2011-06-21_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088

Home Browse Search

Corey Heaps CAM Colorado LLC June 21, 2011 Page 27 Division Response: The planned cumulative disturbance to the Irrigated Wetland type is 0.95 acres, as stated on page 12 of Exhibit 5. Given the very limited disturbance of this community type, it should be addressed under the heading "Description of Minor Predisturbance Area Vegetation Types" on page 14, rather than "Major Predisturbance Area Vegetation Types." PIease amend the text so the Irrigated Wetland type is listed in the "Description of Minor Predisturbance Area Vegetation Types." 34. There is a typographical error in the second paragraph under "Greasewood Vegetation Type" on page 15 of Exhibit 5; "1664" should be "1.664 ". Please correct the typo. CAM Response: Please see revised text on page 18 of Exhibit 5. "1664" has been changed to "1.664". Division Response: Response accepted. 35. The paragraph on page 16 of Exhibit 5 that states "disturbance corresponding to the Wetland ... will be reclaimed to the revegetation success standards for plant cover and total herbaceous forage production obtained from the Greasewood reference area ", would seem to more accurately be written as "disturbance ... will be included within the reclaimed area sample universe for comparison to the revegetation success standards... ". Please amend as warranted for clarity. CAM Response: Text has been revised appropriately, please see the last paragraph on page 19 of Exhibit 5. Division Response: Response accepted. 36. The initial paragraph under "Conclusions" on page 17 of Exhibit 5 is not clearly stated. The second sentence of the paragraph is jumbled and does not make sense. The third sentence could be clarified by stating that sample adequacy was achieved for total plant cover sampling in the greasewood affected and reference areas, and that minimum sample sizes as agreed upon with DRMS prior to sampling were achieved for herbaceous production and woody plant density in the greasewood affected and reference areas, and for all parameters in the wetland and riparian communities. The fourth sentence of the paragraph could be deleted. The one sentence second paragraph should be clarified to state that, due to the very minimal extent of proposed disturbance to the Wetland type (less than 0.5 acres cumulative), and absence of proposed disturbance to the Riparian type, herbaceous production and vegetation cover for all areas reclaimed to Fish and Wildlife habitat postmine land use will be sampled as a single unit for comparison to the Greasewood Reference area. Please revise the narrative for clarity. CAM Response: Please see the revised conclusion section as shown on page 20 of Exhibit 5.