My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-04-22_REVISION - C1981019
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981019
>
2011-04-22_REVISION - C1981019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:32:47 PM
Creation date
4/26/2011 1:21:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
4/22/2011
Doc Name
2nd Adequacy Review Letter
From
DRMS
To
Colowyo Coal Company
Type & Sequence
PR3
Email Name
JHB
KAG
RDZ
TAK
MLT
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.
/
27
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
Colowyo, C1981-019, PR3 adequacy No. 2 25 April 22, 2011 <br />1. Page 33, last paragraph - Please explain in greater detail the method used to determine the <br />weighted reference areas and justify the results. <br />This item has been adequately resolved. <br />2. Page 33, footnote at bottom of page - The response provided by Colowyo does not address the <br />need for a comprehensive shrub establishment plan. The Division feels that it is not best <br />practice to wait several years for a seeded area to "evolve into a sagebrush steppe community" <br />or to let "Mother Nature... determine the plant community expressed..." as explained in <br />Colowyo's response to adequacy review. To meet the standards of Rule 4.15.8(7), the Division <br />suggests that Colowyo commit to fencing designated areas at the time of reclamation to <br />establishing a sagebrush steppe plant community to ensure successful shrub establishment. <br />Please submit a detailed shrub establishment plan (additional to the trial areas) that includes: <br />location of exclosures (include a map), size of the exclosure and plant community in the <br />exclosure. <br />3. Page 34, footnote at bottom of page - Many reasons have been given as rationale to lower the <br />herbaceous cover of reclaimed areas from 90% to 70% of the sagebrush reference area's cover. <br />Along with the given rationale, please provide additional documentation and/or data which <br />support the proposal that a 90% cover of sagebrush reference area is not acheivable within the <br />10 year bond period. <br />This item has been adequately resolved. <br />4.15.8 Revegetation Success Criteria <br />1. Page 38, last paragraph- Colowyo has proposed that the maximum proportion of countable <br />shrubs of fourwing saltbush be 20%. Please include an explanation in greater detail (including <br />documentation/data collected at Colowyo and other locations) that supports this proposed <br />standard. <br />This item has been adequately resolved. <br />2. Page 39, Diversity - The diversity standards proposed for the Collom Expansion Area are <br />different from the diversity standards in the Colowyo Mine. Please provide an explanation and <br />supporting evidence justifying the differences in diversity standards. <br />This item has been adequately resolved. <br />3. Page 29, in the discussion of Field Trials for tall shrub , please remove the sentence in this <br />paragraph describing the use of the information from these trials as "an avenue for relief of the <br />tall shrub establishment area expectations" from the permit. Should best management practices <br />demonstrate that establishment of tall shrubs is unobtainable when the approved techniques are
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.