noted in "Noncompliance Notification", Part II A.3. The permittee shall continually update this list as changes occur at the facility. B. RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Inspections and Right to Entry The permittee shall allow the Director of the State Water Quality Control Division, the EPA Regional Administrator, and/or their authorized representative, upon the presentation of credentials: a) To enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or in which any records are required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit; b) At reasonable times to have access to and copy any records required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit and to inspect any monitoring equipment or monitoring method required in the permit; and Code: i - 29 Date: 1 - 84 B. RESPONSIBILITIES (CONTINUED) c) PART II Page 15 PERMIT NO.: -COG-500000 To enter upon the permittee's premises to investigate, within reason, any actual, suspected, or potential source of water pollution, or any violation of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act. The investigation may include, but is not limited to, the following: sampling of any discharge and/or process waters, the taking of photographs, interviewing permittee staff on alleged violation, access to any and all facilities or areas within the permittee's premises that may.have any affect on the discharge, permit, or alleged violation. d) The Division shall split a sample with the permittee if requested to do so by the permittee. 2. Duty to Provide Information The permittee shall furnish to the Division, within a reasonable time, any information which the Division may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit, or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Division, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit. 3. Transfer of Ownership or Control A permit may be transferred to a new permittee if: a) The current permittee notifies the Division in writing 30 days in advance of the proposed transfer date; and b) The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of permit responsibility, coverage and liability between them; and c) The current permittee has met all fee requirements of the State Discharge Permit System Regulations, Section 6.16.0. 4. Availability of Reports Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 308 of the Federal Clean Water Act and Regulations for the State Discharge Permit System 6.6.4 (2), all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the State Water Quality Control Division and the Regional Administrator. Code: i - 30 Date: 1 - 84 PART II Page 12 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 A. MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED) - 7. Upsets a) Effect of an upset An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with permit effluent limitations if the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section are met. No determination made during administrative review of claims that noncompliance was caused by upset, and before an action for noncompliance, is final administrative action subject to judicial review. b) Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate through properly signed contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that: An upset occurred and that the permittee can specific cause(s) of the upset; The permitted facility was at the time being operated; and The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in Part II A.3 of this permit (24-hour notice). The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Section 122.7(d) of the federal regulations. identify the properly c) Burden of proof In any enforcement proceeding the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof. 8. Removed Substances Solids, sludges, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of the State. Code: i - 27 Date: 1 - 84 PART II Page 13 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 A. MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED) 9. Minimization of Adverse Impact The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize any adverse impact to waters of the State resulting from noncompliance with any effluent limitations specified in this permit, including such accelerated or additional monitoring as necessary to determine the nature and impact of the noncomplying discharge. 10. Discharge Point Any discharge to the waters of the State from a point source other than specifically authorized by this permit is prohibited. 11. Reduction, Loss, or Failure of Treatment Facility The permittee has the duty to halt or reduce any activity if necessary to maintain compliance with the effluent limitations of the permit. Upon reduction, loss, or failure of the treatment facility, the permittee shall, to the extent necessary to maintain compliance with its permit, control production, or all discharges, or both until the facility is restored or an alternative method of treatment is provided. This provision for example, applies to power failures, unless an alternative power source sufficient to operate the wastewater control facilities is provided. It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would be necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit. 12. Proper Operation and Maintenance The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance includes effective performance, adequate funding, adequate operator staffing and training, and adequate laboratory and process controls, including appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems only when necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit. 13. Discharge Effluent Sampling Discharge points shall be so designed or modified that a sample of the effluent can be obtained at a point after the final treatment process and prior to discharge to state waters. PART II Page 11 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 A. MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED) 4. Submission of Incorrect or Incomplete Information Where the permittee failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or report to the Division, the permittee shall promptly submit the relevant application information which was not submited or any additional information needed to correct any erroneous information previously submitted. 5. Bypass The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be exceeded, but if and onlyif it is for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. Bypass is prohibited, and the Division may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless: a) Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage; and b) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime. This condition is not satisfied if the permittee could have installed adequate backup equipment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventative maintenance; and c) The permittee submitted notices as required in "Bypass Notification", Part II.A.6. 6. Bypass Notification If the permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass, a notice shall be submitted, at least ten days before the date of the bypass, to the Division and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The bypass shall be subject to Division approval and limitations imposed by the Division and EPA. Code: i - 26 Date: 1 - 84 Revised 12-15-86 PART II Page 10 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 A. MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS (CONTINUED) 3. Noncompliance Notification a) If, for any reason, the permittee does not comply with or will be unable to comply with any maximum discharge limitations or standards specified in this permit, the permittee shall, at a minimum, submit in writing to the Water Quality Control Division and EPA within five days of becoming aware of such conditions, the following information: (i) A description of the discharge and cause of noncompliance; (ii) The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times and/or the anticipated time when the discharge will return to compliance; and (iii) Steps being taken to reduce, eliminate, and prevent recurrence of the noncomplying discharge. b) The permittee shall report the following instances of noncompliance orally within twenty-four (24) hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the noncompliance, and shall mail to the Division a report within five (5) days after becoming aware of the noncompliance: (i) Any instance of noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment; (ii) Any unanticipated bypass; (iii) Any upset which causes an exceedance of any effluent limitation in the permit; (iv) Any spill which causes any effluent limitation to be violated; (v) Daily maximum violations for any toxic pollutants or hazardous substances limited by PART I -A of this permit and specified as requiring 24 hour notification. The permittee shall report all other instances of non-compliance not reported under A.3(a) or A.3(b) at the time Discharge Monitoring Reports are submitted. The reports shall contain the same information listed in sub -paragraph (a) of this section. Code: i - 25 Date: 1 - 84 PART II A. MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS Page 9 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 1. Change in Discharge The permittee shall inform the Division (Permits and Enforcement Section) in writing of any intent to construct, install, or alter any process, facility, or activity that is likely to result in a new or altered discharge and shall furnish the Division such plans and specifications which the Division deems reasonably necessary to evaluate the effect on the discharge and receiving stream. The permittee shall submit this notice within two (2) weeks after making a determination to perform the type of activity referred to in the preceding paragraph. Process modifications include, but are not limited to, the introduction of any new pollutant not previously identified in the permit, or any other modifications which may result in a discharge of a quantity or quality different from that which was applied for. Following such notice, the permittee shall be required to submit a new CDPS application and the permit may be modified to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited, if the new or altered discharge might be inconsistent with the conditions of the existing permit. In no case shall the permittee implement such change without first notifying the Division. 2. Special Notifications - Definitions a) Bypass: The intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment facility. b) Severe Property Damage: Substantial physical damage to property at the treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. It does not mean economic loss caused by delays in production. c) Spill: An unintentional release of solid or liquid material which may cause pollution of state waters. d) Upset: An exceptional incident in which there is unintentional. and temporary noncompliance with permit effluent limitations . because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventative maintenance, or careless or improper operation. Code: i - 24 Date: 1 - 84 PART I Page 8 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 8. Records Retention All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this permit including all records of analyses performed and calibration and maintenance of instrumentation and recordings from continuous monitoring instrumentation shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years, or longer if requested by the Regional Administrator or the State Water Quality Control Division. PART I Page 7 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 C. MONITORING AND REPORTING (cont'd,) e) A "visual" observation, for oil and grease monitoring requirements, is defined as observing the discharge to check for the presence of a visible sheen or floating oil. If either of these is present, a grab sample shall be taken and analyzed, and corrective measures taken immediately to correct the situation. 4. Test Procedures Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to regulations published pursuant to Section 304 (h) of the Clean Water Act, and Colorado State Effluent Limitations (10.1.5), under which such procedures may be required. 5. Recording of Results For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall record the following information: a) The exact place, date, and time of sampling; b) The dates the analyses were performed; c) The person(s) who performed the sampling; d) The person(s) who performed the analyses; e) The analytical techniques or methods used; and f) The results of all required analyses. 6. Calculations for all limitations which require averaging of measurements shall utilize an arithmetic mean unless otherwise specified. 7. Additional Monitoring by Permittee If the permittee monitors any pollutant at the location(s) designated herein more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified above, the results of such monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the values required in the Discharge Monitoring Report Form (EPA No. 3320-1), or other forms as required by the Division. Such increased frequency shall also be indicated. PART I Page 6 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 C. MONITORING AND REPORTING 1. Representative Sampling Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge. 2. Reporting Monitoring results for each one year period (October 1 - September_30) are due by the 28th of October of each year or upon termination of discharge. The results shall be summarized and reported on applicable discharge monitoring report forms (EPA Form 3320-1), postmarked no later than the due date. If no discharge occurs during the reporting period "No Discharge" shall be reported. The report submitted at termination of discharge shall be marked as a "final" report. Duplicate signed copies of these, and all other reports required herein, shall be submitted to the Regional Administrator and the State at the following addresses: Colorado Department of Health Water Quality Control Division 4210 East llth Avenue Room 200 Denver, Colorado 80220 Attention: Permits and Enforcement U. S. Environmental Protection Agency One Denver Place Suite 1300 999 18th Street Denver, Colorado 80202-2413 Attention: Enforcement -Permit Program Failure to submit the reports shall constitute a violation of the permit and may constitute grounds for revocation of the permittee's authority to discharge under the permit. 3. Definitions a) A "composite" sample, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a minimum of four (4) grab samples collected at equally spaced two (2) hour intervals and proportioned according to flow. b) A "grab" sample, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a single "dip and take" sample collected at a representative point in the discharge stream. c) An "instantaneous" measurement, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a single reading, observation, or measurement. d) A "continuous" measurement, for flow monitoring requirements, is defined as using an automatic recording device to continually measure flow. PART I Page 2 PERMIT NO.: C0 -G500000 A. COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMIT 1) Under this general permit, fac lities engaged in the mining and processing of sand and gravel including rock or stone used as aggregate) may be granted auth•rization to discharge treated process generated waste waters into waters of the state of Colorado with the exception of facilities in the Cherry Creek Basin and those tributary to Chatfield Reservoir downstr-am of the USGS gage at Waterton and on Plum Creek. For purposes of t is permit, process generated waste waters includes: a) wash waters; b) transport waters; c) scrubber waters (crushers d) mine dewatering (groundwat e) other process water as det r classifier); r and/or runoff); and rained by the permit issuing authority. 2. This permit does not constitut- authorization under 33 U.S.C. 1344 (Section 404 of the Clean Ovate Act) of any stream dredging o= _' " -g operations. 3. In order to be considered eligible for authorization to discharge under the terms and conditions of this permit, the owner, operator, and/.or authorized agent of any facility desiring to discharge must submit, by certified letter, t e discharge application form, available from the Water Quality Control Division, which generally requires the following information: a) name, address, and descrip ive location of the facility; b) Name of principal in charg- of operation of the facility; c) Name of water receiving th- discharge; d) Description of the type of activity resulting in the discharge including the an icipatec duration of activity and/or the discharge, anti ipated volume, and rate of discharge, and the source •f water which is to be discharged; e) Description of any waste w=ter treatment system and recycle/reuse utilized; an f) A map or schematic diagram showing the .zeha __ area aar_,'Dr routing of the activity. g) Analysis of tile water to b discharged. PART I Page 3 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 A. COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMIT (CONTINUED) h) At least thirty (30) days prior to the anticipated date of discharge, such information -shall be submitted to: Colorado Department of Health Water Quality Control Division 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220 Attention: Permits and Enforcement The permit issuing authority shall have up to thirty (30) days after receipt of the above information to request additional data and/or deny the authorization for any particular discharge. Upon receipt of additional information the permit issuing authority shall have an additional 30 days to issue or deny authorization for any particular discharge. If the person proposing the discharge does not receive a request for additional information or a notification of denial from the.. permit issuing authority within the specified time frame, authorization to discharge in accordance with the conditions of the permit shall be deemed granted. If the permit issuing authority determines that the operation does not fall under the authority of the general permit, then the information received will be treated as an individual permit, discharge is not allowed until 180 days after the application has been received. i) Authorization to discharge under this general permit shall commence on October 1, 1987 and shall expire on September 30, 1992. The Division must evaluate this general permit once every five (5) years and must also recertify the applicant's authority to discharge under the general permit, at such time. Therefore, a permittee desiring continued coverage under the general permit must re -apply by April 1, 1992. The Division will determine if the applicant continues to operate under terms of the general permit. PART I Page 4 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 B. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND CONDITIONS - 1. There shall be no discharge of sanitary waste waters from toilets or related facilities. 2. There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. 3. No chemicals are to be added to the discharge unless permission for the use of a specific chemical is granted by the permit issuing authority. In granting the use of such chemicals, additional limitations and monitoring requirements may be imposed. 4. The concentration of Oil and Grease in any single sample shall not exceed 10 mg/1 nor shall thence be any visible sheen in the discharge. 5. The pH of discharged waters shall not be less than 6.5 nor more than 9.0 units. 6. Total Suspended Solids: The concentration of Total Suspended Solids shall not exceed the following: 30 day Average Daily Maximum Limitation a/ 7 day Average b/ Limitation c/ 30 mg/1 45/mg/1 60 mg/1 a/ This limitation shall be, determined by the arithmetic mean of three (3) consecutive samples (grab or composite) taken in separate weeks in a 30 consecutive day period. (Minimum of three (3) samples.) b/ This limitation shall be determined by the arithmetic mean of three (3) consecutive samples (grab or composite) taken on separate days in a seven (7) consecutive day period. (Minimum of three (3) samples.) c/ This limitation shall be determined by a single properly preserved grab sample. A "grab" sample, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a single "dip, and take" sample collected at a representative point in the discharge stream. PART I Page 5 PERMIT NO.: COG -500000 B. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND CONDITIONS (cont'd.) 7. Bulk storage structures for petroleum products and other chemicals shall have adequate protection so as to prevent any reasonable loss of the material from entering discharged waters or waters of the State. 8. Monitoring Requirements In order to obtain an indication of the probable compliance or noncompliance with the effluent limitations specified in Part I, the permittee shall monitor all effluent parameters at the following required frequencies. Effluent Parameter Measurement Frequency d/ e/ Sample Type f/ Flow (mgd) Weekly Instantaneous Total Suspended Solids Monthly Grab Oil and Grease gi Weekly Visual or Grab pH Monthly Grab Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/1 h/ Quarterly Grab Total Phosphorus (as P) mg/1 i/ Quarterly Grab Self-monitoring samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements specified above shall be taken at the point of discharge prior to entering waters of the State. d/ Monitoring is required only during periods of discharge. If "no discharge" occurs, this shall be reported at the specified frequency. (See Part C.) e/ When the measurement frequency indicated is quarterly, the samples shall be collected during March, June, September, and December if a continual discharge occurs. If the discharge is intermittant, then samples shall be collected during the period that discharge occurs. f/ See definitions, Part C. g/ Should a visible sheen of oil be observed a sample shall be collected and analyzed plus immediate action shall be taken to correct the problem. h/ TDS monitoring is only required for facilities discharging in the Colorado River Basin. TDS may be measured as electrical conductivity where a satisfactory correlation with TDS has been established based upon a minimum of five (5) samples. i/ Total Phosphorus monitoring is only required for facilities discharging in the Dillon Reservoir drainage area (i.e. Ten Mile Creek, Snake River, Blue River, all tributaries to the Dillon Reservoir). SAND AND GRAVEL PRODUCTION OPERATIONS (INCLUDING ROCK AND STONE USED AS AGGREGATE) GENERAL PERMIT IN COLORADO RATIONALE COLORADO DISCHARGE PERMIT NUMBER: COG -500000 Update This is for renewal of the general sand and gravel permit issued October 28, 1982. The General Permit system for regulating sand and gravel production operations has worked well for the State of Colorado. However, there are a few changes which have been made in the permit that should be highlighted in this rationale. Most of the conditions of the previous rationale are still applicable, a copy is attached for reference. A. Settling Agents Any chemical added to the discharge must be granted prior approval by the permitting authority. This includes the use of lime or alum, which are no longer granted prior approval. B. Part II: Management Requirements and Responsibilities There have been numerous changes to Part II of the permit. These changes were made to consolidate the language of the permit, as well as reflect the 1983 and 1985 amendments to the Water Quality Control Act. We would suggest that each individual permittee read this section, and the entire permit carefully. Special attention should be paid to Part II.A.14, Signatory Requirements. The last paragraph of Part II.A.14 requires the permittee to file a statement within 60 days of certification indicating the name of the person or persons who are designated to report conditions of noncompliance (Part II.A.3). Reporting There have been several occasions where individual permittees have not properly followed the Noncompliance Notification Requirements listed under Part II..A. 3. The permittees should note that any exceedance of the maximum discharge limitations or standards specified in the permit requires the permittee to submit written notification to the State (WQCD) and EPA within 5 days ofbecoming aware of the exceedance. I COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Water Quality Control Division Rationale - Page 2. Permit No. COG -500000 Reporting Ccontinued) The permittees should also be aware of circumstances that 24 hour verbal reporting, followed by written reports. Reauthorization Part I.A.2(i) of the permit specifies under this general permit will expire permittee desiring continued coverage would require that authorization to discharge on September 30, 1992. Any must re -apply by April 1, 1992. Maureen Dudley January 16, 1987 Phosphorus Due to comments received during public notice, the Division has determined that any point source sand and gravel discharge into the Cherry Creek Basin or into stream segments impacting the Chatfield Reservoir, must obtain an individual discharge permit. This determination is based on controls established (or in the process of being established) to maintain the phosphorus standard in Cherry Creek Reservoir and Chatfield Reservoir. This restriction has been incorporated into the permit on page 2. The management plan for maintaining the phosphorus standard in the Dillon Reservoir, recommends total phosphorus monitoring for minor industrial discharges which include gravel pits. Therefore, phosphorus monitoring has been added to the general permit for those facilities which discharge in the Dillon Reservoir drainage. The individual certifications shall note whether or not the site is governed by the monitoring requirement. If the monitoring shows a significant contribution the permittee may be required to obtain an individual permit. This requirement has been added to page 5 of the permit. Maureen Dudley May 13, 1987 SAND AND GRAVEL PRODUCTION OPERATIONS (INCLUDING ROCK AND STONE USED AS AGGREGATE) GENERAL PERMIT IN COLORADO RATIONALE COLORADO DISCHARGE PERMIT NUMBER: COG -500000 Sand and gravel production is the largest nonfuel mineral industry in the United States and is closely associated with the construction industry, Which consumes over 90% of the sand and gravel output. Sand and gravel production operations are subject to the requirements of 25-8-101 et. seq., 1973 as amended. Regulations for the Colorado Discharge Permit System, 5 CCR 102-2 and Title 40 -Part 436 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 436) specify the wastewater discharge requirements for this industry. Section 6.10.2 of the Colorado Discharge Permit System regulations provides for the issuance of General Permits where covered facilities: 1. are within prescribed geographic boundaries; 2. involve substantially the same type of operating conditions; 3. discharge the same type of waste; 4. require the same effluent limitations or operating conditions; 5. require similar monitoring; and, 6. are more appropriately controlled under a General Permit than individual permits. The issuance of a General Permit for sand and gravel production operations is intended to simplify the regulatory program to make it more manageable and effective and to promote a consistent permitting and enforcement posture With respect to these operations. However, it is also for applicability for the normal facility and is not intended to apply to an abnormal operation which will require an individual permit. INDUSTRY DESCRIPTION Typically, the extraction of the raw material, sand and gravel, is via front-end loader, power shovel, or scraper. The extraction process may involve removal of the overburden and/or pit dewatering operations. Mine water pumpouc may occur during periods of rainfall or when the groundwater level reaches a predetermined height in a pit or low -area. Once the raw material is extracted, the methods of processing are similar for all sand and gravel operations in Colorado. Generally, process. operations include sand and gravel separation, screening, crushing, sizing, and stockpiling. Washing of the aggregate generates additional waste waters. In most cases, where practiced, mine pumpout wastewater contributes the largest volume of generated wastewater. Incidental water uses may include non -contact cooling water for crusher bearings and water for dust suppression. This latter water either remains with the product or evaporates. Coverage Under This Permit Under this general permit, owners and operators of sand and gravel (including rock and stone used as aggregate) excavation and processing operations may be granted authorization to discharge treated process generated wastewaters into waters of the State of Colorado. Process generated wastewaters include the following: 1. wash waters: 2. transport waters; 3. scrubber waters (crusher or classifiers); 4. mine dewatering (groundwater and/or runoff); and, 5. other process waters as determined by the Director; _ This permit does not constitute authorization under the provisions of 33 U.S.C. 1344 (Section 404 of the Clean Water Act), of any scream dredging or filling operations. Authorization under the permit shall require prior submittal of certain facility information. Upon receipt of all the required information, the per is issuing authority may allow or disallow coverage under the general permit. The following list shows the criteria under which an individual permit nay be required instead of a general permit. 1. Proximity of the operation to a landfill or mine and mill tailings; 2. Evidence of non-compliance under a previous permit for the operation; 3. Presence of downstream drinking water intakes; 4. Preservation of high quality water; 5. Production of effluent at the facility not covered under 1 through 5 above under process waters. 6. Addition of flocculants (settling agents or chemical additives) co water prior to discharge. 7. The use of land application as a means of discharge. 2 Duration of This Permit This general permit is issued for a period of approximately 5 years. The permittee's authority to discharge under this permit is approved until the expiration date of the general permit. Application For Renewal of Authority Under This Permit 180 days prior to the expiration of this general permit, the permittee must submit a renewal application for authority to continue the discharge. Prior to the expiration of this permit, each permittee under the permit must submit an application so that the Division can determine whether the discharge and operations still comply with the terms of the permit, or an individual permit should be written and issued. Regardless of when a permit applicant applied for and received certification under this general permit, he must re -apply for continued authority prior to the permit expiration date. Permit Rationale The owner, operator and/or authorized agent for a facility shall submit an application as provided by the Water Quality Control Division. This application will be evaluated utilizing the criteria outlined previously. If the general permit is applicable to the applicant's operation, then a rationale will be developed and the applicant will be certified under the general permit. The rationale shall include the name and address of the contact person, a discussion of compliance under the previous permit, if applicable, the receiving water for the discharge, nuaber of discharge points, a determination of the need for salinity monitoring and the expiration date of the general permit certification for the specific facility. If after evaluation of the application, it is found that the general permit is not applicable to the operation, then the application will be processed as an individual permit. For an individual permit, 180 days will be required to process the application and issue the permit. In this case discharge cannot take place until the permit is issued and becomes effective. The general permit itself will contain the effluent limitations and the monitoring requirements for the permitted discharge points. The following text details the rationale for the conditions of the general permit. Effluent Limitations The following table presents a comparison of effluent limitations based upon Best Practicable Control Technology (BPT) 40 CFR 436 Subparts B and C, State Effluent Standards (SES) and Water Quality Standards (WQS): Total Suspended Solids, mg/1 Oil and Grease, mg/1 pH, s.u. Salinity BPT 6.0-9.0 SES 30/45 10 6.0-9.0 6.5-9.0 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) BPT guidelines previously contained limitations of 25/45 mg/1 for the 30 day average and daily maximum respectively. However, these limitations have been remanded and presently no technology based limitations exist. Numerous permits have been written with the 25/45 limitations and compliance with the limitations has not been a problem. In most cases settling alone is sufficient to provide compliance, although the practice of adding settling agents is also practiced and has proven to be very successful, yet economical. The SES limitation is specified in 10.1.4, the 30/45 as the 30 day average and 7 day average respectively. As previously discussed a well run operation should have little problems complying with these limitations, however the enforcement cost to the state can be significant in obtaining 3 samples in 7 days or 30 days, which is necessary to demonstrate a violation. Therefore, a 60 mg/1 limitation as a daily maximum will also be required. The monitoring frequency for TSS shall be monthly. This is adequate to protect water quality as properly run operations should have no problem in complying with the limitation. 011 and Grease The state effluent standard of 10 mg/1 is applicable to all discharges into state waters unless superceded by a technology based limitation. Compliance with this limitation is normally demonstrated by a visual inspection of the discharge for an oil sheen. Conditions of noncompliance have been very infrequent, and should problems occur they will very likely be the result of poor operation or vandalism. The monitoring frequency for this paramecer in the permit will be weekly and a visual analysis will be sufficient. Such a frequency is warranted as a check on operating conditions. The pH range of 6.5-9.0 for WQS, is the effluent limitation appropriate for this permit. Though some stream segments in the state have a WQS of 6.0-9.0, a sufficient number of streams have the more stringent limitation of 6.5-9.0 thus warranting imposition of this limitation. Waters normally encountered in sand and gravel operations are at a pH of 7.0-8.0, this is substantiated by data submitted in self monitoring reports for existing permits. Natural groundwaters in a few locations in the state will noc be within these limits and a facility at such a location will very likely be considered an abnormal operation and therefore required to obtain an individual permit. The monitoring frequency will be monthly for pH, the basis being to track potential impacts of internal or external activities. An example of an external activity of concern is a landfill, of which many exist in the area of mining activities around the large municipalities. It is felt chat the impacts of such activities would be detected with monthly monitoring. Such monitoring is noc excessive as a quality pH meter can be obtained for under 3100 and calibration plus monitoring can be accomplished in less than 10 minutes. Salinity Regulation 3.10.0, Regulations for Implementation of the Colorado River Salinity Standards Through the Colorado Discharge Permit Program, addresses the discharge of salinity to the Colorado River Basin. ' It is a requirement of the regulation that the salinity of each discharge in the Colorado River Basin be evaluated for impact on the system. Generally, the nec impact on salinity to the basin from the sand and gravel production is negligible because the waters are typically shallow groundwaters which eventually reach the river. Nonetheless, the state reserves the right to refuse the applicability under the general discharge permit of any sand and gravel operation, if it appears that the discharge will not be consistent with regulations. Additionally, quarterly monitoring for salinity will be a permit requirement for all facilities located in the Colorado River Basin. Should the data identify a problem the state will have the right to require the facility to obtain an individual permit, whereby a study addressing the economic feasibility of salt removal can be required. Spill Prevention As most facilities provide bulk storage of some volume of petroleum products or other chemicals, the permit will require adequate protection of such facilities so as to prevent loss of these materials into discharged waters. Such protection can take various forms, however diking in most cases will prove to be the most cost effective. This provision is required as the Division interprets proper operation, as properly addressing potential pollutant sources before problems occur. Settling Agents Because of the widevariety of available chemical flocculants, the use of such settling aids must be subject to prior approval by the permitting authority. However, since lime and alum are the most frequently used aids for settling and typically their use results in no significant effect on ocher pollutant parameters, permission for such use will noc•be required. No specific limitations on the approved flocculant agents has historically been necessary to assure their proper use. If over application of a flocculant appears to be a problem, revocation of the general permit discharge authority may be warranted. Runoff BPT as specified in 40 CFR 436 Subparts B and C provides that any overflow from facilities designed, constructed and maintained to contain or treat the volume of wastewater which would result from a 10 year 24-hour precipitation event shall not be subject to technology based effluent limitations. However, limitations imposed in this permit are not technology based effluent limitations and thus this provision -does not apply. Additionally, 10.1.3 (1) exempts storm runoff waters from application of SES. These facts tend to create an enforcement problem and potentially allow degradation of water quality. Therefore, after consideration of the facts, the permit will contain the runoff provision as specified in 40 CFR 436, even though the permit effluent limitations are not technology based. This approach will be in general agreement with federal requirements and should present no special problems for facilities as most facilities will have sizeable retention areas within the pits. Reporting Reports will be required both annually and in cases of noncompliance with permit conditions. The permittee will, however, be required to maintain its records for a period of three (3) years. Such records will be subject to inspection by the State of Colorado and/or EPA. Marshall Fischer - EPA Region VIII Robert Shukle - Colorado Dept. of Health Permit No. COG -500000 Facility No.:COG-500227 CDPS GENERAL PERMIT FOR SAND AND GRAVEL MINING AND PROCESSING AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE COLORADO DISCHARGE PERMIT SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act (25-8-101 et. seq. CRS, 1973 as amended), operations engaged in mining and processing of sand and gravel (including rock and stone used as aggregate), are authorized to discharge from approved locations throughout the State of Colorado to specified waters of the state. Such discharges shall be in accordance with the conditions of this permit. This permit specifically authorizes the Roaring Fork Sand and Gravel, Inc. to discharge from facilities identified as the Powers' Pit. Located in the SW 1/4 and the SE 1/4 of Section 26, T7S, R88W. At 14156 Highway 82, Carbondale, Colorado. Garfield County. to the Roaring Fork River. as of this date July 21, 1992 This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight, September 30, 1992 Signed this 10 day of June, 1987 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Paul Ferraro, Director Water Quality Control Division This facility permit contains 22 pages. CERTIFIED LETTER NO P'"'9 ya333 DATE SIGNED 7/,///9',- EFFECTIVE /ii/tel',EFFECTIVE DATE PERMIT COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Water Quality Control Division Rationale - Page 3 Permit No. COG -500227 IV. FACILITY DESCRIPTION (Continued): The washwater system at the wash plant uses a flocculent that is introduced into the tail water. The water then passes through a water wheel used to remove large amounts of sediment. Sediment is removed from the screens and deposited on a conveyer belt for transport to a stockpile. The fines from the washing process are mixed with masonry sand. The discharge from the settling ponds is pumped to adjacent pasture land, the tailwater is intercepted and maintained on site by two catch basins. Stormwater runoff is limited to the disturbed areas of the mining operation. The pit floor is being excavated in a concave configuration to capture and isolate runoff. There is no discharge at the present time. Water that infiltrates the gravel floor will be pumped.to the settling pond system and then discharged to the adjacent pasture land that ranges from 41 to 79 acres. There is no proposed water treatment at this time for this facility. The facility is not located within one mile of a landfill or any mine or mill tailings. V. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT: The permittee is encouraged to read the general rationale for an understanding of how this permit was developed and read the permit to see what requirements exist. In the permit, effluent limitations and monitoring/reporting requirements are specified in Parts I.B. and I.C; special notification requirements fcr effluent violations are addressed in Part II.A. Salinity (TDS) monitoring of the discharge will be required. Although there is fuel storage in the project area, a Materials Containment Plan will not be required. However, diking should be performed as discussed in.page 5 of the previous general rationale and in Part I.B.7 of the permit. This general permit expires on September 30, 1992; therefore, the Roaring Fork Sand and Gravel, Inc. should be aware that another application will need to be submitted in the very near future. Based upon the above information, the Powers Pit facility is certified to discharge under the general permit for sand and gravel operations, identified as permit number COG -500000. All correspondence relative to this facility should reference the specific facility number COG -500227. Robert Cribbs July 10, 1992 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Water Quality Control Division Rationale - Page 2 Permit No. COG -500227 III. RECEIVING STREAM: A. Identification, Classification and Standards 1. Identification: The discharge goes to the Roaring Fork River, Segment 3, Roaring Fork River sub -basin, Upper Colorado River basin. 2. Classification and Antidegradation Review: Segment 3 is classified for the following uses: High Quality Class 2; Recreation, Class 1; Aquatic Life, Class 1 (Cold); Agriculture; Water Supply. An antidegradation evaluation was done by the Division on July 10 1992. The Division determined that the antidegradation presumption was overcome because the dilution ratio is greater than 100 to 1. Thus, a further antidegration review was not necessary for this facility. 3. Numeric Standards: The complete list of standards for segment 3 which have been assigned in accordance with the above classifications can be found in 3.3.0 Classifications and Numeric Standards for the Upper Colorado River Basin (5 CCR 1002-8), as amended September 9, 1991. B. Receiving Water Data 1. Stream Low Flow: Not applicable; effluent limitations are not flow based. IV. FACILITY DESCRIPTION: A. Industry Description: The Powers Pit, is a open pit gravel extraction operation. The operation will include extraction of sand and gravel materials, with subsequent crushing, screening, and washing of a portion of the aggregate for the manufacture of concrete. Mining and aggregate sizing occurs year-round; washing of gravel is done as needed. Discharge associated with the operation will include pit dewatering of groundwater and stormwater. Discharge flow will be measured by pump capacity. The water from the washing system flows to a settling pond for suspended solids removal. Polymer is added to the wash water for better settling. The permittee has submitted to the Division a Materials Data Safety Data Sheet for the flocculent used. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OFAHEALTH ROY ROMER Governor PATRICIA A. NOLAN, MD, MPH Executive Director 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220-3716 Phone (303) 320-8333 Telefax Number,: Main Building, Denver (303) 322-9076 Ptarmigan Place, Denver (303) 320-1529 First National Bank Building, Denver (303) 355-6559 Grand !unction Office (303) 248-7198 Pueblo Office (719) 543-8441 July 21, 1992 Richard Stephenson, President Roaring Fork Sand and Gravel, Inc. P.O. Box 1220 Carbondale, CO 81623 rfil ;� 7 \.fir _i id I J ;J.' � f�' � I j rl JUL 2 8 1992 GARFIELD CUUN i Y CERTIFIED MAIL NO: P 860 423 336 RE: Final Permit, Colorado Wastewater Discharge Permit System Number: CO -G-500227 - ROARING FORK SAND AND GRAVEL, INC. Gentlemen: Enclosed please find a copy of the permit which was issued under the Coiorado Water Quality Control Act. Your discharge permit requires that specific actions be performed at designated times. You are legally obligated to comply with all terms and conditions of your permit. It is especially important to note the "ErrLCTIVE DATE OF PERMIT", not the "DATE SIGNED", located in the lower right hand corner of page 1, of your permit. It is illegal to discharge per the conditions of this permit until that date. Please read the permit and if you have any questions contact this office at 331-4590. Sincerely, AeOL 614/(x Robert J. Shukle, Chief Permits and Enforcement Section Water Quality Control Division cc: Permits Section, Environmental Protection Agency Regional Council of Government Local County Health Department District Engineer, Field Support Section, WQCD Derald Lang, Field Support Section, WQCD Ginny Torrez/Anne Ihlenfeldt, Permits and Enforcement Section, WQCD Permit Drafters, Permits and Enforcement Section, WQCD RJS/lg Enclosure COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Water Quality Control Division 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220 T CERTIFICATION SAND AND GRAVEL OPERATIONS GENERAL PERMIT ROARING FORK SAND AND GRAVEL, INC. ?OWERS PIT FACILITY NUMBER: .COG -500227, GARFIELD COUNTY TYPE OF PERMIT: II. FACILITY INFORMATION: A. Facility Type and Fee Category: B. SIC No.: C. Legal Contact: D. Owner Contact: E. Facility Location: F. Discharge Point: G. Facility Flows: Industrial - New (General Sand and Gravel) Category 07, Subcategory 1 - General Permits: Sand and Gravel - Current fee $232/year per CRS 25-8-502 1442 Richard Stephenson (President) Roaring Fork Sand and Gravel, Inc. P.O. Box 1220 14156 Highway 62 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 (303)+963-3516 John G. Powers (Landowner) Route 1, 13114 Highway 82 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 (303)+963-3516 In the SW 1/4 and the SE 1/4 of Section 26, T7S, R88W. At 14156 Highway 82, Carbondale, Colorado. Garfield County. Discharge point 001 - discharge from the settling ponds to irrigated pasture drainage system, the drainage in this area and pasture land flows to tributary waters of the Roaring Fork River. Discharge point 001 - discharge flow rates are anticipated to be an average of 600 gpm or 0.864 MGD. The settling ponds that receive wash water from the plant have an approximate volume of 3'.9 Acre Feet. The settling basin at the pit floor has an approximate volume of 3.4 Acre Feet. 0 GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT March 21, 1988 Mr. John G. Powers c/o Gerald D. Hartert 811 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Powers Gravel Pit Dear Mr. Powers: On Monday, March 21, 1988, the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners verified that your property located in part of Lots 10, 11, and 12, Section 26, T7S, R88W, of the 6th P.M., and located northerly of State Highway 82, has a valid, continuing non -conforming gravel quarrying operation presently located on the property. As such, the gravel quarrying operation described in Mr. Hartert's letter of February 11, 1988, is in compliance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended. If you need any additional information or have other concerns, feel free to call or write to this office at your convenience. Sincerely, Mark L. Bean Director Building, Sanitation & Planning MLB/ljb 109 8TH STREET, SUITE 303 945-8212 / 625-5571 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 TELEPHONE 303-945-8571 • • GERALD D. HARTERT o¢ttotncy at Jaw 811 BLAKE AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 February 23, 1988 Mr. Mark Bean Director Community Development Garfield County Courthouse 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Powers Gravel Pit Dear Mr. Bean: C C7-• (-,11��ci,, FEB 24 1988 GAM' i LLD COUNTY Enclosed is a letter which I have addressed to the Board of County Commissioners in behalf of Mr. John G. Powers, the owner of the referenced property. We would appreciate it if you could secure a place on the Commissioner's agenda for the regular meeting on March 7, 1988, at which time and place we wish to be present to present any information which may be helpful to the board in responding to the request set forth in the enclosed letter. Also, I would appreciate it if you would advise me in advance of the meeting if there is any particular information or data which would be helpful to the Board. Thank you for your assistance. Yours Very Truly, Gerald D. Hartert GDH/vs Enclosure TELEPHONE 303-945-8571 • • GERALD D. HARTERT c4ttotnty at law 811 BLAKE AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 February 22, 1988 Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado Garfield County Courthouse 109 8th Street, Suite 300 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Gentlemen: I represent John G. Powers who is the owner of real property located in Garfield County and described below. The purpose of this letter is to request the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, to indicate their affirmation that the gravel quarrying activity described below is a valid, continuing, non -conforming use under the Zoning Regulation of Garfield County, Colorado. This affirmation is necessary to obtain approval for the quarrying operation from the Mined Land Reclamation Board. The quarrying activity involved has been carried on on a portion of a 440 acre ranch located on State Highway 82 approximately one mile east of its intersection with State Highway 133. The legal description of the property on which the quarrying operation is located is: That part of Lots 10, 1 1 , and 12, Section 26, Tp. 7 S., R. 88 W., 6th P.M. located northerly of State Highway No. 82 The quarrying operation began at least 30 years ago, and has been carried on continuously since such time by either the property owner or various lessees of the gravel quarry, including the Colorado Department of Highways. In addition to the quarrying activity, a portion of the real property involved has since 1980 been used for a concrete batch plant and gravel washing facility under a special use permit granted by Garfield County, Colorado as Resolution No. 80-58. Since the inception of his ownership in 1968, it has been the intention of the owner of the property to continue to quarry gravel at this location to what may be described as the natural extent of the gravel deposit, subject to topographical and other constraints and to cease quarrying operations when the pit was extended to limits optimum insofar as providing an opportunity for esthetically attractive site rehabilitation. r 1 • Board of County Commissioners February 22, 1988 Page 2 We would also add that the continuation of the quarrying activity will be at the same approximate rate of extraction and processing as in the past years and that such continuation will not result in increased impacts in terms of traffic volume, dust generation and similar effects related to this type of activity. We would therefore appreciate your confirmation of the legality of this continuation of a non -conforming use under the provisions of the Zoning Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado. GDH/vs Yours Very Truly, rald D. Hartert