My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV01977
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV01977
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:59:32 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 8:57:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/29/1998
Doc Name
SENECA II-W MIDTERM REVIEW
From
DMG
To
MIKE BOULAY
Type & Sequence
MT3
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.
/
2
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
iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiii <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY RFG~~VED <br />Deparmiem of Natural Resources <br />1113 Sherman 51., Roum 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 JUN 2 9 1998 <br />Phone: (7071 R66 1567 <br />FAti: (3(131 832-H 106 Division of ~Ylmerals 6 Geology <br />DATE: June 23. 1998 <br />TO: Mike Boulay /~ <br />FROM: Dan Mathews ll~~[-~~-~ <br />RE: Seneca II-W Midterm Review <br />~~ <br />I~~~~ <br />DEPARTMEt~1T OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br />lames S. Lochhead <br />E ~ewiive Dnrclur <br />Michael B. LOnR <br />Division Director <br />I have reviewed various documents pertinent to the Seneca II-W mid-term review, with respect to <br />Soils, Vegetation, and Wildlife, as previously requested by Erica Crosby. Materials I reviewed <br />included applicable sections of the permit application package, revisions approved since approval <br />of the permit renewal in 1996 (TR-26, Stip 23 Response), the 1996 Renewal Findings, and '95. <br />'96, and `97 Annual Reclamation Reports and Revegetation Monitoring Reports. I have the <br />following questions and comments. <br />There appears to be a discrepancy between "seedmix 1", in the permit (revised 5/95), and <br />the seedmix listed in the annual reclamation reports. No explanation is provided in the <br />reports for why the approved mix was altered. In the permit application, Mix 1 contains <br />11 grasses, 8 forbs, and 4 shrubs, and permit narrative states that any substitutions will be <br />chosen from "adapted and desireable native species" listed in the baseline data species <br />list. Permit narrative further states that such changes would be noted in the ARR, and <br />indicates that "substitutions will only occur when availability of any of the listed species <br />is a problem." <br />The seedmix listed in the ARR's contains 12 grasses and 4 forbs, plus "supplemental" <br />species including 5 forbs and 6 shrubs. Species included in the ARR list which are not in <br />the approved pennit seedmix include the introduced grass, Russian wildrye, and the <br />introduced leguminous forb, cicer milkvetch. Two native grasses, slender wheatgrass and <br />basin wildrye, are seeded a[ lower rates than specified in the approved mix. One native <br />forb included in the approved seedmix (arrow leaf balsamroot) is not listed in the ARR <br />specified mixes. <br />These changes are not addressed or explained in the annual reports. Some explanation <br />should be provided, and the operator should ensure that the approved seedmix is used in <br />1998 and future seeding, unless the seedmix is amended through appropriate revision to <br />the permit. <br />2. Revgetation reporting and evaluation conducted by Peabody and included in the annual <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.