Laserfiche WebLink
2.04.10. The Division further requested that the 4.15.8 narrative be amended to <br />incorporate the reference azea weighting percentage described in the adequacy letter <br />response for the original mine area and Lower Wilson project area. <br />The amended version of Section 4.15.8 still conflicts with amended Section 2.04.10 <br />regarding reference areas that will be used in demonstrations of revegetation success for <br />the permit revision area (e.g. reference to "new" Sagebrush reference area). The most <br />succinct solution might be to replace the second sentence of the first paragraph of 4.15.8 <br />Revegetation Success Criteria with "See Section 2.04.10 of Volume 12 regarding <br />vegetation reference azeas applicable to the South Taylor and Lower Wilson mine areas". <br />Please amend the application as appropriate. <br />South Taylor Area <br />30. The Division requested that Vegetation Maps 3 and 4A be amended to replace sample <br />locations from the 1999 Greystone study with sample locations from the 1985 Harper <br />study. The sample locations were properly amended, but the amended legend on both <br />maps erroneously cites Harper, 1995 Report. The correct citation is Harper, 1985 <br />Report. <br />Please amend the map legends as appropriate. <br />31. The Division requested clazification regarding reference area weighting percentages <br />based on projected disturbance acreage of the major community types. The response <br />clazified that, for the existing original operations, ground cover and production data will <br />be weighted 45% sagebrush and 55% mountain shrub, based on sampling of the CCC <br />1981 sagebrush reference area and CCC 1980 mountain shrub reference area. For Lower <br />Wilson operations, ground cover and production would be weighted 8% sagebrush and <br />92% mountain shrub (tentative due to preliminary disturbance acreage figures), and for <br />South Taylor, ground cover and production would be based 100% on the CCC 1981 <br />sagebrush reference area, used as a "targeted" reference area. <br />This response generally conforms with the text in amended Section 2.04.10 under <br />Justification for Reference Area Selection, but there aze minor discrepancies and <br />uncertainties for which we request clazification in the text. <br />First, narrative under Aspen Reference Area indicates that "Colowyo may use the <br />Aspen Reference Area...Please clarify that use of the aspen reference area is not <br />proposed at this time. Second, in the first paragraph under Sagebrush Reference <br />Area, text states that "Colowyo will likely use the C-SRA as the sole "tazgeted" <br />reference area for ground cover and production testing for all South Taylor disturbance <br />azeas...Please delete the word "likely", to eliminate the ambiguity. Also, our <br />understanding of "South Taylor disturbance areas", is that the term applies to the 1492 <br />acre azea depicted within the green "tie-in" boundary on Map 23A. Please confirm if <br />that is correct, and include reference to the map boundary for the area, to prevent <br />