My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2015-11-23_REVISION - C1981019
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981019
>
2015-11-23_REVISION - C1981019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:12:51 PM
Creation date
11/30/2015 9:15:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
11/23/2015
Doc Name
3rd Preliminary Adequacy Response Adequacy Items 1 to 86
From
Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
PR4
Email Name
ZTT
JRS
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Mr. Zach Trujillo <br />November 20, 2015 <br />Page 4 <br />ITEM 42. Please explain why some drainage areas on Map 41 B do not correspond to the topography <br />(e.g., the west side of Bear Draw). <br />Response: The area described in this comment is similar to the perimeter areas noted in Item 36. Please <br />refer to the response to Item 36. <br />ITEM 43. Response is adequate. <br />ITEM 44. Response is adequate. <br />ITEM 45. Exhibit 7, Item 23 describes the worst case scenario (the "maximum configuration of the <br />temporary spoil pile"), but it does not give any reasoning 3vhj this is the worst case hydrologic condition. <br />When looking at Map 29, Spoil Grading, it appears that in the year 2040 there will be a large amount of <br />graded area with no vegetation (CN = 85) near the bottom of the watershed, and also a large amount of <br />area near the bottom of the watershed that has only a year or two of vegetation growth. If a SEDCAD <br />analysis has been performed to illustrate that this scenario creates less runoff and sediment loading than <br />the selected worst case with the maximum configuration of the temporary spoil pile, it should be <br />described in the introductory text in the exhibit. <br />Response: Exhibit 7, Item 23, Part I has been created to address what Colowyo believes is the worst-case <br />hydrologic condition. <br />ITEM 46. In Rule 4 for Collom, on page 7, further clarification of the text is needed. In Section 4.05.13 <br />there is a sentence that reads, "All surface water and shallow groundwater monitoring data is submitted in <br />an annual report." This is not true (or is at least confusing) because Colowyo data for the NPDES permit <br />is not reported in AHRs. The Division recommends that the sentence be placed in another paragraph <br />(separated from the NPDES discussion) and be changed to the following: "In addition to the NPDES data, <br />monitoring data is collected for receiving waters (creeks listed below) and shallow groundwater; this data <br />is submitted each year in an annual report (the Annual Hydrology and Reclamation Report)." <br />Response: Section 4.05.13 — Surface and Groundwater Monitoring has been revised to make a clear <br />distinction between surface and groundwater monitoring reporting in the annual hydrology report, and <br />required CDPS quarterly reporting as required under the Clean Water Act. <br />ITEM 47. Response is adequate. <br />ITEM 48. The word "and" was not included after "Creek", and the first comma in the sentence is not <br />appropriate. Please further revise the sentence. <br />Response: The last sentence under Surface Water (Section 4.05.13) has been revisited, and it is <br />determined that the original language included in the application is clear and appropriate. The word <br />"and " was not added, and the first comma in the sentence will be retained. <br />AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER <br />A Touchstone Energy'Cooperative <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.