REV06832 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

March 30, 2006 Mr. Byron Walker Re: Hayden Gulch Loadout, Permit C-92-081 Responses to Midterm Permit Comments Page /3 vegetative cover between the water pipeline corridor and the adjacent landscape. Furthermore, Division compliance inspections have never noted any signs of erosion along the corridor. However, to satisfy the Division's request, an SAE demonstration has been completed that shows any erosion from the corridor as a result of a 10-year, 24-hour storm event would be less than the applicable water quality standard. The SAE demonstration needs to be inserted into the PAP in accordance with the accompanying insertion instructions. Rude 4.05.13(1) Item 33. The Division has not determined that a point of compliance is appropriate to this permit. A monitoring well, HGDAL4, was to be set during 2005 (PAP, Tab 7, Appendix 7-2, page 7-2.5; page 10 of Tab 13). In review, the Division has determined that a point of compliance may be appropriate to existing conditions at the site, as well as for approved TR 6 retrofit and operations. Thus delay of the installation ofmonitoring well HGDAL4 and ground water monitoring until commencement of permitted coal transfer operations is not appropriate. Please proceed with the installation of monitoring well HGDAL4 and initiate the corresponding monitoring program. Response: HGTI installed monitoring well HGDAL4 during November, 2005. The completion report has been included with this response package and should be inserted into the permit application package as Attachment 7-4 in accordance with the accompanying insertion instructions. A water quality sample was collected on December 2, 2005 and analyzed for the parameter list presented in Tab 13. Laboratory results for this sampling event will be submitted to CDMG in the 2005 Annual Hydrology Report. Rule 4.15.9 Item 34. There is an incorrect reference to Tab 18 of page Il of Tab 20 with regard to revegetation success. Please correct this reference. The reference to Exhibit 18-1 is correct. Response: Page 11 of Tab 20 has been corrected as requested Rule 4.18 Item 35. Rule 4.18(1) requires the use of best technology currently available to minimiae disturbances and adverse impacts on (in part) wildlife. The PAP cites (page 3, Tab 21) an outdated reference. Current guidelines include the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee and the US Fish and Wildlife Service related national Avian Protection Plan Guidelines (Suggested Practices for Avian Protection on Power Lines; State of the Area in 2005. " Rule 4.18(4) requires raptor protection on existing, as well as proposed new, electric lines. Please revise the PAP accordingly. Response: The reference the Division cites in this comment was the best technology currently available when the PAP was originally submitted. HGTI has revised the page to cite the most recent Avian Protection Plan (APP) Guidelines, a voluntary guidance document developed in cooperation Hydro-Environmental Solutions, Inc. P.O.Bax772996 57 /0'~ Street, Suite B Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 (970) 871-6125