My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL53802
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL53802
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:39:14 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 8:57:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999002
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
7/22/1999
Doc Name
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT VOLUME 1 CHAPTER 4 PAGES 1 THRU 50
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.
/
51
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
CRAPTERFOUR Responses to Public and I~lency Comments <br />Letter and • <br />Comment No. Response <br />F-2.19 The Agency Preferred Alternative incorporates mitigation measures to <br />protect water quality from spills and runoff. Refer to the :Pipeline Plan of <br />Development (Appendix E) for protection and monitorin@; measures for the <br />pipelines. The evaporation pond and MVR pond would be visually <br />inspected on a daily basis as discussed in Section 2.2.5.4 ~~f the Draft EIS. <br />Refer to the Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Plan (Appendix <br />G) for measures to prevent contamination and monitor w<der quality. The <br />ROD will also include conditions of approval to protect water quality from <br />spills and runoff. <br />F-2.20 Figures 2-1 a through 2-1 b of the Draft and Final EIS show the proposed <br />pipeline route. From these figures, it is appazent that alluvial aquifers most <br />likely impacted by a potential pipeline spill or leak include two crossings of <br />Piceance Creek, pipeline traverses along ephemeral streazns -Hatch Gulch, <br />Collins Gulch, a short traverse along Stewart Gulch, and :final traverse <br />south along the middle fork and main branch of Pazachute Creek. <br />Figure C-1 (modified) of the Final EIS provides locations of water wells <br />along the pipeline route. According to the Colorado Division of Water <br />Resources, the agency does not require submittal of water quality analyses <br />from well permittees. Therefore, acquiring groundwater quality data from <br />the public domain is problematic. The requirement to place monitoring <br />wells along the pipeline mute to establish water quality iri the alluvial <br />aquifers appeazs to be excessive since this has not typically been a <br />requirement of other pipeline companies proposing to traivsport more <br />hazardous substances through their pipelines (e.g., petroleum products) in <br />this region. <br />F-2.21 Refer to response to Comment F-2.20. Additionally, the Groundwater and <br />Surface Water Monitoring Plan presented in Appendix G, when <br />implemented, would provide baseline groundwater quality information at <br />the Piceance and Parachute sites prior to project start-up. <br />F-2.22 Refer to the Reclamation Plan (Appendix H) and Pipelinc: Plan of <br />Development (Appendix E) for specifics on soil erosion smd sediment <br />control measures to be implemented. These plans aze part of the Agency <br />Preferred Alternative. <br />F-2.23 The previous Soil Conservation, Erosion, and Sediment (:ontrol Plan has <br />been revised and is included (entire document) as Appendix H in the Final <br />EIS. A discussion of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is provided in <br />Section 3.3 of Appendix H, and descriptions of BMPs aze: provided in <br />Appendix A through E of Appendix H. BMPs would be selected and used <br />on asite-specific basis and would be tailored to meet the site-specific <br />requirements to which they are applied. <br />4-8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.