Laserfiche WebLink
Please amend the section narrative for clarity, and to incorporate the TR-16 <br />proposed disturbances. <br />49. The fencing plan described on permit page 3-16 is not entirely clear, and may <br />need to be amended to ensure protection from livestock grazing for the entire <br />reclaimed area, including the proposed additional disturbances associated with <br />TR-16. <br />Please amend the plan as warranted, and depict new fence to be constructed, <br />as well as existing fence to be rehabilitated, on amended Exhibit 3.1-1. The <br />same BLM fencing specifications used for the recent Munger Canyon <br />reclamation project are recommended. <br />Rule 2.05.6(1) Air Pollution Control Plan <br />50. Permit section 4.7-1 "Air Quality Plan" has not been amended to address <br />measures that will be taken in association with TR-16 proposed coal mine waste <br />disposal and associated facilities. <br />Please update permit section 4.7-1 to incorporate measures associated with <br />TR-16 proposed activities and demonstrate compliance with 2.05.6(1). In <br />addition, submit any necessary new air quality permits, permit <br />modifications, or applications for such required permits or modifications, for <br />inclusion in Appendix E. <br />Rule 2.05.6(2) Fish and Wildlife Plan <br />51. Please refer to the enclosed comment letter from the Office of Surface Mining <br />Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM). OSM has identified Threatened and <br />Endangered Species related concerns with regard to increased pond evaporative <br />losses associated with the proposed new sediment pond, and possible impact of <br />proposed new disturbance on the threatened Uinta Basin hookless cactus <br />(Sclerocactus glaucus). <br />Please address these concerns and provide a response and updated Appendix <br />"P" Water Consumption Estimate (if necessary) as soon as possible, to allow <br />OSM to initiate formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service <br />(USFWS) if they determine such consultation is warranted. <br />52. Please refer to the enclosed comment letter from the Colorado Division of <br />Wildlife (DOW). DOW's concerns focused on water quality impacts to East Salt <br />Creek, and possible hazards to wildlife associated with the proposed sediment <br />pond. <br />15