REV99944 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

recognition of the "ecological target" azgument and associated information set forth with respect to the existing sagebrush reference area, it appears that a relatively straightforward case could be made for designation of the existing sagebrush reference area as the sole reference area applicable to the South Taylor project area, pursuant to Rule 4.15.7(3)(b)(iii). This approach would acknowledge the practicability of reestablishment of a sagebrush grassland type community as a major component of the reclaimed landscape. In contrast, feasibility of reestablishment of mountain shrub and aspen woodland communities as major landscape components within bond release timeframes has not been demonstrated. Please give consideration to the 4.15.7(3)(b)(iii) approach for the South Taylor project area as discussed above, and provide appropriate text amendments if you concur with that approach. If you do not consider that approach to be appropriate for the South Taylor project area, please address how compliance with the "statistical demonstration of equivalence" requirement of 4.15.7(3)(b) is demonstrated for the South Taylor project area, in the application proposal. b) There is mention in revision text of limited cover and production sampling of the currently approved big sagebrush and mountain shrub reference areas in 2005, and sample means for 2005 cover and production in these reference areas are presented in Table 2.04.10-10 and Figures 2.04.10-7, 8, 9, and 10. However, summary tables for cover, species composition, and herbaceous production, and associated transect data tables are not provided for the 2005 mountain shrub and big sagebrush reference area samples. Please provide the summary tables and transect data tables for the 2005 big sagebrush and mountain shrub reference area samples, for inclusion in the application. c) Please clarify in the narrative on page R2-79, whether the various C-SRA reference area species and life form composition values listed are from the 2005 sample data, or another specified data set. Include reference to any additional data sets for the subject reference areas which are pertinent to the reference area justification section beginning on page R2-78 (mention is made that these reference areas have been sampled frequently in recent years). d) The "Colowyo CC Ref Area 2005" total ground cover sample mean of 63% indicated on Figure 2.04.10-9, for the mountain shrub reference area, appears to be in error. Other text and table references indicate a cover sample mean of 51.3% for the mountain shrub reference azea in 2005. Please amend the figure as appropriate. 35. Colowyo responses state that consideration will be given to a revised species diversity standard in the context of a comprehensive revegetation plan revision to be submitted for the Colowyo Mine, following approval of PR-2. Please include a specific commitment to submittal of such technical revision application within the appropriate narrative section(s) of the PR-2 application.