My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-05-17_REVISION - C1982056
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1982056
>
2016-05-17_REVISION - C1982056
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:22:06 PM
Creation date
5/17/2016 10:35:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
5/17/2016
Doc Name
Adequacy Response
From
Twetymiel Coal, LLC
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
MR296
Email Name
JLE
DIH
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.
/
6
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
2.05.6 Mitigation of Impacts <br />10. TC consulted tirith Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) regarding the proposed project. According to the e- <br />ntail sent to CPPV submitted with the application, the project will occur in the general area of nt,o Sharptail <br />Grouse Leks. Based on this consultation is appears that CPW and TC concur that mitigation techniques <br />include the construction of topsoil berms to Minimize noise and that artificial lighting will be minimized on site. <br />Please add a 9 East Utilii_l, Borehole section to section 2.05.6(2) of the permit and add a narrative specificalh, <br />citing these 1171t7gat1On Measures agreed upon with CPPV Please discuss the configuration of the topsoil <br />berm(s) and ensure the appropriate /hops submitted fOr the revision reflect the design and orientation Of the <br />topsoil bernl(s). <br />Response: Given that there are identified sharp -tailed grouse leks in the general project area, TC met <br />with CPW representatives on-site to discuss the status of the leks, the nature and timing of the proposed <br />activities, and any appropriate mitigation measures. The CPW representatives (Andrea Sponseller and Jeff <br />Yoast) indicated that, based on their field observations, the birds on the closest lek may have moved to <br />another location which is further away from the project site. They also indicated that sharp -tailed grouse <br />are much more tolerant of activity than sage grouse. Given that the proposed activities are close to an <br />existing road (18 -Right Vent Shaft Road) and the distances to lek sites, they have limited concerns with <br />the proposed activities. They noted that lighting and noise could be general concerns for birds in the area, <br />and we discussed options for minimizing the potential impacts. <br />We discussed that other than the temporary construction and drilling activities (not identified as a <br />concern), the exhausters would be the primary noise source, and these would be fitted with silencers so <br />that noise levels at the exhausters would be on the order of 60 dBa. Given the distance to lek sites and <br />distance -related noise attenuation, these noise levels should not be a problem. It was noted that if during <br />actual operation, noise was identified (by CPW) as a problem, dirt berms or other measures could be used <br />to further attenuate the noise. Given that no permanent structures will exist on the site, there will not be <br />permanent lighting, so light mitigation should not be an issue. TC has, for remote installations, used <br />down -cast lighting and light sensors, which turn the lights on only when there is activity on site, to <br />address similar concerns. CPW is comfortable with the cooperative approach of coordinating with TC as <br />activities proceed to address any concerns that may develop, as indicated by their consultation letter and <br />the text discussion provided in Section 2.05.6(2). <br />Map 2.4 <br />11. TC proposes to revise N1c1p 2-1 (Sheet 4). The n7ap image is shifted east f oin the map currenth, approved and <br />tills it cuts off portions of the main facilities area, the 18LT Vent Shaft site, The Fish Creek Borehole site, 15LT <br />Borehole and the 16L Borehole. Please either revise the map to depict these features or submit additional <br />maps that cover these areas. <br />Response: The Map 24 sheet provided with the MR16-296 submittal shows the proposed 9 -East Utility <br />Borehole facilities, and includes other mine facilities, roads, and features to provide a reference relative to <br />location. In discussions with the Division, it is recognized that changes in the coverage for the Map 24 <br />sheets may cause problems with map continuity. TC proposes to address these problems by creating a <br />standardized map set for Map 24, with fixed coverage and overlap for the individual map sheets as part of <br />the currently pending Permit Mid -Term Review. <br />Map 23c and 29 <br />12. Please submit an updated Map 23c and Map 29 that depict the MR296 proposed disturbance. <br />Response: Maps 23C and 29 have been updated to reflect the proposed MR16-296 activities. Copies of <br />the revised maps accompany these responses. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.