GENERAL55787 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

repellency of contour plumage and the insulative value of down. These effects • could ultimately lead to debilitation and/or mortality of birds (BLM 1997x). The extremely low waterfowl use exhibited to date at the existing cooling/retention ponds suggests that very little use would be expected at the evaporation pond. The evaporation pond is substantially farther away from Piceance Creek and is at a higher elevation than the existing ponds, which may indicate an even lower potential for waterfowl use. In addition, few waterfowl may tend to use the Piceance Site evaporation pond because of its proximity to human activities and processing plant operations. Furthermore, it is likely that waterfowl will avoid the Piceance Site evaporation pond if they have an aversion to its high temperature and/or chemical conditions. Because the evaporation pond will not support typical aquatic plant and animal communities, birds would not likely be attracted to the ponds for long durations. The Parachute Site evaporation pond will be used to hold wastes from the cooling tower and boiler and discharge from the process water treatment plant. Solutions will enter the Parachute Site evaporation pond at a maximum input temperature of 75°F (Kvaerner 1998f). Inputs to the Parachute Site evaporation pond would be nearly 99 percent water, with ]ow concentrations of sodium bicarbonate, sodium carbonate, and other salts (Kvaerner 1998f). Solutions stored in the evaporation pond would be only slightly alkaline, with a pH of approximately 8 (Kvaerner 1998f). Conditions in the Parachute Site evaporation pond will be biologically benign, and no impacts to waterfowl or any other opportunistic users of the evaporation pond are anticipated. 8.7 WETLAND AND RIPARIAN HABITATS Wet meadow wetlands and some riparian habitats exist along Piceance Creek in the vicinity of the Piceance Site. The product and return water pipelines will be constructed under Piceance Creek in a location near the access road crossing. However, no wetlands or riparian habitats would be affected by these crossings of Piceance Creek. Furthermore, no other riparian habitat has developed at the Piceance Site along the ephemeral tributaries to Piceance Creek. Therefore, activities carried out at the Piceance Site under the commercial mine plan would have no impact on wetlands or riparian habitats. Protection of Piceance Creek riparian habitats in the delivery of natural gas and telephone services to the Piceance Site would be addressed in the permitting of these utilities. A second Piceance Creek pipeline crossing would occur in Section 32, T2S, R97W. Although no riparian habitat exists at this location, wetlands would be crossed. Impacts to wetlands would be mitigated by restoring the affected areas after the pipes are buried. The pipelines would also cross wet meadow wetlands in Stewart Gulch, approximately 3 miles southeast of the second Piceance Creek crossing. As with the • crossing of wetlands at Piceance Creek, impacts would be temporary and would be American Soda, L.L.P. 8-25 Commercial Mine Plan August ]8, 1998