Laserfiche WebLink
Final Compensatory Mitigation and Monitoring Plan—Version 2.0 <br />Climax Mine Overburden Storage Facility Expansion (SPK-2013-00045) <br />March 2017 Bikis Water Consultants, a division of SGM Page 6 <br />4.0 SITE SELECTION CRITERIA <br />As described in the Compensatory Mitigation Proposal, several options were evaluated for <br />providing mitigation to offset losses from the proposed project, including: use of the Western <br />Slope ILF Program, CRCR mitigation bank, local mitigation projects in Summit County, and <br />providing permittee-responsible mitigation on Climax property. <br />The following site selection criteria were used to evaluate potential wetland mitigation options: <br />1. Adequate size. A relatively large amount of mitigation is needed (at least 36 acres). <br />2. Availability. Portions of the total mitigation may be needed as early as summer of 2018 <br />to meet the OSF expansion site preparation schedule. <br />3. Watershed approach. The mitigation needs to be located within the same watershed <br />upper Colorado River) and as close as possible to McNulty Gulch. <br />4. Wetland types. The mitigation needs to be able to provide types of mitigation to ensure <br />no net loss of wetland functions. <br />Based on the above criteria, the only option that is available for mitigation at this time is <br />permittee-responsible mitigation on Climax property. The following additional criteria were <br />developed for permittee-responsible mitigation: <br />5. Site has water sources and characteristics conducive to wetland creation. Ideally, both <br />perennial surface water and groundwater sources (including springs) are available. <br />6. The site does not interfere with current and future mine facilities. The wetlands need to <br />be a permanent and sustaining part of the landscape. <br />7. Wetlands and aquatic resources can be integrated into other natural habitats, to the <br />extent possible. The mitigation site should be located away from existing and future <br />disturbances to the extent possible. <br />It should be noted that the Climax property is essentially entirely surrounded by National Forest <br />land and it would be difficult to use National Forest land for wetlands mitigation (the subject of <br />the West Slope ILF), so that the search for sites was limited to Climax property. With the