EPA91WMS-011
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 1C
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Water Division
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon.
Washington
EPA-10-AK-Chuitna-NPDES-go
February 1990
Chuitna
Coal Project
Final Environmental Impact Statement
Volume II - Appendices
-------
Chapter 13.0
Index
-------
13.0 INDEX
ADF&G: (see Alaska Department of Fish & Game)
Access/haul road: S-2, 2-21, 2-23, 2-35, 2-40, 2-42, 2-43,
3-6, 3-13, 3-16, 3-17, 3-19, 3-20, 3-21, 5-3, 5-9, 5-78
through 5-84, 5-91 through 5-95, 5-101 through 5-121,
6-3, 10-8, 10-10, 10-11, 10-23, 10-37, 10-38,
10-39
Action alternatives: (see Alternatives)
Air quality: S-4, S-10, 2-47, 2-48, 3-20, 4-60, 4-65, 5-52
through 5-63, 5-100, 5-111, 5-112, 5-119, 5-126, 5-130,
5-135, 5-138, 6-12, 6-24, 10-2, 10-10, 10-11,
10-34, 10-35, 10-40, 10-41, 10-53, 10-56, 10-58
Airstrip: S-2, S-6, 2-30, 2-31, 2-37, 3-9, 3-23, 3-24, 3-25,
3-27, 3-36, 3-38, 3-39, 5-6, 5-9, 5-114 through 5-122,
6-3, 6-15, 10-35
Alaska Coastal Management Program: 1-10 through 1-13, 6-3,
6-11, 6-12, 10-28
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC): 1-11,
1-12, 1-13, 2-42, 5-31, 5-32, 5-62, 6-3, 6-11, 6-15,
7-5, 10-6, 10-7, 10-8, 10-20, 10-28, 10-29, 10-30,
10-31, 10-40, 10-43, 10-47, 10-53, 10-58
Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G): 1-11, 1-12, 1-13,
5-71, 6-3, 6-8, 6-9, 6-11, 6-12, 6-14, 6-15, 6-18, 6-23,
6-24, 7-5, 10-55, 10-56, 10-57
Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR): S-l, 1-4, 1-10
through 1-13, 2-42, 3-39, 4-3, 6-2, 6-5, 6-7, 6-8, 6-9,
6-11 through 6-14, 7-5, 7-6, 7-7, 10-50
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA): 4-1, 4-80
Alaska Range: S-4, 1-5, 4-4, 4-5, 4-58
Alaska Surface Coal Mining Control and Reclamation Act: S-l,
1-4, 1-5, 1-10, 1-11, 2-1, 6-1 through 6-10, 6-16, 6-17,
6-20 through 6-23, 10-2, 10-4, 10-5, 10-7, 10-15, 10-16,
10-22 through 10-27, 10-31, 10-37, 10-41, 10-42, 10-50,
10-51, 10-52
Alternatives: S-6, S-7, S-8, 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, 3-1 3-25 through
3-40, 5-1, ,10-12, 10-13
Ammonia nitrogen: 4-34, 5-34 through 5-39, 5-87, 5-88, 5-124,
5-125, 10-3, 10-46
13-1
-------
Anchorage: S-2, S-3, S-10, 1-5, 2-2, 2-45, 3-8, 3-23, 3-32,
4-53, 4-60, 4-65, 4-68, 4-70, 4-71, 4-79, 5-62, 5-64,
5-66, 5-100, 5-101, 5-112, 5-119, 5-126, 5-131, 5-135,
5-138, 7-1, 7-2, 10-1, 10-33, 10-53
Animal Crossings: S-2, S-10, 2-19, 2-21, 3-20, 5-83, 5-84,
5-107, 5-117, 6-17, 10-7, 10-8, 10-11, 10-12, 10-26
Animal feeding: 6-18
Animal-human interactions: 2-23, 2-27, 2-48, 3-10, 3-14,
5-11, 5-122, 5-123, 6-17, 6-18, 10-14, 10-57
Archeological sites: 4-92, 4-93, 5-78, 5-103, 5-114, 5-115,
5-121, 5-127, 5-128, 5-132, 5-136
Bald eagle: S-3, 3-16, 4-16, 5-12, 5-81, 5-82, 5-84, 5-106,
5-107, 5-117, 5-123, 5-129, 5-133, 6-18
Barges: 2-26, 2-27, 2-42, 2-44, 3-7, 3-32, 5-97, 5-111,
5-115, 10-43
Bass, Hunt, Wilson Group: 1-5
Bathymetry: 4-51, 4-52
Beaver: 4-21, 5-12, 5-48, 5-81, 5-89, 6-23
Beluga airstrip: 2-3, 3-3, 4-3, 4-14, 4-16
Beluga power station: S-3, 2-31, 3-3, 3-8, 3-16, 3-26, 4-1,
4-14, 4-60, 5-106, 5-115, 5-117, 5-136
Beluga Region: S-l, S-2, 1-4, 1-5, 4-1, 4-3, 4-4, 4-14, 5-1,
5-2, 5-64, 5-72, 5-104, 5-113, 5-115, 5-120, 5-128,
5-137, 10-36, 10-57
Beluga River: 1-5, 3-8, 4-3, 4-4, 4-14, 4-16, 4-17, 4-51,
4-57, 4-86, 5-105, 5-114, 5-121
Belukha whale: (see Marine mammals)
Benthic invertebrates: 4-40, 4-54, 5-98, 5-99
Beshta Bay: 5-99
Birds: (see Bald eagle, Ducks, Geese, Peregrine falcon,
Sandhill crane, Shorebirds, Songbirds, Trumpeter swan)
BLM: (see U.S. Bureau of Land Management)
Black Bear: S-3, S-10, 4-13, 4-17, 4-20, 4-22, 4-92, 5-10,
5-12 through 5-15, 5-82 through 5-85, 5-103, 5-114,
10-12, 10-57
13-2
-------
Blasting: 2-8, 2-40, 5-64, 5-84, 5-107, 5-117, 10-54
Bonding: 6-10
Borrow sites: 2-40, 2-42, 5-9, 5-84, 6-12, 10-7, 10-8
BOX CUt: 2-7, 2-13, 2-32
Bridges: 2-43
Brown bear: S-3, S-10, 3-31, 4-17, 4-19, 4-20, 4-22, 4-92,
5-10 through 5-15, 5-82 through 5-85, 5-107, 5-117,
5-122, 5-123, 10-12, 10-57
Causeway: 3-7, 3-10, 3-11
Chakachatna River: 4-3, 4-4, 4-5, 4-85, 4-86
Chugach Electric Association: S-3, 2-31, 3-25, 4-1, 4-79
Chugach Mountains: 4-58, 4-60
Chuit Creek: 4-16, 4-29, 4-47, 5-37, 10-49
Chuit Flats: 5-111
Chuitbuna Lake: 4-29, 4-48, 5-114, 5-118
Chuitna River: S-2, S-4, S-10, 1-5, 1-8, 2-15, 2-30, 3-3,
3-8, 3-21, 3-32, 3-36, 3-38, 4-3, 4-10, 4-11, 4-13,
4-14, 4-16, 4-17, 4-19, 4-20, 4-21, 4-23, 4-29 through
4-50, 4-55, 4-85, 4-86, 4-91, 4-92, 5-11, 5-21 through
5-26, 5-30, 5-39, 5-40, 5-42, 5-43, 5-48, 5-50, 5-51,
5-52, 5-75, 5-76, 5-77, 5-84, 5-94, 5-96, 5-102, 5-108,
5-110, 5-111, 5-113, 5-114, 5-115, 5-120, 5-124, 5-125,
5-127, 5-129, 5-130, 5-131, 5-132, 5-135, 5-136, 5-137,
5-144, 6-10, 6-11, 6-19, 6-20, 6-23, 10-7, 10-20, 10-29,
10-36, 10-44, 10-57
Clean Water Act: (see Section 404)
Clearing: 2-7, 2-40, 5-4, 5-75, 5-79, 5-80, 5-105, 5-116,
5-121, 5-122, 5-128, 10-42
Coal: 1-4, 1-5, 2-1, 2-2, 2-5, 2-7, 2-15, 2-19, 2-13, 2-25,
2-26, 2-27, 2-32, 2-44, 2-48, 3-6, 3-7, 3-10, 3-11,
3-17, 3-19, 3-21, 4-1, 4-3, 4-4, 4-23, 4-24, 4-25, 5-3,
5-4, 5-19, 5-80, 5-97, 5-139, 5-140, 6-20, 10-3, 10-6,
10-10, 10-36, 10-43, 10-49, 10-52
Coal-carbon dioxide slurry: 3-6, 3-10, 3-11
Coal-water slurry: 3-6, 3-10, 3-11, 10-54
13-3
-------
Coastal Zone Management: (see Alaska Coastal Management
Program)
Collection ditch: (see also Drainage and drainage control,
RlUlOff) 2-13, 2-15, 2-21
Commercial fisheries: S-4, S-5, S-10, 1-9, 3-10, 3-30, 3-32,
3-34, 3-35, 3-37, 3-38, 4-41, 4-54, 4-57, 4-58, 4-85,
5-76, 5-98, 5-99, 5-100, 5-111, 5-131, 5-135, 6-23,
6-24, 10-1, 10-48, 10-49, 10-56
Community facilities: 4-71, 4-72, 4-78, 4-79, 5-68, 5-69,
5-70, 5-71
Component: S-5, 1-8, 1-9, 2-1, 2-3, 2-5, 3-1, 3-2, 3-25,
5-1, 5-9, 5-76
Congahbuna housing site: S-2, s-8, 2-3, 2-30, 3-8, 3-11,
3-22, 3-23, 3-26, 3-27, 3-28, 3-36 through 3-39, 5-9,
5-128 through 5-132, 10-21
Congahbuna Lake: 3-8, 3-23, 4-14, 4-17, 4-20, 4-29, 4-60,
4-80, 5-72, 5-82, 5-129, 5-132, 10-21
Conveyor: S-2, S-10, 2-2, 2-7, 2-9, 2-15, 2-19, 2-21, 2-23,
2-25, 2-35, 2-42, 2-43, 2-47, 3-2, 3-7, 3-11, 3-17,
3-18, 3-19, 3-22, 3-26, 5-9, 5-78 through 5-87, 5-89,
5-100, 5-101, 5-102, 5-105, 5-107, 5-108, 5-114, 5-117,
6-3, 10-2, 10-6, 10-7, 10-8, 10-10, 10-11, 10-12, 10-23,
10-38, 10-39, 10-41, 10-43, 10-54
Cook Inlet: S-l, S-3, S-4,. 1-4, 1-5, 2-2, 2-23, 2-25, 3-32,
4-4, 4-14, 4-17, 4-19, 4-20, 4-50 through 4-60, 4-65,
4-71, 4-91, 4-92, 4-93, 5-52, 5-66, 5-72, 5-91, 5-93
through 5-98, 5-136, 5-138, 10-19, 10-29, 10-33,
10-47,10-49, 10-57, 10-58
Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI): S-3, 4-3, 4-80, 5-74
Cook Inlet Region Native Corporation: 2-3
Corps: (see U.S. Department of Army Corps of Engineers)
Cost: (see Economics)
Council on Environmental Quality (CIQ): S-l, 1-4, 6-2
Crusher (primary): S-2, 2-7, 2-9, 2-15, 2-47
Crusher (secondary): S-2, 2-7, 2-9, 2-15, 2-47
Cultural resources: 4-92, 4-93, 5-78, 5-103, 5-114, 5-115,
5-121, 5-127, 5-128, 5-132, 6-24
13-4
-------
Culverts: 2-21, 2-25, 2-43, 5-89, 5-92, 5-110, 6-12, 6-14,
6-15
Cumulative impacts: s-5, 1-9, 3-19, 5-136, 5-137, 5-138
Currents: 4-51
DICJ (see Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation)
Denslow Lake: 4-17
Diamond Alaska Coal Company (Diamond Alaska): S-l, S-3,
1-4, 1-6, 1-10, 2-1, 2-2, 5-2, 5-70, 6-2, 6-7, 6-16,
6-20, 7-7, 10-1, 10-9, 10-27, 10-32, 10-48, 10-50,
10-52, 10-54, 10-58
Diamond Chuitna: (see Diamond Alaska)
Diamond Shamrock Chuitna Coal Joint Venture: 1-6
Diesel fuel: 2-27, 2-46
Distribution lists: 9-1 through 9-6
DNR: (see Alaska Department of Natural Resources)
Drainage and drainage control: 2-1, 2-9, 2-11, 2-13, 2-15,
2-21, 2-23, 2-25, 2-30, 2-32, 4-14, 5-20, 5-30, 5-32,
5-33, 5-34, 5-36, 5-44, 5-89, 6-4, 6-5, 6-6, 6-9, 6-19,
6-20, 10-41, 10-42, 10-48
Dredging: 2-42
Drift River: 5-98, 5-136
Ducks: 3-38, 4-14, 4-55, 4-83
Dust:
road: 2-47, 2-48, 3-19, 3-20, 5-80, 5-93, 5-100, 5-112,
5-126, 6-24, 10-2, 10-39, 10-40
coal: 2-19, 2-27, 2-47, 2-48, 5-80, 5-93, 5-100, 6-23,
10-6, 10-10, 10-11, 10-39, 10-40, 10-41
Dust control: 2-19, 2-27, 2-47, 5-93, 5-95, 5-126, 10-2,
10-10, 10-11, 10-39, 10-41, 10-42
Earthguakes: (see Seismology)
Eastern corridor: 2-19, 2-21, 2-40, 3-34, 4-40, 4-48, 5-9,
5-116 through 5-121, 10-2, 10-8, 10-12
Eastern/Ladd option: S-6, S-8, 2-3, 2-4, 3-3, 3-11, 3-13,
3-15, 3-16, 3-17, 3-25 through 3-34, 5-81, 5-116 through
5-121, 10-12, 10-49, 10-54, 10-55
13-5
-------
Employment: S-3, S-70, 2-38, 2-45, 2-46, 3-32, 4-70, 4-71,
4-74, 4-75, 4-76, 4-77, 4-81, 4-82, 5-64, 5-66 through
5-72, 5-138, 5-140
Endangered species: 4-10, 4-22, 4-57, 5-8, 5-81, 5-122,
5-133
Environmental coordinator: 2-48, 10-53
Environmental training program: 2-48
EPA: (see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
Erosion: 2-11, 2-31, 2-32, 2-33, 2-40, 2-43, 2-44, 3-19,
5-32, 5-33, 5-36, 5-45, 5-89, 5-91, 5-92, 5-97, 5-108,
6-4, 6-6, 6-7, 6-14, 6-17, 10-10, 10-15
Faults: 4-26, 10-4
Fire: 5-40, 10-42, 10-43, 10-53
Fish: (see also Marine Fish) S-10, 1-8, 1-9, 2-32, 2-43,
3-13, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3-18, 3-19, 3-30, 3-31, 3-32,
3-36, 3-37, 3-38, 4-13, 4-40 through 4-50, 4-54 through
4-58, 4-83, 4-85, 4-88, 5-44 through 5-51, 5-76, 5-77,
5-94, 5-95, 5-98, 5-99, 5-102, 5-109, 5-110, 5-113, 5-
119, 5-120, 5-130, 5-131, 5-134, 5-137, 5-141, 6-8,
6-20, 6-21, 6-22, 6-23, 10-9, 10-25, 10-42, 10-52,
10-55, 10-56
Anadromous fish: (see also Salmon) S-4, 1-8, 2-32,
3-10, 4-40 through 4-50, 4-54 through. 4-58, 5-44, 5-94,
5-98, 6-9, 6-12, 6-21, 6-22, 10-55
Arctic lamprey: 4-44
Chinook salmon: S-4, S-10, 4-41 through 4-50, 4-56,
4-83, 4-91, 4-92, 5-42, 5-43, 5-46 through 5-51, 5-76,
5-94, 5-109, 5-125, 5-127, 5-131, 5-137, 6-20, 6-21,
6-23, 10-56
Chum salmon: S-4, 4-44, 4-55, 4-56, 10-56
Coastrange sculpin: 4-41
Coho salmon: S-4, S-10, 4-41 through 4-50, 4-55, 4-56,
4-91, 5-42, 5-43, 5-46 through 5-51, 5-76, 5-94, 5-109,
5-125, 5-127, 5-137, 6-9, 6-12, 6-20, 6-21, 10-56
Dolly Varden: 4-41, 4-48, 4-49, 4-50, 4-55, 4-56, 4-85,
5-42, 5-43, 5-48, 5-49, 5-50, 5-109, 5-114, 5-125, 5-134
King salmon: (see Chinook salmon)
Migration: 3-31, 4-44, 4-48, 4-50, 4-54, 4-55
13-6
-------
Pacific lamprey: 4-41
Pink salmon: S-4, 4-41 through 4-50, 4-55, 4-56, 5-42,
5-43, 5-46 through 5-51, 6-21, 10-56
Rainbow trout: S-4, 4-41, 4-49, 4-50, 4-85, 4-91, 5-42,
5-43, 5-48, 5-49, 5-50, 5-73, 5-110, 5-114, 5-125,
5-134, 6-21
Red salmon: (see Sockeye salmon)
Salmon: S-4, 2-43, 4-16, 4-19, 4-20, 4-40 through 4-50,
4-54 through 4-58, 4-83, 4-85, 4-88, 4-91, 4-92, 5-11,
5-12, 5-44 through 5-49, 5-76, 5-98, 5-102, 5-109, 5-110,
5-111, 5-114, 5-117, 5-125, 5-127, 5-131, 5-134, 6-8,
6-20 through 6-23, 10-55
Slimy sculpin: 4-41
Sockeye salmon: 4-42, 4-43, 4-44, 4-48, 4-55, 4-91,
5-50, 6-22
Spawning: 2-43, 3-13, 3-14, 3-31, 4-44 through 4-48, 4-
50, 4-55, 5-11, 5-12, 5-44 through 5-49, 5-76, 5-94,
5-109, 5-137, 6-8, 6-9, 6-11, 6-12, 6-20, 6-21, 6-23,
10-55
Three-spine stickleback: 4-41, 5-95, 5-110
Flocculation: 5-33, 5-34, 5-36, 5-37, 6-5, 10-17, 10-18,
10-42
Fuel: 2-27, 2-46, 2-47, 5-80, 5-87, 5-96, 10-8
Furbearer: 5-12, 5-13, 5-81
Geese: 4-14
Geology: 4-3, 4-4, 4-5, 4-23, 4-24, 4-25, 5-3, 5-78, 5-79,
5-95, 5-97, 5-110, 5-116, 5-121, 5-128, 5-133, 5-140
Glossary: 12-1 through 12-8
Granite Point: 3-3, 3-8, 3-22, 3-33, 4-16, 4-19, 4-52, 4-53,
4-54, 4-57, 4-58, 4-86, 4-88, 5-72, 5-108, 5-110, 6-14
Granite Point port site: S-2, 2-23, 2-25, 2-26, 2-27, 2-31,
3-32, 3-33, 4-3, 4-11, 4-22, 4-51, 4-53, 5-9, 5-78
through 5-104, 5-108, 5-111, 6-14, 6-15, 10-4, 10-13,
10-28, 10-29, 10-31, 10-34, 10-35, 10-39, 10-47, 10-52,
10-53
Gravel: 2-21, 2-40, 5-3, 5-78, 5-84, 5-121, 10-7, 10-37
13-7
-------
Ground water: S-4, 1-8, 2-30, 4-24 through 4-29, 5-10, 5-16
through 5-20, 5-23, 5-28, 5-29, 5-30, 5-36, 5-37, 5-85,
5-87, 5-107, 5-123, 5-129, 5-134, 6-9, 6-10, 10-3, 10-4,
10-19, 10-37
Gulls: 4-56, 4-57
Habitat:
Fish: S-4, S-10, 1-8, 1-9, 2-32, 3-13, 3-14, 3-30,
3-31, 4-13, 4-38 through 4-49, 5-44 through 5-51, 5-109,
5-110, 5-131, 5-137, 5-138, 6-8, 6-9, 6-12, 6-20 through
6-23, 10-24, 10-26, 10-52
Wildlife: S-3, S-4, S-10, 1-8, 1-9, 2-31, 2-32, 3-13,
3-14, 3-16, 3-27, 3-29, 3-30, 3-31, 3-35, 3-38, 4-13,
4-17 through 4-23, 5-12 through 5-16, 5-81 through 5-85,
5-106, 5-107, 5-117, 5-122, 5-123, 5-129, 5-131, 5-133,
5-137, 5-138, 5-139, 6-7, 10-11, 10-23, 10-26, 10-57
Habitat evaluation: 4-22, 4-23, 5-13, 5-16, 5-85, 10-11
Haul Road: (see Access/Haul road)
Hazardous wastes: 2-15, 2-25, 2-30, 5-93, 6-13
Herbicides: 2-1, 4-39
Housing: (see aso Congahbuna housing site, Lone Creek housing
site, and Threemile housing site) S-2, 1-9, 2-1, 2-2,
2-27, 2-30, 2-37, 2-38, 3-7 through 3-11, 3-22 through
3-28, 3-36 through 3-39, 5-121 through 5-136, 6-3, 6T4,
6-13, 6-15, 6-19, 10-15, 10-29, 10-29, 10-32, 10-33,
10-44
Hunting: (see Sport hunting, Subsistence)
Hydrology: S-10, 4-13, 4-14, 4-24 through 4-38, 5-10, 5-16
through 5-30, 5-41, 5-85, 5-87 through 5-91, 5-107,
5-108, 5-118, 5-123, 5-124, 5-129, 5-134, 5-137, 6-9,
6-10, 6-19, 10-4, 10-24, 10-25, 10-26
Ice: 2-26, 2-27, 3-9, 3-10, 4-53, 5-23, 5-64, 5-89, 5-95,
10-15, 10-15, 10-35
Instream flow incremental methodology: 5-47, 6-21
Interburden: 2-5, 2-7, 2-32, 4-5, 5-3, 5-32, 6-6
Iron: 4-38, 4-39, 5-31 through 5-39, 5-87, 5-88, 10-3,
10-31, 10-46
Irreversible and irretrievable commitments: 5-140
Japan: 1-5
13-8
-------
Kenai, City of: 3-9, 4-53, 4-59, 4-60, 4-64, 4-65, 4-66,
4-68 through 4-73, 5-62, 5-64, 5-67, 5-68, 5-96, 5-100,
5-114, 5-126, 5-131, 5-135
Kenai Peninsula: S-10, 2-45, 3-23, 3-32, 4-5, 5-2, 5-64,
5-101, 5-112, 5-119
Kenai Peninsula Borough: S-3, 1-13, 2-3, 4-3, 4-68 through
4-74, 4-78, 4-80, 4-82, 5-64, 5-65, 5-72, 5-74, 5-102,
5-115, 5-138, 6-16, 7-5, 7-7, 10-1, 10-14, 10-33, 10-52
Knik Ann: 4-54, 4-55
Kodiak Lumber Mills (KLM): 4-74, 4-82, 4-86, 5-69, 5-70,
5-126
Korea: 1-5
Ladd port site: S-2, S-6, 2-3, 2-23, 2-25, 2-26,
2-27, 2-31, 3-3, 3-27, 3-32, 4-3, 4-48, 5-9, 5-104
through 5-115, 5-118, 5-120, 5-121, 6-14, 6-15, 10-2,
10-4, 10-12, 10-13, 10-28, 10-30, 10-31, 10-34, 10-35,
10-39, 10-47, 10-48, 10-52, 10-53, 10-57
Ladd Road: 3-3, 4-33, 4-35
Landfill: 2-15, 2-25, 2-30, 2-35, 6-15, 10-43
Land status: 4-1, 4-2, 4-3
Lead: 5-35, 5-45, 10-3
Loading facilities: (see Trestle)
Logical mining unit: 3-3, 5-128, 5-132, 5-137
Logical mining unit no. 1 (LMU-1): 2-4
Lone Creek: S-8, 2-11, 2-19, 3-8, 4-17, 4-19, 4-20, 4-27,
4-29, 4-35, 4-36, 4-40, 4-41, 4-44 through 4-48, 4-50,
4-86, 5-11, 5-19, 5-21, 5-23, 5-25, 5-26, 5-27, 5-29,
5-30, 5-37, 5-41, 5-46, 5-49, 5-50, 5-51, 5-76, 5-107,
5-108, 5-109, 5-117, 5-119, 5-120, 5-121, 5-125, 5-127,
5-134, 6-8, 6-10, 6-21, 10-49
Lone Creek Coal Company: 1-5
Lone Creek housing site: S-2, S-6, 2-3, 2-29, 3-8, 3-11,
3-22 through 3-28, 3-36 through 3-39, 5-9, 5-86, 5-121
through 5-136, 10-29
Long-term productivity: 5-139, 5-140
13-9
-------
Manganese: 4-38, 4-39, 5-34 through 5-39, 5-87, 5-88, 10-3,
10-46
Marine biology; 4-54 through 4-57, 5-52, 5-98, 5-99, 5-111
Marine birds: 4-55, 4-57, 5-98, 5-99
Marine fish: 4-54, 4-55, 4-56, 6-23
Eulachon: 4-54, 4-55, 4-56, 4-85
Bering cisco: 4-54, 4-55, 4-56
Smelt: 4-54, 4-55, 4-56, 4-85
Herring: 4-54, 4-55, 4-56
Marine invertebrates: 4-54, 4-55, 5-99, 5-111
Marine mammals: 1-9, 4-54, 4-57, 4-85, 5-98
Belukha whale: S-4, 4-54, 4-57, 4-85, 5-99
Harbor seal: 4-57, 4-85
Material sites: (see Borrow sites)
Maxus Energy Corporation: 1-5
McArthur River: 4-4, 4-5, 4-52, 4-83, 4-85, 4-86, 4-92,
5-75, 5-101
Mercury: 5-35, 10-3
Meteorology: 4-58 through 4-65
Middle River: 4-3, 4-85
Mine: S-2, S-10, 1-5, 1-9, 1-11, 2-2, 2-5, 2-7, 2-9,
2-11, 2-31, 3-1, 3-3, 3-10, 3-11, 3-25, 3-26, 3-28,
3-29, 4-11, 4-58, 5-3 through 5-78, 6-3 through 6-13,
6-15, 10-6, 10-27, 10-28, 10-30, 10-31, 10-36, 10-37,
10-44, 10-48
Mine service area: 2-2, 2-3, 2-7, 2-13, 2-15, 2-34, 2-35,
2-38, 3-10, 3-11, 3-25, 3-26, 3-28, 3-29, 5-5, 5-6,
5-9, 5-11, 6-3
Mitigation: S-5, 1-3, 1-9, 2-1, 3-35, 3-40, 4-22, 5-1, 6-1
through 6-24, 10-2, 10-4, 10-5, 10-6, 10-9, 10-10,
10-12, 10-22, 10-24, 10-25, 10-46
Mixing zones: 2-9, 2-11, 6-12, 10-2, 10-6, 10-7, 10-16,
10-21, 10-28, 10-29, 10-30, 10-44, 10-47
Monitoring: 1-3, 1-6, 6-1 through 6-24, 10-3, 10-4, 10-5,
10-18, 10-25, 10-26, 10-27, 10-31, 10-32, 10-42
Mooring dolphins: 2-24
13-10
-------
Moose: S-3, S-10, 2-19, 2-21, 3-13, 3-20, 4-13, 4-17, 4-19,
4-22, 4-83, 4-85, 4-86, 4-87, 4-88, 5-10 through 5-16,
5-75, 5-76, 5-81 through 5-85, 5-101, 5-102, 5-107,
5-117, 5-122, 5-123, 5-127, 5-129, 5-133, 6-8, 6-18,
10-7, 10-8, 10-12, 10-13, 10-14, 10-18, 10-21, 10-23,
10-26, 10-36, 10-37, 10-57
Moquawkie Indian Reservation: 4-1, 4-77, 4-80, 10-13
Mount Augustine: 4-52
Mount Spurr: 4-4
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS): 5-52, 5-53,
5-100, 10-11, 10-40
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA): S-l, 1-1,
1-2, 1-4, 1-11, 1-12, 4-1, 7-2, 10-1, 10-12, 10-50,
10-57
National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS): 7-2
National Ocean Survey (NOS): 4-51
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Permit: S-l, 1-4, 2-25, 5-94, 5-96, 5-124, 6-15, 7-2,
10-2, 10-6, 10-13, 10-15, 10-16, 10-20, 10-28, 10-29,
10-30, 10-42, 10-44, 10-45, 10-48
National Wetland Inventory Program: 4-11, 4-12
Native Village of Tyonek (NTV) : 4-73 through 4-80, 5-74
Navigation: 5-97, 5-98, 5-100
Nickel: 5-34 through 5-39, 10-3, 10-46
Nikiski: 4-54, 5-98
Nikolai Creek: 3-23, 3-24, 4-4, 4-14, 4-16, 4-17, 4-48,
4-57, 4-85, 4-86, 4-91, 5-76, 5-104, 6-11
Nikolai housing site: 3-8, 3-11, 3-22, 3-23
NMFS: (see National Marine Fisheries Service)
No Action Alternative: S-6, S-8, 3-1, 3-40, 5-1, 5-2
Noise: S-4, 3-18, 3-19, 4-65, 5-11, 5-12, 5-13, 5-64, 6-65,
5-75, 5-82, 5-83, 5-85, 5-92, 5-99, 5-101, 5-107, 5-112,
5-117, 5-119, 5-126, 5-130, 5-135
North Foreland: 3-3, 4-3, 4-51, 4-90, 5-96, 5-102, 10-34,
10-35
13-11
-------
North Foreland port site: 3-9 through 3-12, 10-1, 10-2,
10-34, 10-35, 10-54
Northern corridor: 2-15, 2-19, 2-21, 2-40, 4-40, 5-9, 5-78,
5-111, 5-112, 5-113, 10-2, 10-8, 10-48, 10-54
Northern/Ladd option: S-6, 2-3, 3-3, 3-11, 3-13, 3-15, 3-16,
3-17, 3-25 through 3-36, 5-81, 5-104 through 5-119,
5-121, 10-5, 10-11, 10-12, 10-38, 10-39, 10-43, 10-55
Office of Management and Budget (State of Alaska): 1-10
through 1-13, 7-5
Old Tyonek Creek: s-4, 2-15, 4-4, 4-21, 4-23, 4-29, 4-31,
4-39, 4-40, 4-48, 4-85, 4-86, 5-90, 5-94, 5-102, 5-129,
6-11, 6-14, 10-49
Options: S-6, 2-1, 2-3, 2-5, 3-1, 3-9 through 3-25, 3-27,
3-36 through 3-39
Options screening criteria: 3-12, 3-14, 3-15
Options screening process: S-5, S-6, 1-3, 3-9 through 3-39
Overburden: 2-5, 2-7, 2-32, 4-5, 4-26, 5-3, 5-4, 5-7, 5-16,
5-17, 5-34, 5-52, 5-59, 6-6, 6-7
Overburden stockpile: 2-3, 2-7, 2-13, 2-33, 3-3, 3-10 through
3-13, 3-25, 3-26, 5-3, 5-6, 5-11, 5-36, 6-6, 6-7, 10-36
Particulates: (see Air Quality)
Passerines: (see Songbirds)
Peregrine falcon: 4-22
Permits: S-8, 1-1 through 1-4, 1-9 through 1-13, 2-1, 2-9,
2-11, 3-39, 3-40, 6-1 through 6-17, 10-4, 10-5, 10-6,
10-13, 10-22 through 10-27, 10-28, 10-29, 10-30, 10-32,
10-44, 10-45, 10-48, 10-52, 10-53, 10-58
Petroleum product spills: 2-46, 2-47, 3-14, 3-29, 5-20,
5-40, 5-80, 5-87, 5-93, 5-94, 5-96, 5-97, 5-111, 5-118,
5-122, 5-123, 5-134, 10-41, 10-42
pH: 4-38, 5-11, 5-30, 5-31, 5-35, 5-45, 5-87, 10-3,
10-31, 10-45
Physiography: 4-3, 4-4, 4-88, 4-90, 4-91, 5-3, 5-78, 5-104,
5-116, 5-121, 5-128, 5-133
Placer U.S. Center Ridge: 3-33, 5-104, 5-115, 5-121, 5-137
Pneumo-train: 3-6, 3-10, 3-11
13-12
-------
Population (human): 4-68 through 4-74, 5-66 through 5-72,
5-113
Port facilities: (see also Granite Point port site and Ladd
port site) 2-23, 2-25, 2-26, 2-27, 2-35, 3-13, 5-4,
10-34, 10-35
Offshore port facilities: 2-26, 2-27, 2-35, 2-38, 5-4,
5-79, 10-1
Onshore port facilities: 2-23, 2-25, 2-35, 2-38, 2-44,
5-4, 5-59, 5-79
Port site: (see Granite Point port site, Ladd port site)
Power generation: S-3, 2-1, 2-31, 3-3, 3-11, 3-12, 3-25,
3-28, 5-53, 5-59, 5-62, 5-78
Preferred alternative: 3-34, 3-35, 3-36, 3-39
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD): 10-11, 10-41,
10-58
Railroad: 3-7, 3-11, 3-17 through 3-22
Raptors: (see Bald eagle, Peregrine falcon)
Reclamation: S-5, S-8, S-10, 1-3, 2-1, 2-7, 2-31 through
2-35, 3-14, 3-15, 3-17, 3-18, 3-21, 3-30, 3-37, 5-3,
5-4, 5-7, 5-8, 5-10, 5-11, 5-13, 5-20, 5-28, 5-41, 5-80,
5-122, 5-124, 5-131, 6-6 through 6-9, 6-16, 6-17, 6-21,
6-22, 6-23, 10-2, 10-4, 10-25, 10-37
Record of Decision (ROD): 1-2, 6-15, 10-12, 10-13
Recreation: 3-14, 3-15, 3-18, 3-20, 4-14, 4-91, 4-92, 5-11,
5-31, 5-64, 5-77, 5-103, 5-114, 5-120, 5-121, 5-126,
5-127, 5-132, 5-136, 6-24
Red squirrel: 4-13
References: ll-l through 11-18
Regional use: 3-14 through 3-18, 3-21, 3-30, 3-33 through
3-36, 3-38, 3-39, 5-78, 5-104, 5-115, 5-121, 5-128,
5-132, 5-136
Responsiveness summary: 1-1
Revegetation: 2-5, 2-21, 2-31 through 2-35, 2-37, 2-42, 5-4,
5-7, 5-8, 5-32, 5-124, 6-6, 6-7, 6-8, 6-17, 10-2, 10-10,
10-15, 10-22, 10-25, 10-50
Riprap: 2-11, 2-32, 2-40, 2-43
River and Harbor Act of 1899: (see Section 10)
13-13
-------
Runoff: 2-9, 2-11, 2-13, 2-21, 2-25, 2-30, 2-40, 2-42, 2-43,
2-47, 4-28 through 4-33, 4-52, 5-11, 5-21, 5-32 through
5-39, 5-89, 5-91, 5-92, 5-108, 5-124, 5-129, 5-134, 6-4,
6-5, 6-13, 10-15, 10-32, 10-33, 10-41, 10-50, 10-51
Salinity: 4-53
Salmon: (see Fish)
Sandhill crane; S-3, 4-13, 4-16, 4-23, 5-12, 5-13, 5-14,
5-82, 5-84, 5-85, 5-106, 5-107
Scoping issues: S-4, 1-1, 1-2, 1-8, 1-9, 3-1, 3-12, 3-22
through 3-25, 3-27, 6-20
Scoping process: S-4, 1-1, 1-2, 1-8, 2-1, 2-5, 3-1, 3-9,
6-1, 7-1 through 7-4
Section 10 (River and Harbor Act of 1899): S-l, 1-4, 10-13
Section 404 (Clean Water Act of 1972): S-l, 1-4, 4-11, 6-16,
10-13, 10-43, 10-45, 10-47
Sediment ponds: 2-9, 2-11, 2-13, 2-15, 2-21, 2-23, 2-25,
2-30, 2-31, 2-34, 2-40, 2-43, 5-19, 5-26, 5-28 through
5-39, 5-45, 5-91, 5-92, 5-93, 5-108, 5-124, 5-134, 6-4,
6-5, 6-15, 10-7, 10-16, 10-19, 10-28, 10-31, 10-32,
10-33, 10-41, 10-47, 10-50, 10-51
Sedimentation: 2-31, 2-34, 3-14, 3-36, 5-21, 5-45, 5-91
through 5-95, 5-109, 6-4, 6-5, 6-7, 10-19, 10-45
Seismology: 4-5
Set net fishery: (see Commercial fisheries)
Sewage: 2-25, 2-30, 4-71, 4-79, 5-87, 5-94, 5-124, 5-125,
5-130, 5-134, 6-4, 10-2, 10-15, 10-29, 10-43, 10-44,
10-46, 10-48
Shipping: 2-23, 2-25, 2-26, 2-27, 2-44, 2-45, 3-7, 3-12,
3-34, 4-52, 5-97, 5-98, 5-110, 5-111, 10-34
Shorebirds: 4-14, 4-16, 4-55, 4-57, 5-12, 5-81, 5-84, 5-106,
5-111, 5-129
Short-term uses: 5-139, 5-140
Slash burning: 5-40, 10-53
Small mammals: S-10, 5-12, 5-81 through 5-85, 5-122
Smoke: 5-53, 5-54, 10-53
Snowfall: 4-28, 4-11, 6-18, 10-23
13-14
-------
Socioeconomics: S-10, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3-23, 3-30, 3-32,
3-33, 3-37, 3-38, 4-66 through 4-83, 5-64, 5-66 through
5-75, 5-101, 5-102, 5-112, 5-113, 5-119, 5-120, 5-126,
5-131, 5-135, 5-137, 5-138, 5-140, 6-24, 10-1, 10-27,
10-54
Soils: 4-3 through 4-7, 4-9, 4-28, 5-4, 5-5, 5-8,
5-11, 5-75, 5-78, 5-104, 5-105, 5-116, 5-121, 5-128,
5-133, 5-140, 6-6, 10-2, 10-9, 10-22, 10-25
Soldotna: 5-67, 7-1, 10-1
Solid waste: 2-15, 2-25, 2-30, 5-40, 6-11, 6-12, 6-13, 6-15,
10-43, 10-39
Song birds: 4-16, 5-12, 5-81, 5-83, 5-84, 5-122
Sound: (see Noise)
Southeastern corridor: 3-3
Southeastern/North Foreland option: 3-3, 3-9, 3-10, 3-11
Southern corridor: 2-3, 2-15, 2-19, 2-21, 3-21, 4-3, 4-11,
4-14, 4-40, 5-9, 5-78 through 5-108, 5-113, 5-116, 5-118,
6-14, 10-8, 10-45
Southern/Granite Point option: S-6, 2-3, 3-3, 3-11, 3-13,
3-21, 3-25 through 3-36, 5-78 through 5-108, 10-12,
10-39, 10-55
SPCC plan: (see Spill Prevention, Control and Counter-measure
Plan)
Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan: 2-46,
2-47, 5-87, 5-97, 10-9, 10-42
Splitter-hopper: 2-15, 12-5
Sport fisheries: S-4, S-10, 3-10, 4-41, 4-50, 4-91, 4-92,
5-64, 5-74, 5-75, 5-77, 5-103, 5-114, 5-120, 5-121,
5-126, 5-127, 5-132, 5-136
Sport hunting: 3-10, 4-14, 4-91, 4-92, 5-64, 5-74, 5-75,
5-77, 5-103, 5-114, 5-126, 5-127, 5-132, 5-138, 10-14
Spruce beetle: 5-5, 5-53, 10-9, 10-10
State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO): 6-24, 7-5
Stream 2002: (see Lone Creek)
13-15
-------
Stream 2003: 2-9, 2-15, 3-24, 4-19, 4-20, 4-27, 4-29, 4-30,
4-32, 4-41, 4-42, 4-47, 4-50, 5-11, 5-21, 5-22, 5-23,
5-26, 5-27, 5-37, 5-41 through 5-46, 5-49, 5-50, 5-94,
5-118, 5-137, 6-8, 6-10, 6-12, 6-14, 6-15, 6-21, 6-22
Stream 2004: 3-13, 4-19, 4-20, 4-27, 4-29, 4-30, 4-41, 4-42,
4-43, 4-47, 4-50, 5-21, 5-22, 5-23, 5-24, 5-26, 5-27,
5-29, 5-46, 5-137, 6-8, 6-10, 6-21, 6-22
Stripping: 2-5, 2-38
Subsistence: S-4, S-10, 1-9, 3-10, 3-14, 3-15, 3-16, 3-18,
3-22, 3-23, 3-30, 3-32, 3-35, 3-36, 3-37, 3-38, 4-14,
4-41, 4-82 through 4-88, 5-75, 5-76, 5-101, 5-102, 5-113,
5-120, 5-126, 5-127, 5-131, 5-135, 5-138, 5-140, 6-24,
10-2, 10-18, 10-21, 10-48, 10-49
Sulfur: 4-4, 4-6, 5-52, 5-62, 5-63, 10-3
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act: (see Alaska
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act)
Surface water: 1-8, 2-9, 2-11, 4-13, 4-28 through 4-40,
5-10, 5-11, 5-19 through 5-41, 5-89 through 5-94, 5-107,
5-108, 5-124, 5-129, 5-134, 6-9, 6-10
Susitna Flats State Game Refuge: 4-14, 4-92, 5-99, 5-111
Susitna River: 4-52, 4-57, 5-75, 5-76
Suspended solids: S-10, 2-9, 4-38, 4-39, 4-52, 4-53, 5-32
through 5-45, 6-4, 6-10, 10-3, 10-18, 10-20, 10-31,
10-32, 10-33, 10-42, 10-46, 10-57
Taiwan: 1-5
Tanaina Indians: 4-1, 4-88, 4-93
Technical feasibility: 3-14, 3-15, 3-17, 3-30, 3-34, 3-37,
3-39, 5-78, 5-104, 5-115, 5-121, 5-128, 5-132, 5-136,
10-34
Threemile Creek: 2-9, 3-8, 3-16, 4-28, 4-29, 4-31, 4-39,
4-40, 4-48, 4-85, 4-91, 5-108, 5-109, 5-114, 5-118,
5-120, 5-134, 5-136, 10-49
Threemile housing site option: S-2, S-8, 2-3, 2-30, 3-8,
3-11, 3-22, 3-23, 3-25, 3-26, 3-27, 3-36 through 3-39,
5-9, 5-133 through 5-136, 10-21
Tides: 4-50, 4-51, 5-95, 5-96, 5-97, 5-111, 10-35, 10-58
Topsoil: 2-7, 2-13, 2-32, 2-33, 2-34, 5-5, 5-7, 6-6, 6-7,
10-2, 10-52
13-16
-------
Trading Bay State Game Refuge: S-3, 1-5, 3-8, 3-23, 4-3,
4-11, 4-14, 4-16, 4-54, 4-55, 4-92, 5-99
Transportation corridor: 1-11, 1-12, 1-13, 2-1, 2-3, 2-34,
3-3, 3-10, 3-11, 3-13, 3-14, 3-15, 3-25, 3-27, 5-9, 5-78
through 5-121, 6-13, 6-14
Transportation mode (see also pneumo-train, coal-waste slurry,
coal-carbon dioxide slurry, road, railroad, conveyor):
3-6, 3-10, 3-17 through 3-22, 10-53
Transportation system: 1-4, 1-9, 2-3, 3-11, 3-25, 3-27
Trapping: 1-9, 4-86, 4-91
Trestle: S-2, S-5, S-6, 1-9, 2-2, 2-25, 2-26, 2-27, 2-38,
2-42, 3-7, 3-11, 3-22, 3-25, 5-95 through 5-100, 5-102,
5-104, 5-105, 5-110, 5-111, 5-115, 6-23, 10-43
Trumpeter swans: S-3, 3-16, 3-38, 4-14, 4-16, 4-23, 5-12,
5-13, 5-14, 5-15, 5-82, 5-84, 5-106, 5-107, 5-129, 5-133
Tsunami: 4-52
Tyonek Creek: 2-15, 4-4, 4-21, 4-28, 4-29, 4-39, 4-40, 4-48,
4-85, 5-90, 5-94, 5-102, 6-14
Tyonek Native Corporation (TNG): S-3, S-8, 2-3, 3-9, 3-16,
3-34, 4-1, 4-3, 5-74, 5-101, 5-120, 7-6, 10-2, 10-34,
10-35
Tyonek, Village of: S-4, S-10, 1-5, 1-9, 3-3, 3-14, 3-16,
3-24, 3-32, 3-33, 4-1, 4-57, 4-66, 4-73 through 4-88,
4-91, 5-2, 5-62, 5-64, 5-69 through 5-76, 5-100, 5-101,
5-102, 5-112, 5-113, 5-120, 5-126, 5-127, 5-131, 5-135,
5-137, 5-138, 6-24, 7-1, 7-6, 7-7, 10-1, 10-21, 10-35,
10-56
Tukallah Lake: 3-16, 4-16, 4-17, 4-28, 4-48, 5-107, 5-110,
5-114, 5-117, 5-118, 5-119, 5-121, 5-134
Turbidity: S-4, S-10, 5-32, 5-44, 5-77, 5-98, 6-4, 6-10,
10-3, 10-6, 10-7, 10-16, 10-17, 10-31, 10-42, 10-45,
10-47
Unavoidable adverse impacts: 5-139
U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM): 4-90
U.S. Department of Army Corps of Engineers (Corps): S-l,
1-4, 1-5, 1-11, 1-12, 3-39, 4-5, 4-11, 6-3, 6-12, 6-15,
7-2, 7-6, 10-1, 10-5, 10-6, 10-13, 10-28
13-17
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): S-l, 1-4, 1-5,
1-12, 3-39, 4-36, 5-30, 5-31, 5-59, 6-3, 6-12, 6-15,
6-21, 7-1, 7-2, 7-5, 8-1, 10-1, 10-6, 10-13, 10-16,
10-17, 10-20, 10-30, 10-37, 10-39, 10-45, 10-46, 10-47,
10-58
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS): 4-23, 4-50, 5-46,
6-16, 7-2
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS): 4-38
Vegetation; 2-31, 2-33, 2-34, 2-35, 2-36, 2-40, 3-12, 3-13,
3-14, 3-15, 3-18, 3-19, 3-21, 4-7, 4-8, 4-10, 4-17, 4-
19, 4-20, 4-33, 4-88, 4-90, 5-4 through 5-11, 5-16,
5-75, 5-77 through 5-81, 5-105, 5-116, 5-122, 5-128,
5-133, 6-7, 6-17, 10-50
Viapan Lake: 3-16, 4-28, 4-80, 5-72, 5-108, 5-110, 5-114,
5-115, 5-118, 5-119, 5-136, 10-49, 10-52
Vicky Lake: 4-28
Visual resources: 3-10, 3-18, 3-20, 3-22, 4-88, 4-90, 5-76,
5-77, 5-103, 5-113, 5-114, 5-120, 5-127, 5-131, 5-132,
5-135
Wastewater:
Domestic: 2-15, 2-30, 5-30, 5-40, 5-94, 5-96, 5-124,
5-125, 6-12, 6-13, 6-14, 10-20, 10-29, 10-44
Washdown: .2-46, 5-93, 10-28, 10-30, 10-41
Wastewater treatment plant: 2-15, 2-30, 10-20, 10-29, 10-31
Waterfowl: (see also Ducks, Geese, Trumpeter swan) 4-13,
4-55, 4-57, 5-12, 5-81, 5-84, 5-85, 5-106, 5-111, 5-114,
5-129
Water quality: S-10, 2-15, 2-25, 2-30, 3-12, 3-13, 3-15,
3-18, 3-19, 3-29, 3-34, 3-36, 3-37, 4-13, 4-14, 4-36
through 4-40, 5-16, 5-19, 5-102, 5-109, 5-111, 5-118,
5-124, 5-125, 5-134, 10-2, 10-15 through 10-20, 10-26
through 10-31, 10-44 though 10-48, 10-50, 10-51, 10-57,
10-58
Surface water: S-10, 1-8, 4-6, 4-36, 4-39, 4-40, 5-30
through 5-41, 5-91 through 5-94, 5-102, 5-108, 5-109,
5-118, 5-124, 5-125, 5-129, 5-130, 5-134, 6-19, 6-20,
10-15, 10-42, 10-57
Ground water: 4-36, 4-37, 5-19, 5-40, 5-85, 5-87, 5-88,
5-118, 5-134, 6-20, 10-3, 10-19, 10-20, 10-25, 10-42,
10-57
13-18
-------
Appendix A
Terrestrial Habitat Evaluation
-------
Marine water: 4-52, 4-53, 5-95, 5-96, 5-104, 10-19,
10-39, 10-46, 10-57, 10-58
Water supply: 2-30, 3-9 through 3-12, 3-26, 3-28
Waves: 4-50, 4-51, 5-64
Wetlands: S-3, S-8, 3-13, 3-24, 3-31, 4-10 through 4-14,
4-28, 4-41, 5-8 through 5-11, 5-81, 5-89, 5-99, 5-105,
5-106, 5-108, 5-111, 5-116 through 5-119, 5-122, 5-129,
5-133, 6-7, 6-8, 6-9, 10-24, 10-45, 10-48, 10-49, 10-50
Wildlife: (see also Bald eagle, Beaver, Brown bear, Ducks,
Geese, Marten, Moose, Peregrine falcon, Red squirrel,
Sandhill crane, Shorebirds, Small mammals, Songbirds,
Trumpeter swans, Waterfowl): S-4, S-10, 1-8, 1-9, 3-13
through 3-16, 3-18, 3-19, 3-20, 3-29 through 3-32, 3-35,
3-37, 3-38, 4-66, 4-81, 4-82, 5-8, 5-10 through 5-16,
5-64, 5-73 through 5-76, 5-81 through 5-85, 5-102, 5-106,
5-107, 5-117, 5-118, 5-122, 5-123, 5-126, 5-127, 5-129,
5-130, 5-131, 5-133, 5-135, 5-137, 5-138, 6-8, 6-17,
6-18, 10-8 through 10-11, 10-22, 10-23, 10-42,
10-52, 10-56
Wind: 4-52, 4-58 through 4-65, 5-64, 10-40, 10-41
Wolverine Creek: 4-28, 4-44, 4-47
Zinc: 4-36 through 4-39, 5-34, 5-35, 5-37, 5-38, 5-45, 5-46,
5-87, 5-88, 10-3, 10-46
13-19
-------
APPENDIX A
TERRESTRIAL HABITAT EVALUATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION A-l
2.0 METHODS A-l
3.0 SPECIES ACCOUNTS A-4
3.1 LESSER SANDHILL CRANE A-4
3.1.1 Life History Information A-4
3.1.2 Habitat Parameters A-5
3.2 TRUMPETER SWAN A-5
3.2.1 Life History Information A-5
3.2.2 Habitat Parameters A-6
3.3 BLACK BEAR A-7
3.3.1 Life History Information A-7
3.3.2 Habitat Parameters A-7
3.4 BROWN BEAR A-8
3.4.1 Life History Information ..... A-8
3.4.2 Habitat Parameters A-9
3.5 MOOSE A-9
3.5.1 Life History Information ..... A-9
3.5.2 Habitat Parameters A-10
4.0 HABITAT ANALYSIS RESULTS A-10
4.1 LESSER SANDHILL CRANE A-16
4.1.1 Port Areas A-16
4.1.2 Transportation Corridors ..... A-16
4.1.3 Mine and Mine Facilities ..... A-16
4.1.4 Airport and Housing Facilities . . A-16
4.1.5 Material Sites ..... A-19
-------
APPENDIX h
TERRESTRIAL HABITAT EVALUATION
TABLE OP CONTENTS
(continued)
4.2 TRUMPETER SWAN A-19
4.2.1 Port Sites A-19
4.2.2 Transportation Corridors A-19
4.2.3 Mine and Mine Facilities A-22
4.2.4 Airport and Housing Facilities . . A-22
4.2.5 Material Sites A-22
4.3 BLACK BEAR A-22
4.3.1 Port Areas A-22
4.3.2 Transportation Corridors A-25
4.3.3 Mine and Mine Facilities A-25
4.3.4 Airport and Housing Facilities . . A-25
4.3.5 Material Sites A-25
4.4 BROWN BEAR A-25
4.4.1 Port Areas A-25
4.4.2 Transportation Corridors A-25
4.4.3 Mine and Mine Facilities ..... A-26
4.4.4 Airport and Housing Facilities . . A-26
4.4.5 Material Sites A-26
4.5 MOOSE A-26
4.5.1 Port Areas A-31
4.5.2 Transportation Corridors A-31
4.5.3 Mine and Mine Facilities A-32
4.5.4 Airport and Housing Facilities . . A-32
4.5.5 Material Sites A-32
4.6 COMPARISON OF PRE- AND POSTMINING
HABITAT VALUE . . ..... A-33
4.6.1 Vegetation Types A-33
4.6.2 Habitat Values A-33
4.6.3 Black Bear A-33
4.6.4 Brown Bear A-35
4.6.5 Moose (spring/summer/fall range) . A-35
4.6.6 Overall Habitat Quality A-35
5.0 DISCUSSION A-37
6.0 REFERENCES A-37
11
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Tables gage
1 VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM A-2
2 RESOURCE CATEGORIES AND MITIGATION PLANNING GOALS.. A-3
3 HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OF SANDHILL
CRANE HABITAT SUITABILITY A-6
4 HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OF TRUMPETER
SWAN HABITAT SUITABILITY A-7
5 HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OF BLACK BEAR
HABITAT SUITABILITY A-8
6 HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OF BROWN BEAR
HABITAT SUITABILITY A-10
7 HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OF MOOSE WINTER
RANGE SUITABILITY A-ll
8 HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OF MOOSE
SPRING/SUMMER/FALL RANGE SUITABILITY. A-12
9 HABITAT SUITABILITY OF VEGETATION MAP UNITS FOR
WILDLIFE SPECIES A-13
lOa DIRECT LOSS OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AND SUITABILITY OF
HABITATS IN HECTARES (ACRES) FROM MINE
DEVELOPMENT BY PROJECT COMPONENT A-14
10b DIRECT LOSS OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AND SUITABILITY OF
HABITATS IN HECTARES (ACRES) FROM MINE
DEVELOPMENT BY PROJECT COMPONENT A-15
11 COMPARISON OF AREAS OF HABITAT LOST TO MINING
ACTIVITIES AND REPLACEMENT HABITAT A-34
12 RELATIVE HABITAT VALUE FOR REPLACEMENT HABITAT FOR
BLACK BEAR, BROWN BEAR, AND MOOSE A-36
13 COMPARISON OF PREMINING AND POSTMINING HABITAT
VALUES FOR EVALUATION SPECIES A-36
111
-------
LIST OP FIGURES
Figure ' Page
1 SANDHILL CRANE NESTING HABITAT IN STUDY
AREA A-17
2 SANDHILL CRANE NESTING HABITAT IN PROJECT
AREA A-18
3 TRUMPETER SWAN POTENTIAL NESTING HABITAT
IN STUDY AREA A-20
4 TRUMPETER SWAN POTENTIAL NESTING HABITAT
IN PROJECT AREA A-21
5 BLACK BEAR AND BROWN BEAR HABITAT IN STUDY
AREA . A-23
6 BLACK BEAR AND BROWN BEAR HABITAT IN PROJECT
AREA A-24
7 MOOSE SPRING/SUMMER/FALL RANGE IN STUDY
AREA A-27
8 MOOSE SPRING/SUMMER/FALL RANGE IN PROJECT
AREA A-28
9 MOOSE WINTER RANGE IN STUDY AREA A-29
10 MOOSE WINTER RANGE IN PROJECT AREA.... A-30
IV
-------
APPENDIX A
TERRESTRIAL HABITAT EVALUATION
1-0 INTRODUCTION
This terrestrial habitat analysis was done for the
Diamond Chuitna Coal Project EIS using data collected from
several sources including the coal project baseline studies,
the Susitna River Basin studies conducted by the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) » the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) and other government agencies, and
the USFWS Habitat Evaluation Program. The purpose of the
analysis was to identify the types and quantities of habi-
tats which would be affected by the coal project, to
describe their values to key wildlife species, and to pro-
vide a quantitative basis for comparison of habitat impacts
among project alternatives and between premining and
postreclamation conditions.
2.0 METHODS
Evaluation species were selected on the basis of their
high public interest and/or because they serve as indicator
species for habitats that have significant ecological value.
Using these criteria, the following species were chosen:
moose (Alces alces), brown bear (Ursus arctos), black bear
(U. americanus), trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator), and
lesser sandhill crane (Grus canadensis). Moose, brown
bear, and black bear are upland species whereas swans and
sandhill cranes inhabit wetland and aquatic habitats.
The basis for the terrestrial habitat evaluation was
the composite vegetation maps developed by the Soil
Conservation Services (SCS) and USFWS for the Beluga region
and the vegetation maps developed during the project base-
line study program (ERT 1984b). The ERT maps are at a
larger scale than those produced by SCS/USFWS and were used
for habitat delineation within the mine area, southern
transportation corridor, and Granite Point port area.
Direct comparisons between the two mapping efforts were dif-
ficult due to the significant differences in vegetation
interpretation. The differences are outlined in Table 1.
The habitat units used in the analyses for each species
roughly correspond to the vegetation units delineated on the
base maps. The units were then grouped into four categories
which correspond with the habitat value ratings from the
USFWS mitigation policy (Table 2). The ratings indicate the
extent to which a particular habitat provides the life
requirements for the species under consideration. It is a
rating of a habitat's overall suitability. A habitat for a
particular species is considered only as valuable as the
life factor which is the most limited.
A-l
-------
Table 1
VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CORRELATION
Hap
Unit f
Vierreck et al. (1982)
Hap
Unit t
U.S. Forest Service (1979)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1979)
to
1 Closed Broad leaf Forest/Paper Birch
2 Open Broadleaf Forest/Balaam Poplar
Closed Needleleaf Forest/White Spruce2
3 Open Mixed Forest/Spruce-Birch
4 Needleleaf Wood land/Black Spruce
5 Mixed Hbodland/Spruce-Birch
5 Mixed Noodland/Spruce-Birch
24 Closed broadleaf forest/paper birch
28 Cottonvood, medium aged stands!
25 Coniferous, Mhite spruce, tall stands,
closed forest!
26
41
Deciduous, mixed, old stands, closed
forest
Palustrine - forested need lei caved evergreen
Paluatrine - forested nixed needleleaved
evergreen, broad leaved deciduous'
Black spruce, short stands, closed foreat Palustrine - forested needleleaved evergreen'*
32 Dec id in us, nixed, median aged, woodland
34 Deciduous, nixed, old stands, woodland
6 Open Tall Shrub Scrub/Millow 61 Alder-willow
7 Closed Tall Shrub Scrub/Alder 60 Alder
8 Open Low Shrub ScruVSweetgale-Graas Fen £8 Sphagnum bog
8 Open Low Shrub Scrub/Sweetgale-Graas Fen 69 Sphagnun shrub bog
Open Low Scrub/Willow-Grass Tundra2 64 Sedge-grass
Dry Gaminoid Herbaceous/Midgrass-Shrub2 65 Herbaceous
9 Mesic Gaminoid Herbaceous/Bluejoint-Herb 63 Upland grass
Palustrine - forested nixed needleleaved
evergreen broad leaved decidous'
Palustrine - forested needleleaved evergreen
broadleaved deciduous'
Palustrine - scrub/shrub broadleaved deciduous4
Palustrine - scrub/shrub broadleaved deciduous-*
Palustrine - emergent narroMleaved persistent^*
Pal ua trine - scrub/shrub broadleaved deciduous*1
Palustrine - emergent persistent'
Palustrine - emergent persistent*
Palustrine - emergent persistent^
1 Not mapped within Diamond-Chuitna study area.
2 Not identified within lease area or transportation corridor.
* Classified aa wetland when located on floodplains.
4 Classified aa wetland then located on very poorly and poorly drained soils or on floodplains.
-------
Table 2
RESOURCE CATEGORIES AND MITIGATION PLANNING GOALS*
Resource
Category
Habitat
Value
Designation
Criteria
Mitigation Planning
Goal
very high
high
medium
low
Habitat to be impacted is of
high value for evaluation
species and is unique and
irreplaceable on a national
basis or in the ecoregion
section.
Habitat to be impacted is of
high value for evaluation
species and is relatively
scarce or becoming scarce on
a national basis or in the
ecoregion section.
febitat to be impacted is of
high to medium value for
evaluation species and is
relatively abundant on a
national basis.
Habitat to be impacted is of
medium to low value for
evaluation species.
No loss of existing
habitat value.
No net loss of
in-kind habitat
value.
No net loss of
habitat value while
minimizing loss of
in-kind habitat
value.
Minimize loss of
habitat value.
4aken from BWS Mitigation Policy (FR Vol. 46, No. 15, 23 January 1981).
A-3
-------
Models of species-specific habitat requirements have
been constructed by USFWS for many Alaskan wildlife species
using all pertinent data available (USFWS 1980). These
models and the model of moose habitat developed by ADF&G for
the Susitna River Basin were used in this study.
The habitat parameters used in the models are discussed
below in the species accounts. In addition, snow accumula-
tion was included as a parameter for this analysis as it was
considered a habitat factor of major importance for several
of the species under consideration. From snow accumulation
contours developed for the Susitna River Basin study, an
estimate of 152 m (500 ft) was chosen as the elevation above
which moose would encounter mobility problems in the winter
due to snow depth (ADF&G 1984). It also was considered the
level above which the ice-free season was too short to allow
trumpeter swan nesting (King 1968? Hansen et al. 1971).
To provide additional perspective to the question of
moose winter habitat value, the distribution of moose based
on actual field observations (Faro 1985a) was delineated on
the winter range maps. A fall rutting concentration, not
directly related to vegetation type, was also delineated
based on field observations (Faro 1985a).
Location maps of proposed project components were
overlain on the vegetation maps and the surface area of the
habitat types within their boundaries was estimated using a
compensating polar planimeter. Areas were rounded to the
nearest acre and then converted to hectares. The area of
affected habitat along the southern transportation corridor
was con-sidered to be the area from the west side of the
haul road to the east side of the conveyor system except
where the road separates from the conveyor at the Chuitna
River crossing. The 61 m (200 ft) undisturbed buffer zone
between the haul road and conveyor was considered part of
the direct habitat loss for this analysis.
3.0 SPECIES ACCOUNTS
3.1 LESSER SANDHILL CRANE
3.1.1 Life History Information
Sandhill cranes are common summer residents and
breeders in the Cook Inlet Region. They are most abundant
during spring and fall migration and use tidal flats and
muskegs of the area for staging and feeding. They are com-
mon nesters in the refuges of upper Cook Inlet but were
found to be uncommon nesters in the Beluga region (ERT
1984a).
Sandhill cranes are birds of open country. Their
summer habitat consists of tundra areas with short vegeta-
A-4
-------
tion such as mosses, labrador tea (Ledurn spp.) dwarf birch
(Betula spp.) crowberry (Empetrum ni.grurn), and cloudberry
(Rubus chanaemorus) (Walkinshaw 1949). Cranes roost at
night and during the day between periods of feeding in
wetlands and aquatic areas. They are opportunistic omni-
vores and are able to subsist on a wide variety of food
items such as crowberry, cloudberry, mice, small fish,
snails, and flying insects (Boise 1977). Breeding cranes
usually feed within close proximity of the nest (Walkinshaw
1949) .
3.1.2 Habitat Parameters
Most habitat work related to sandhill cranes in Alaska
has been done in the tundra habitats of the Yukon-Kuskokwim
Delta. These studies, which primarily addressed suitability
of habitats for feeding and nesting, indicate that dry sites
near water bodies appear to be very important for nesting.
Cranes also prefer sites which offer unobstructed views of
the surrounding terrain. Habitat parameters for lesser
sandhill cranes are outlined on Table 3.
Because data from other geographic regions were
lacking, no attempt was made to rate habitat values
according to the Table 2 criteria? rather, a simple model
was developed to differentiate between suitable and
unsuitable crane habitat for the Diamond Chuitna project.
Cover and suitability for reproduction were the life
requirements used to delineate overall habitat suitability.
Habitat above 152 m (500 ft), which might otherwise be con-
sidered suitable, was determined to be limiting for repro-
duction due to late snow melt off.
3.2 TRUMPETER SWAN
3.2.1 Life History Information
Trumpeter swans are common migrants and breeders on the
Kenai Peninsula and along the west coast of Cook Inlet
(USFWS 1980). Once thought to be endangered, recent surveys
of trumpeters on their breeding grounds indicate an
expanding population with a 94 percent increase between 1975
and 1980. A high ratio of non-breeding to breeding swans in
Alaska appears indicative of the fact that the swans are
near the northern limit of their range.
Breeding trumpeters require relatively shallow static
ponds or lakes which range in size from 2.4 to 14 ha (6 to
35 ac) with significant amounts of emergent vegetation such
as Equisetum fluviatile, Carex sp. and Menyanthes trifolia
(Hansen et al"l1971). ~A 145- to 156-day span between
breakup and freezeup is needed to successfully complete the
reproductive cycle (Hansen et al. 1971). This suggests
that, in the project area, most breeding takes place below
500 feet elevation (King 1968; Hansen et al. 1971).
A-5
-------
Table 3
HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OP SANDHILL
CRANE HABITAT SUITABILITY
Life
Requisite
Cover
Reproduction
Habitat Suitability
Suitable
open habitat
low vegetation
good visibility of
surrounding area
wet with occasional
raised areas
73 m (80 yd) or less
to freshwater body
below 152 m (500 ft)
elevation
Unsuitable
closed to open forest
tall shrub
poor visibility of
surrounding area
uniformly wet with no
raised areas
uniformly dry
greater than 73 m
(80 yd) to freshwater
body
greater than 152 m
(500 ft) elevation
Source: USFWS 1980
The range of non-breeding swans is closely tied to that
of the breeding population. Ponds and lakes used by non-
breeders should provide adequate open water and emergent
vegetation should not be used by breeding pairs because
territorial conflicts may arise (USFWS 1980). Since the
present population is expanding, lakes and ponds which
appear suitable for breeding but are not used at this time
must be considered potential breeding habitat.
3.2.2 Hab i tat Parameters
The available baseline data on potential habitats for
swans in the study area are somewhat limited since the vege-
tation map units are quite broad and do not address aquatic
vegetation or water depth along the shores of lakes and
ponds. Adult and juvenile swans feed on land only to a
limited extent? cygnets feed exclusively in the water.
Therefore, upland terrestrial vegetation along the peri-
meters of water bodies was not considered in the analysis.
Habitat parameters for trumpeter swans are presented in
Table 4. The 152 m (500 ft) contour was used as an approxi-
mate upper limit for breeding habitat. The extent of
aquatic and emergent vegetation was determined from wetland
maps developed by the USFWS wetlands inventory.
A-6
-------
Table 4
HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OF
TRUMPETER SWAN HABITAT SUITABILITY
Life Requisite
Size of pond or
lake
Reproduction
Elevation above
sea level
Food and cover
Aquatic and
emergent
vegetation
Habitat Suitability
High
2.4 - 14 ha
(6 - 35 ac)
<152 m
(500 ft)
Medium
14.4 - 51.2
(36 - 128 ac)
<152 m
(500 ft)
Low
>51.2 ha
(128 ac)
>152 m
(500 ft)
Abundant
Common
Uncommon to
none
Source: USFWS 1980
3.3 BLACK BEAR
3.3.1 LifeHistory Information
Black bears are common residents of the Cook Inlet
region and are found in many different habitat types. They
feed primarily on grasses, sedges (Carex sp.), horsetail
(Equisetum sp.), and when available, carrion (ADF&G 1976).
Late summer and fall food items consist primarily of salmon
and berry-producing plant species such as blueberry
(Vaccinium sp.), elderberry (Sambucus rasemosa), bearberry
(ArctostaPholos sp.), crowberry (Empetrum nigrum), and high-
bush cranberry (Viburnum edule) . Bears of all ages avoid
extensive open areas such as grasslands, low shrublands, and
tundra except when they are feeding on alpine berry patches
or in tideflats (Schwartz and Franzman 1980; Fame 1974?
Mcllroy 1970). Black bears usually do not range further
than 315 m (350 yd) from cover to feed (Pacific Working
Group 1977). Females with cubs will often remain near
mature trees so that escape cover is readily available for
the cub.
3.3.2 Habitat Parameters
The primary habitat characteristics used to evaluate
black bear habitat in the project area were the availability
and diversity of preferred herbaceous food species, avail-
ability of salmon, and the proximity to mature trees. These
parameters are shown on Table 5.
A-7
-------
Table 5
HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION OF
BLACK BEAR HABITAT SUITABILITY
Life Requisite
Food
Diversity of food
species
% cover herbaceous
food species
spring/early
summer
Availability of
salmon
Cover
Proximity to
mature trees
(Escape cover)
Habitat Suitability
High
Medium
Low
2-4 species
16 - 100%
common to
abundant
<400 m
(440 yd) to
mature trees
or tall shrub
with >25%
canopy cover
1 species
5 - 15%
uncommon
400 m
(440 yd)
to 8 km
(5 mi)
< 5%
rare to
none
>5 mile
to mature
trees
Source: USFWS unpublished model
3.4 BROWN BEAR
3.4.1 Life History Information
Brown bears are distributed throughout much of the
coastal area of Cook Inlet including the Beluga region.
They are generally solitary animals. Brown bears feed on
sedges, grasses (Calamagrostis sp. and Arctogrostis sp.),
and horsetails during the spring and early summer but will
use a wide variety of foods when available (Sommerville
1965). During the summer and fall, bears feed on salmon.
From mid-summer through fall, bears also rely heavily on
several types of berries including blueberries, soapberries
(Shiphardia canadensis), crowberries, bearberries, and
lowbush cranberries (Vaccinium vitisideae) (USFWS 1980).
Brown bears are found in a variety of habitat types but
generally prefer relatively open higher areas (Erickson
1965j Sommerville 1965). They also extensively utilize low-
lying areas free of snow in the spring after emerging from
A-8
-------
their dens. Bears on Kodiak Island spent 50 percent of
their time in low-lying areas, 35 percent in foothills, and
15 percent in uplands (Berns and Hensel 1972).
Elevation of denning habitats varies in Alaska. In the
upper Susitna Valley, dens were found at elevations
averaging 1,468 m (4,818 ft) (Miller and McAllister 1982).
On Kodiak Island and the Alaska Peninsula, dens averaged 549
ra (1,800 ft) and 396 m (1,300 ft) in elevation, respec-
tively. Bears within the study area very likely den at
lower elevations (ERT 1984a). DOWL (1981) suggests that
much of the Beluga area is unusable or marginal bear denning
habitat because it is an elevated plateau and has con-
siderable lowland tree cover.
3.4.2 Habitat Parameters
The parameters used to evaluate brown bear habitats in
the project area were food value (by season) and cover
(Table 6). Reproduction was not used as an evaluation para-
meter. Brown bears have relatively large home ranges. It
is quite possible that if vegetation types within the pro-
ject area were not optimum for food, bears would feed in
adjacent more suitable areas.
3.5 MOOSE
3.5.1 Life History Information
Moose are common inhabitants of the Beluga region and
constitute an important economic resource for residents and
non-residents alike. Moose are primarily associated with
habitat types that include lowland bog communities, upland
shrub areas, and early successional communities influenced
by fire or flooding (LeResche et al. 1974).
Calving occurs from late May through June and takes
place primarily in lowland bog areas. Cows with calves
often remain in these areas throughout the summer so that
they can feed on the abundant herbaceous vegetation found
there. Moose move from their lowland wintering areas into
upland shrub areas throughout the summer and fall. In late
fall and early winter, they move down into willow com-
munities along rivers and streams (LeResche et al. 1974).
Moose feed mostly on browse-type vegetation. Of these,
willows (Salix sp.) are the most important species followed
by birch (Betula sp.). Other species consumed are cotton-
wood (Populus sp.), aspen (Populus tremuloides)f and alder
(Alnus sp.). During the winter, 80 percent of the diet con-
sistsof browse species, whereas during the summer, grasses
and forbs constitute a significant portion of the diet.
Important species include sedges, horsetail, bluejoint
grass (Calamagrostis canadensis), and fireweed (Epilobium
angustifolium) (USFWS 1980).
A-9
-------
Table 6
HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVALUATION
OP BROWN BEAR HABITAT SUITABILITY
Life Requisite
Food
% grasses and horsetail
(spring/early summer)
% berry-producing species
(late summer/early fall)
Distance to salmon stream
(late summer/early fall)
Cover
% tree canopy cover
Habitat Suitability
High
Medium
Low
>20%
>20%
10-20%
1-19%
<30 mi 30-50 mi >50 mi
0-60%
60-100%
Source: USFWS 1980
3.5.2 Habitat Parameters
Because habitat requirements for moose differ sea-
sonally, the criteria used for the analysis were divided
into two categories: winter range and spring/summer/fall
range. Parameters used were food value and cover. Key
variables for both seasons were browse quality (i.e., vege-
tation species and percent of total available browse), quan-
tity (total available willow, birch, and alder), and
presence of lowbush cranberry (Tables 7 and 8).
4.0 HABITAT ANALYSIS RESULTS
Up to 2,500 ha (6,175 ac) would be lost as a result of
the development of the mine and mine facilities, transpor-
tation corridor, airport, housing facilities, and port site.
The area includes seven of the nine vegetation types located
within the project area and approximately 40 ha (99 ac) of
aquatic habitat in the form of small ponds. The vegetation
type sustaining the greatest loss would be mixed woodland/
spruce-birch followed by closed tall shrub scrub/alder and
low shrub/sweetgale-grass fen, respectively. The latter is
a wetland vegetation type.
The habitat suitabilities of the vegetation types
according to the parameters examined for the key wildlife
species are summarized in Table 9. Table 10 provides a
A-10
-------
Table 7
HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVMiUATION OF
MDOSE WINTER RANGE SUITABILITY
Life Requisite
Food
Browse quality
species and % total
available
Brcwse quantity
total available
Salix sp., Betula sp.r
Alnus sp.
% cover of Vaccinium
yitis-idaea
Coverl
Availability of
cover as indicated
by canopy2 closure
Habitat Suitability
High
Medium
Low
Salix sp,
Betula
Salix sp.
Betula
Alnus sp.
paperifera glandula
Populus sp. Betula nana
>300 Ib/ac 100-200 Ib/ac 1-99 Ib/ac
1-5%
CL-CF
CL-DF
CL-MF
QP-CF
OP-DF
QP-MF
T/S
Cover types - CF - Coniferous forest
DF - Deciduous forest
MF - Mixed forest
2 Canopy type - CL - Closed
OP - Open
Source: ADF&G 1984
LS - Low shrub
TS - Tall shrub
HSG - Herbaceous
sedge/grass
A-ll
-------
Table 8
HABITAT PARAMETERS FOR EVAHJATION OF MOOSE
SPfOJXS/SlMER/FALL RANGE SUITABILITY
Habitat Suitability
Life Requisite High _ Medium _ Low _
Food
Browse quality Salix sp. Salix sp. Alnus sp.
species and % total Betula Betula
available paper if era glandulosa
Populus sp. Betula nana
Browse quantity >300 Ibs/ac 100-299 Ibs/ac 1-99 Ibs/ac
total available
Salix sp., Betula sp.,
Alnus sp.
Total annual forb >120 Ibs/ac 300-120 Ibs/ac 0-30 Ibs/ac
production
Cover
Availability of cover CL-CF - TG
as indicated by canopy 2 CL-DF LS
closure * CL-MF HSG
OP-CF
OP-DF
OP-MF
Cover types - CF - Coniferous forest LS - Low shrub
DF - Deciduous forest TS - Tall shrub
MF - Mixed forest BSG - Herbaceous
sedge/grass
2 Canopy type - CL - Closed
OP - Open
Source: ADF1G 1984
A-12
-------
Table 9
HABITAT SUITABILITY OF VEGETATION MAP UNITS FOR WILDLIFE SPECIES
High
Med iurn
Low
Species/
Mapping System SCS^-
Sandhill crane
Trumpeter swan
Black bear
Brown bear
Moose
(spring/
summer/
fall)
Moose
(winter)
68,69
68,69
92
24,26,28
41,32,34
60,61,63
68,69
25,26,28
32,34,41
60,61,63
64,65,68
69
24,32,61
24,25,27
31,32,61
Viereck2 Viereck Viereck
et al. 1982 et al . 1982 SCS et al. 1982
8 - ...
8 91 -
1,2,3,4
5,7,8,9
2,3,4 22,24 1
5,6,7
8,9
1,5,6 21,22,25 2,3,7 41,42,43 4
26,27,28 8,9 46
29,31,33
34,35,36
60,62,63
68,69
1,5,6 21,22,26 2,3,4 35,43,46 8,9
28,29,33 7 51,63,68
34,36,41 69
42,60,62
^Vegetation classification scheme used in mapping areas outside the project
area developed by the USDA, Soil Conservation Service (SCS).
P
^Vegetation classification scheme used within the project area developed by
Viereck et al. (1982).
A-13
-------
Table 10a
DIRECT LOSS IF WILDLIFE HABITAT AW> SUITABILITY OF HABITATS IN HECTARES (ACRES)
FROM MINE DEVELOPMENT BY PROJECT COMPOtCNT
I
l->
**
10 Year
Mine Limit
Species
Sandhill
Crane
Trun peter
Swan
Black Bear
Brawn Bear
Moose
Spr ing/ Sinner/
Fall
Moose
Winter
Suitable
X
X
Unsuitable
High
Med
Low
NU2
High
Hsd
Low
NU
High
Had
Low
NU
High
Had
Low
NU
High
fed
Low
NU
Mine Service
Area
0
___
22(55)
0
0
0
22(55)
22(55)
0
0
0
22(55)
0
0
0
14(35)
8(20)
0
0
0
0
0
22(55)
Pit
Area
0
0
0
564(1411)
0
0
0
575(1438)
564(1411)
0
0
11(27)
564(1411)
0
0
11(27)
360(950)
85(212)
180(449)
0
0
0
0
575(1438)
Stockpile
Roads and
Areas Settling Ponds
0
0
0
80(200)
t~*m*m
.
-
80(200)
80(200)
0
0
0
. 79(198)
0
0
1(2ac)
47(117)
33(83)
0
0
0
0
0
80(200)
0
~_
68(169)
__
_,,
**
68(169)
64(158)
0
0
4(10)
64(158)
__-
4(10)
47(117)
21(52)
0
0
0
0
0
68(169)
30 Year
Mine Limit
Pit
Area
0
0
0
2029(5012)
0
0
0
2029(5012)
1982(4955) '
0
0
23(57)
1982(4955)
0
0
23(57)
1356(3349)
653(1612)
20(49)
0
0
a
0
2029(5012)
Total
22(55)
575(1438)
80(200)
68(169)
2029(5012)
1 Exact sighting not finalized.
2 Not utilized.
-------
Table IQb
DIRECT LOSS OF WILDLIFE HABIIAI AND SUITABILITY Of HABITATS IN HECTARES (ACRES) FROM NINE DEVELOPMENT BY PROJECT COMPONENT
01
Port Sites
Speciea
Sandhill
Crane
Trumpeter
Sxan
Black Bear
Bratm Bear
Moose
Spring/SlMDor/
Fall
Moose
Winter
Suitable
X
X
Unsuitable
High
Medium
Low
NU2
High
Medium
Lo«
NU
High
Medium
LOM
NU
High
Madium
LOM
NU
High
Medium
Low
NU
Granite
Point
64(158)
0
0
16 (4i)
0
0
0
80(190)
80(198)
0
0
0
80(198)
0
0
0
0
74(183)
6(15)
0
0
16(41)
64(157)
0
Transportation Corridors
Ladd
6(16)
0
0
111(277)
9(23)
0
0
110(271)
116(287)
0
0
3(7)
116(287)
0
0
3(7)
0
116(287)
0
3(7)
0
110(271)
£(16)
3(7)
Southern
16(00)
0
0
53(131)
0
0
0
69(171)
69(171)
0
0
0
67(166)
2(5)
a
a
22(54)
46(114)
1(3)
0
1(2)
3(8)
38(93)
28(68)
Eastern
14(35)
0
0
40(9?)
2(6)
0
0
52(128)
54(134)
0
0
0
54(134)
0
0
0
4(10)
50(124)
0
0
0.5(2)
29(73)
14(34)
19(47)
Northern
23(56)
0
0
SOU24)
1(3)
0
0
72(177)
73(180)
0
0
0
73(180)
0
0
0
5(12)
68(168)
0
0
2(4)
32(79)
22(53)
18(45)
Housing
Lone
Creek
0
0
0
29(72)
0
0
0
29(72)
29(72)
0
0
D
29(72)
0
0
0
25(62)
4(10)
0
0
0
0
0
29(72)
Facilities
Three-
Mile
0
0
D
29(72)
0
0
0
29(72)
29(72)
0
0
0
29(72)
0
0
0
0
29(72)
0
0
0
29(72)
0
0
and Airport
Congahbuna Material Sites1
Lake1
6(15)
0
0
23(57)
2(5)
0
0
27(67)
29(72)
0
0
0
29(72)
0
0
0
10(25)
19(47)
0
0
10(25)
2(5)
3(6)
14(36)
»5
0
0
0
106(262)
0
0
0
106(262)
106(262)
0
0
0
106(262)
0
0
0
85(210)
21(52)
0
0
0
0
0
106(262)
n
0
0
0
119(294)
0
0
0
119(294)
119(294)
0
0
0
119(294)
0
0
0
119(294)
0
0
0
119(294)
0
0
0
to
15(37)
0
0
119(294)
0
0
0
134(331)
134(331)
0
0
0
134(331)
0
0
0
91(224)
45(111)
0
0
0
0
0
134(331)
Total
'Exact sighting not finalized.
^ot utilized.
80(198) 119(293) 69(171) 54(134) 73(180) 29(72) 29(72) 29(72)
106(262) 119(294) 134(331)
-------
breakdown by project component of the surface area of the
various habitat types according to the value to the key spe-
cies .
4.1 LESSER SANDHILL CRANE
Distribution of sandhill crane habitat for the study
area is given on Figure 1 and within Diamond Alaska's pro-
posed project area on Figure 2.
The only vegetation type found to be suitable for
sandhill cranes was open low shrub/sweetgale-grass fen.
These wetland areas provide adequate open space, food spe-
cies, and patterned ground necessary for nesting. Areas
below the 152 m (500 ft) contour were classified as having
an overall habitat quality suitable for nesting cranes.
Significantly better crane habitat is found just southwest
of the study area in the lowlands of Trading Bay Refuge.
4.1.1 Port Areas
A significant portion (80 percent) of the area of pro-
posed development at the Granite Point Port site is classi-
fied as having some suitability for cranes. Only a
relatively small portion (2 percent) of the proposed devel-
opment at the Ladd port site is classified as having some
suitability for cranes.
4.1.2 Transportation Corridors
A total of 16 ha (40 ac) of suitable crane habitat
makes up only 23 percent which will be lost to the develop-
ment of the haul road and conveyor system in the southern
corridor. Approximately the same amount (27 percent-total)
of crane habitat would be affected by the eastern corridor.
The largest amount of crane habitat 23 ha (56ac) or 32 per-
cent, would be lost within the northern corridor.
4.1.3 Mineand Mine Facilities
The low shrub communities in the mine area were con-
sidered of limited value for reproduction due to shortness
of the ice-free season. These areas could possibly provide
some feeding or roosting habitat for sandhill cranes.
4.1.4 Airport and Housing Facilities
Only small areas of suitable open low shrub habitat
would be lost to development at the Lone Creek site. Use by
nesting cranes would be limited by elevation.
The Threemile housing facility site has no suitable
crane habitat within the area to be cleared.
The Congahbuna Lake site is near the 152 m (500 ft)
contour, but would likely receive some crane use. Approxi-
A-16
-------
1 61 2 3 4
BS=Ei^Z
SCALE IN MILES
SANDHILL CRANE NESTING HABITAT IN STUDY AREA
Diamond Chuitna Environmental Impact Statement
A-17
FIGURE 1
-------
-------
-------
Diamond Chuitna Environmental
Impact Statement
500 FT. CONTOUR
LEGEND
HABITAT VALUE
H
SUITABLE
UNSUITABLE
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000
8000
SANDHILL CRANE NESTING
HABITAT IN PROJECT AREA
FIGURE 2
-------
mately 20 percent would be suitable crane habitat. Since
the exact site has not been delineated, this amount may
vary.
4.1.5 Material Sites
The only material site with any significant amount of
potential crane habitat is Site $8 which has approximately
15 ha (37 ac) of low shrub habitat. This area is proximate
to the 152 m (500 ft) elevation which suggests it has
limited value for crane reproduction.
4.2 TRUMPETER SWAN
Within the study area, a total of 14 suitable aquatic
habitats were identified as having potentially high value as
swan nesting habitat. Only areas of potentially high value
were delineated outside the Diamond Alaska project area
(Figure 3). Habitat possibly suitable for swans within the
project area is presented in Figure 4.
4.2.1 Port Sites
No swan nesting habitat was identified in the area of
the Granite Point port site. Some wetland types could con-
ceivably be used by non-breeders but this would be only to a
very small degree because of the lack of open water bodies.
These wetland types were classified as "not utilized".
At the Ladd port site, two small ponds will be directly
affected by the proposed development. The smallest is below
the minimum size for swan nesting habitat, but the larger
one would be classified as high quality. Another small lake
just north of the port, also high quality, would be
indirectly affected by the development of this site.
4.2.2 Transportation Corridors
Only two lakes within the southern transportation
corridor were classified as having a high suitability for
trumpeter swans (Figure 4). However, both lakes are near
the 152 m (500 ft) elevation which may limit their use for
swan breeding in years with late springs. A total of three
lakes within the corridor were classified as moderate value
based primarily on their size. The largest lake, Congahbuna
Lake, ranked low because it is larger than the size pre-
ferred by swans. It may be used for feeding by non-breeders
since aquatic and emergent vegetation is plentiful at the
south end of the lake.
Two small lakes and one large lake, Chuitbuna Lake,
within or adjacent to the eastern corridor were considered
potential swan nesting habitat. Although a final route
selection would likely go around these lakes, indirect
impact from disturbance would likely make it unsuitable for
nesting.
A-19
-------
.. 'i UEGEJ^D
*9^ '!>' ^j/'H^jT^T VALUE
1 0 1 234
ES^S^^a^!^
SCALE IN MILES
TRUMPETER SWAN POTENTIAL NESTING HABITAT IN STUDY AREA
Diamond Chuitna Environmental Impact Statement
A-20
FIGURE 3
-------
-------
Diamond Chuitna Environmental
Impact Statement
LEGEND
HABITAT VALUE
- HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
SCALE IN FEET
0 2000 4000
8000
TRUMPETER SWAN
POTENTIAL NESTING
HABITAT IN PROJECT AREA
FIGURE 4
-------
Three large lakes and 4 small lakes adjacent to the
northern transportation corridor appear to provide some
degree of nesting habitat for swans. The largest, Viapan
Lake, would be classified as low quality due to its large
size, 100 ha (250 ac) . Tukallah Lake, on Threemile Creek,
would be ranked medium primarily due to its size (39 ha [96
ac]) but it could be used by non-breeding swans for feeding.
Four small unnamed lakes adjacent to this route would be
classified as high quality for nesting swans.
None of these habitats would be directly affected by
the road or conveyor system.
4.2.3 Mine and MineFacilities
No suitable habitat for breeding swans was located in
the mine area. The primary limiting factor is the low
number of ice-free day due to the elevation of the mine
area. Non-breeding swans may be seen in some open water
areas of the mine site during the summer but use is likely
to be insignificant.
4.2.4 Airport and Housing Facilities
No suitable swan habitat occurs within the Lone Creek
site or the Threemile site.
The Congahbana Lake site is adjacent to high, medium,
and low quality swan nesting habitat but direct habitat loss
would be minor (about 2 ha [5 acj) depending on the exact
site. Indirect impacts from disturbance would be signifi-
cantly greater than actual habitat loss.
4.2.5 Material Sites
No suitable swan habitat occurs within Sites 5 and 7.
Site 8 is adjacent to medium quality swan habitat but
no direct loss of habitat is expected from its development.
4.3 BLACK BEAR
None of the habitat types located within the project
area were found to be limiting as far as availability of
forage species. Cover was also found to be adequate
throughout the project area with the exception of some
grasslands west of Congahbuna Lake which are farther than
400 m (400 yd) from escape cover (Figure 5 and 6).
4.3.1 Port Areas
All habitat types within the proposed Granite Point
port site were classified as having high value for black
bear as were habitats within the Ladd site.
A-22
-------
,'4
LEGEND
VALUE
BftOWN BEAR
BROWN
BLACK BEAR AND BROWN BEAR HABITAT IN STUDY AREA
Diamond Chuitna Environmental Impact Statement
FIGURE 5
A-23
-------
-------
0
Diamond Chuitna Environmental
Impact Statement
LEGEND
HABITAT VALUE
HIGH BROWN BEAR
MEDIUM BROWN BEAR
NOTE: All black bear habitat
within the project area is high
value. There is no low value
for brown bear.
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000
8000
BLACK BEAR AND BROWN BEAR
HABITAT IN PROJECT AREA
FIGURE 6
-------
4.3.2 Transportation Corridors
All habitat types within the southern, eastern, and
northern transportation corridors were classified as having
high suitability for black bear.
4«3.3. Mine and Mine Facilities
All habitat types were classified as high value except
for open water areas.
4.3.4 Airport and Housing Facilities
Within the area of the proposed Lone Creek site, all
habitat which would be lost was classified as having high
suitability for black bear. The same was true for the
Congahbuna Lake site and Threemile site.
4.3.5 Material Sites
Material sites 5, 1, and 8 were all considered to con-
tain high quality black bear habitat,
4.4 BROWN BEAR
The only habitat type within the project area which was
found to be limiting for forage species and cover was the
closed broadleaf forest/paper birch. This forest type has
a relatively low percentage of berry-producing species and
herbaceous forage species. Tree canopy cover is over 60
percent and the habitat was classified as having a medium
overall suitability (Figures 5 and 6).
Bear densities are likely higher in the mine area since
brown bears prefer open areas in the higher elevations.
4.4.1 Port Areas
All habitat types with the area to be developed at the
proposed Granite Point and Ladd port sites were classified
as having high overall habitat suitability for brown bear
except for a small amount of open water habitat at the Ladd
port site.
4.4.2 Transportation Corridors
Ninety-seven percent of the area to be developed within
the southern corridor was classified as having a high
overall suitability for brown bear. The remaining 3 percent
was closed paper birch forest with a medium habitat suita-
bility value.
All habitat types within the northern and eastern
corridor were classified as high quality for brown bear.
A-25
-------
4.4.3 Mine and Mine Facilities
All of the terrestrial habitat within the 30-year limit
of the mine, the mine facilities, and overburden stock
piles areas were considered to have a high overall habitat
value for brown bears and provide good interspersion of
habitat types. Open water areas, primarily pond habitats,
were considered low quality habitat but were not delineated
on the maps since all are relatively small. Total areas of
aquatic habitat were approximately 24 ha (59 ac).
4,4.4 Airport and Housing Facili ties
All habitats which would be lost in development of the
Lone Creek site were classified as having a high overall
suitability for brown bear, as were those in the Congahbuna
Lake site and Threemile site.
4.4.5 Material Sites
All habitats within the three material sites were
classified as high quality brown bear habitat.
4.5 MOOSE
A higher degree of resolution was achievable in deline-
ating quality of moose habitat in the project area than for
the other species. This was largely due to the discrete
habitat requirements of moose and the greater amount of
available information on their habitat requirements.
Suitable spring/summer/fall range for moose is abundant
throughout the project area and does not appear to be a
limiting factor for the local population. Suitable habitat
is found in low-lying areas which provide browse and herba-
ceous vegetation in the spring and early summer prior to the
snow melt in the higher elevations. Once the upper areas
are free of snow, moose can move up into extensive areas of
high quality summer and fall range north of the Chuitna
River (Figures 7 and 8).
Moose winter range is restricted to areas where snow
accumulation does not limit availability of browse or mobil-
ity. The 152 m (500 ft) contour was used in this area as
the upper elevation limit. The distribution of moose winter
range in the study area and project area is given in Figures
9 and 10.
Some riparian areas very likely receive use dispropor-
tional to the size of the habitat areas. This may occur
along both the Chuitna River and stream 2003.
A-26
-------
LEGib
rtlGH}''.;v~ v
MECTUM k f
s. &
.,«,r-'
.
--4 *.m ,-- . ~-"f:;-*«'»-%,
Cl^
-#$».".!;"*/' ^"'.'.«\i»
MOOSE SPRING/SUMMER/FALL RANGE IN STUDY AREA
Diamond Chuitna Environmental Impact Statement
A-27
FIGURE 7
-------
-------
A-28
-------
[«: Af» *
\ *.'Xi , N , : -- - J ^ \ ',<,
S ' - -* I * ".*«« l^ *° Ev ' ',
T,*-At»; »^-1- ,^*
~'F- ->fc# '
' T -^ry ^ ^' ^^ x-.-.' 'r-.^,'! v
. u.-yv- ^^4^Ky?'V -l.r^vf.f.: . fi^ V^
»*-^f i '^KF^X ^-'' i-:^^«f '-'". x>
* * X-. i - tfarW X.. * , x - ! A *!?**» , - i » M
;4
^^..'"../-L^Q^to, ,
1>\-;^^>lApJ_TAT^VALglE.
*: --.v^^'-^iilfc/^ -r/--
MEDIUM
-. -4 ; ' rsO'>-'
,LQW i.rJ w,':, -r'^_^., if '
"Of cdfjbENTRAflON ! "
101 234
E^«S=E=X
SCALE IN MILES
MOOSE WINTER RANGE IN STUDY AREA
Diamond Chuitna Environmental Impact Statement
A-29
FIGURE 9
-------
-------
LEGEND
HABITAT VALUE
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
AREA OF CONCENTRATION
(from Faro 1985a)
SCALE IN FEET
0 2000 4000 8000
MOOSE WINTER RANGE
IN PROJECT AREA
Diamond Chuitna Environmental
Impact Statement
FIGURE 10
-------
4.5.1 Port Areas
No areas of high suitability for either spring/summer/
fall range or winter range occurred within the area to be
developed at the proposed Granite Point port site. These
areas would be characterized as having moderate spring/
summer/fall values and low to moderate winter range value.
It should be noted, however, that patterns of actual moose
distribution in the winter (Figure 10) indicate high utili-
zation of the coastal area including Granite Point which
contradicts the results of the habitat modelling to some
extent. Forage value of the habitat, which would be
directly disrupted by port facilities, is probably low but
the snow conditions and mix of habitats within the coastal
strip as a whole is evidently favorable.
of the habitat types in the Ladd port site (except
for 3 ha [7ac] of open water) were classified as medium
spring/summer/f all habitat. Only 6 ha (16 ac) were con-
sidered as having low value for winter range? the remainder
received a medium rating. Actual utilization by moose in
winter is probably high due to its proximity to the coast.
4.5.2 Transportation Corridor
The southern transportation system would affect a wide
range of moose habitat. Moderate quality spring/summer/fall
habitat would be the major type lost (67 percent) followed
by high quality habitat (32 percent).
Winter range affected by the haul road and conveyor
would largely be areas of low suitability (90 percent).
High quality moose winter range lost to development amounts
to one percent of the total lost along the corridor. Large
areas of high suitability occur west of the proposed haul
road.
The eastern corridor alignment would affect medium
quality spring/summer/fall habitat to the greatest degree
(93 percent) and high quality range to the lesser extent (7
percent) .
No significant high quality winter range would be
affected by the eastern route. Fifty-four percent of the
route was classified as medium quality and 26 percent was
low. Approximately 35 percent of the route would not be
used due to its elevation (above 500 ft) .
The northern corridor alignment would affect a rela-
tively small amount of high quality moose spring/summer/fall
habitat (5 ha [12 ac]) located along Lone Creek and
Tributary 2003. These habitats are also considered high
quality for winter range, but the high elevation (approxi-
mately 152 m [500 ft]) would likely preclude their use by
moose. Most of the habitat affected by this route alignment
A-31
-------
(93 percent) is of medium quality for moose spring/summer/
fall use.
Forty-four percent of this corridor (32 ha [79 ac]) is
of medium moose winter range with another 30 percent being
classified as low quality.
4.5.3 Mi ne and Mine Facilities
Terrestrial habitats within the 30-year mine limit area
are predominantly high quality moose spring/summer/fall
range (67 percent) with most of the remaining area being of
moderate quality. Less than one percent was classified as
having low suitability. Since winter range was defined as
areas below 152 m (500 ft) elevation, this area would con-
tain no moose winter range. The possibility does exist that
moose could use some of this area in winters of low snowfall
or in early winter before significant snow accumulation.
However, its significance as winter range would not be great
over time.
4-5.4 airport and Housing Facilities
A majority (86 percent) of the habitat lost in
developing the Lone Creek site is classified as having a
high overall habitat suitability for spring/summer/fall
range but was not considered suitable for winter range due
to the elevation. The remaining areas were considered of
medium quality for moose summer range.
The moose habitat at the Congahbuna Lake site is pre-
dominately medium quality spring/summer/fall habitat but
there is a significant amount of high quality habitat (34
percent). This area lies near the 152 m (500 ft) elevation
so it is questionable whether moose are able to use the area
in typical winters.
All of the habitat at the Threemile site is classified
as being of medium quality for both moose spring/summer/fall
habitat and for moose winter range.
4.5.5 Material Sites
A majority of habitats within material sites #5 and #8
provide high quality spring/summer/fall range for moose.
Site #7 contains all high quality range. No low quality
habitat was found within any of the areas proposed for use.
Sites #5 and #8 are too high in elevation to provide
winter range in normal years. Site #7 is located on a
south-facing slope above Nikolai Creek within a long band of
high quality winter range. All of the habitat types at this
site were characterized as high quality winter range.
A-32
-------
4.6 COMPARISON OF FEE- AND POSTMINING H&BITAT VALUE
4.6.1 Vegetation Types
The four major vegetation types which presently occur
within the 10-year mine limit and overburden stockpile areas
would be replaced by seven vegetation types during the
reclamation process. Three of these vegetation types would
be wooded types, only one of which, the mixed woodland, is
presently found within the project area. These include:
mixed woodland/spruce-birch, spruce woodland, and birch
woodland. The mixed woodland/spruce-birch would be the most
extensive type reestablished in the disturbed areas (Table
11). Smaller amounts of pure spruce stands and pure birch
stands would replace some of the natural mixed woodland.
Three shrub types would be developed to replace the low
shrub/sweetgale grass fen type. These include one natural
type, closed tall shrub scrub alder, and two artificial
types, open-tall shrub scrub/willow and open shrub scrub/
mixed shrub.
The areas of vegetation types removed and replacement
vegetation types are given in Table 11.
4.6.2 Habitat Values
The value of these replacement vegetation types for
wildlife species would vary considerably depending upon
several factors such as success of reestablishment, growth
rates of the trees and shrubs, annual forage production and
rates of natural introductions of native species. Habitat
values would likely increase over time as the communities
mature.
Since a major factor in determining habitat quality
involves quantity of available forage (i.e., percent cover
of berry-producing species) and this data is not available
for the replacement vegetation types, the types cannot be
evaluated using the criteria used for the overall habitat
analysis. Only subjective values can be assigned based on
plant species composition and professional judgment.
Sandhill cranes and trumpeter swans would not be
affected by the mine development so black bear, brown bear
and moose habitat only are discussed in this analysis.
4.6.3 Black Bear
The overall habitat value of all the revegetation com-
munity types would likely be medium due to the lack of
diversity of succulent herbaceous understory species and
berry-producing species, especially during the initial years
after reclamation. Lack of mature trees or dense shrub
A-33
-------
Table 11
COMPARISON OF AREAS OF HABITAT LOST TO MINING
&CTIVTTI£S AND REPLACEMajr HABITAT
Vegetation Typesl
Premining Habitat Replacement Habitat
(hectares [acres]) (hectares [acres])
Mixed Woodland/Spruce Birch
Spruce Woodland
Birch Woodland
Mesic Graminoid Herbaceous/
Bluejoint Herb
Open Low Shrub Scrub/
Sweetgale-grass Fen
Open Tall Shrub Scrub/
Willow
Closed Tall Shrub Scrub/
Alder
Open Shrub Scrub/kLxed
Shrub-grass
Opai Water
398 (984)
34 (84)
117 (291)
105 (262)
Total
7 (18)
662 (16395
222 (549)
55 (137)
83 (206)
125 (310)
0
24 (60)
104 (259)
47 (118)
0
660 (1639)
*-It should be noted that pranining and postnining habitat types that have
the same name do not necessarily have the same composition or value to
wildlife.
A-34
-------
cover for escape may inhibit use until communities mature.
Relative values of each replacement habitat are given in
Table 12.
4.6.4 Brown Bear
Brown bears are a more wide-ranging species than black
bears. Therefore, the effect of limited habitat on brown
bear may not be as significant since the bears can compen-
sate by using more suitable habitat outside the mine area.
Lack of diversity of forb and berry-producing species
may decrease the quality of replacement vegetation types.
However, since grasses would be a major component of most
all types, this may compensate for the deficiency.
Since brown bears are primarily an open country spe-
cies, habitat values of wooded types would decrease as they
mature and develop a closed canopy.
4.6.5 Moose (spring/summer/fall range)
Snow depth during the winter would limit the mine area
for moose winter range so use would occur during spring
through fall.
The major habitat parameters determining the suita-
bility of a vegetation type for moose during this time
period are browse quality and quantity, availability of
cover, and forb production.
Browse quality should be good in all woodland and shrub
types with the possible exception of closed tall schrub
scrub/alder but browse quantities are speculative at this
point. The open tall shrub scrub/willow would be highest in
habitat value? forb production would likely be low. In all,
very few forbs would be introduced. Cover would likely not
be a limiting factor affecting overall habitat quality.
4.6.6 OverallHabitat Quality
Surface areas of habitats according to value for key
species are presented in Table 13 for both the premining and
postreclamation condition using the assumptions developed
above. Quality of the replacement habitat for wildlife
within the 10-year mine limit would actually be highly
dependent on the success of the reclamation and the succes-
sion of the new communities. It is suspected that replace-
ment communities would provide lower quality habitat than
the existing community types but would increase in value
over time as the stands mature and resemble more closely
premining diversity and forage species composition.
A-35
-------
Table 12
RELATIVE HABITAT VALUE FOR REPLACEMENT HABITAT
FOR BLACK BEAR, BROWN BEAR AND MOOSE
Replacement
Community Type
Mixed Woodland/
Spruce-Birch
Spruce Woodland
Birch Woodland
Black Bear
Medium
Medium
Medium
Mesic Graminoid Herbaceous/
Bluejoint Herb Medium
Open Tall Shrub Scrub
Willow
Closed Tall Shrub Scrub
Alder
Open Shrub Scrub/
Mixed Shrubs
Medium
Medium
Medium
Table 13
Species
Brown Bear
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
Moose
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
High
Low
High
COMPARISON OF PRSMINING AND POSTMINING
HABITAT VALUES FOR EVALUATION SPECIES
Premining
Evaluation Habitat Habitat
Species Value (Hectares [acres]
Black Bear High
Med
Low
Brown Bear High
Med
Low
Moose High
Summer/Fall Med
Low
660 (1639)
0
0
660 (1639)
0
0
398 (984)
257 (637)
0
Postmining
Habitat
) (Hectares [acres])
0
660 (
0
660 (
0
0
71 (
485 (
104 (
1639)
1639)
178)
1202)
259)
A-36
-------
5.0 DISCUSSION
The terrestrial habitats of the Beluga area exhibit
very high diversity and interspersion. The small amount of
low quality habitat found for most species is an indication
of the quality of this area. None of the habitat areas
affected by the proposed development of the various com-
ponents were classified as "very high" or critical to the
species considered.
From the standpoint of direct habitat loss and quality
of habitat, the southern transportation corridor to a port
site at Granite Point and the housing facility and airport
site at Lone Creek would produce the least adverse impact to
wildlife habitat. The use of material site #5 would result
in a smaller loss of habitat (especially for moose) than
either #7 or 18. The Lone Ridge site was not considered in
this analysis due to the remote possibility of its develop-
ment.
The differences in direct habitat loss between alter-
natives is not significant compared to the large amount of
habitat which would be lost within the 30-year mine limit.
6.0 REFERENCES
Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game. 1976. A fish and wildlife
resource inventory of the Cook Inlet-Kodiak areas.
Anchorage, AK.
. 1984. Fish and wildlife resources element for the
Susitna area planning study and resource atlas.
Anchorage, AK.
Berns, V.D. and R.J. Hensel. 1972. Radio tracking brown
bears on Kodiak Islands. Internat. conf. on bear
research and management, Union for the Conserv. of
Nature and Nat. Resources. Series No. 23.
Boise, C.M. 1977. Breeding biology of the lesser sandhill
crane (Grus canadensis canadensis) on the Yukon-
Kuskokwim Delta, AK. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of AK,
Fairbanks, AK.
DOWL. 1981. Coal to methanol feasibility study, Beluga
methanol project. Vol. IV-Environmental. Prepared for
Cook Inlet Region, Inc. and Placer Amex, Inc. DOS
grant DE-FG01-80RA-50299. Anchorage, AK.
Environmental Research and Technology, Inc. 1984a. Diamond
Chuitna Project. Terrestrial wildlife baseline report,
Vol. I and II. Prepared for Diamond Shamrock-Chuitna
Coal Joint Venture, Anchorage, AK.
A-37
-------
. 1984b. Diamond Chuitna Project. Vegetation baseline
studies report. Prepared for Diamond Shamrock-Chuitna
Coal Joint Venture, Anchorage, AK.
Erickson, A.W. 1965. The brown grizzly bear in Alaska: its
ecology and management. Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game.
Juneau, AK.
Fame, G.W. 1974. Black bear predation on salmon at Olsen
Creek, Alaska. 22 Fierspsychol. 35s23-38.
Faro, J. 1985a. Moose studies for the proposed Diamond
Chuitna coal mine. AK Dept. of Fish and Game internal
report. Anchorage, AK.
. 1985b. Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Anchorage, AK.
Personal communication to M.C.T. Smith, Terra
Nord, Anchorage, AK.
Hansen, H.P., J. Shepard, J. King and W. Troyer. 1971. The
trumpeter swan in Alaska. Wildl. Monog. 2C.
King, J.G. 1968. Trumpeter swan survey, Alaska, USDI, Bur.
Sport Fish and Wildlife, Juneau, AK.
LeResche, R., R. Bishop and J.W. Coady. 1974. Distribution
and habitats of moose in Alaska. Naturaliste Can.
101:143-178.
Mcllroy, C.W. 1970. Aspects of the ecology of hunter har-
vest of the black bear in Prince William Sound. M.S.
thesis, Univ. of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK.
Miller, S.D. and D.C. McAllister. 1982. Big Game Studies
Vol. VI. Black bear and brown bear. Environmental
Studies Phase I Final Report. Alaska Power Authority,
Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Anchorage, AK.
Pacific Working Group. 1977. In: Burk (editor). The black
bear in modern North America. Proc. workshop on the
manager, biol. of No. Amer. black bear, Kalispell, MT.
Schwartz, C.C. and A.W. Franzman. 1980. Population ecology
of the Kenai Peninsula black bear. AK Dept. of Fish
and Game. Fed. aid in wildlife restor., proj. prog.
rept. W-17-11, Juneau, AK.
Sommerville, R. 1965. An evaluation of the 1961-1963 Alaska
brown bear and grizzly management program. M.S.
Thesis, Univ. of Montana, Missoula, MT.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1980. Terrestrial habitat
evaluation criteria handbook - Alaska Ecol. Serv.,
Anchorage, AK.
A-38
-------
Viereck, L.A., C.T. Dyrness and A.R. Batten. 1982. 1982
revision of preliminary classification for vegetation
of Alaska. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Sta., Portland, OR.
Walkinshaw, L.H. 1949. The sandhill cranes. Cranbook Inst.
Sci, Bull. No, 29.
A-39
-------
Appendix B
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Mitigation Statement
-------
United States Department of the Interior
\\V\kTii Alaska i-Volngical Services
Sunshine I'la/a, Suite 21!
Hi W, MhAvc,
Aiidmraiie, Alaska l>'»5<)1
IN HEPLY REFEM TO:
WAES
Mr. William M. Riley - ccp 1885
EIS Project Officer 1B
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region X
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
Re: Diamond Chuitna Coal Project
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service {FWS)
Mitigation Policy Statement
Dear Mr. RHey:
As a part of overall planning and participation in the subject project, the
FWS has prepared a mitigation statement for your information and guidance.
This document, in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Service Mitigation
Policy (FR Vol. 46 No. 15, 23 January 1981), establishes fish and wildlife
evaluation species, resource categories of habitat and mitigation goals.
By establishing project and species habitat specific mitigation goals, the
FWS intends to protect and conserve the most important and valuable fish and
wildlife resources while facilitating balanced development of. the nation's
natural resources.
Sincerely
Field Supervisor
Enclosure
cc: Don McKay, ADF&G, Anchorage
Jim Hemming, Dairies & Moore, Anchorage
Brad Smith, NMFS, Anchorage
Rich Sumner, EPA, Anchorage
Sam Dunaway, DNR, Anchorage
Carol Gorbics, CE, Anchorage
Dan Wilkerson, DEC, Anchorage
-------
Dianond Chuitna Coal Project
Mitigation Statement
Under the F1sh and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) and the National
Environment a "I Policy Act (NEPA) regulations, the Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) has responsibilities to Insure that project-related losses to fish and
wildlife resources are identified and mitigated. As part of our
participation in the planning and evaluation of the Diamond Chuitna Coal
Project> the following mitigation statement has been developed in accordance
with the FWS Mitigation Policy (FR Vol. 46, No. 15, 23 January 1981) and in
consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Alaska Department of Fish and
Game (ADF&G). It has been prepared to provide guidance for evaluating and
mitigating impacts of the proposed project to fish and wildlife.
The Diamond Chuitna Coal Project, mitigation statement has been developed by
first selecting fish and wildlife habitats from among the full range of
habitats occurring within the area to be impacted by both direct and
indirect perturbations. These were chosen either because they represent
resources which are most characteristic of the area or because FWS has
mandated responsibilities for them. By narrowing the scope in this way, the
analysis can focus on areas where significant changes are most likely to
occur and not be unduly burdened by inclusion of areas with low fish and
wildlife value.
Evaluation species, which function as indicators of habitat quality and
quantity, were chosen. Selection of evaluation species has an important
role in determining the extent and type of mitigation to achieve. A
combination of two sets of criteria is typically used to choose species for
this purpose. The first is to pick species with high public interest,
subsistence, or economic values, and the second is to select species which
use habitats of significant ecological val ue.
Fish and wildlife habitats were then assigned to one of the four Resource
Categories delineated in the FWS Mitigation Policy (Table 1). Designation
of habitat into Resource Categories ensures that the level of mitigation
recomnended is consistent with the value of that habitat and its relative
abundance on a regional or national basis.
Eleven species have been selected as the basis for evaluating impacts and
formulating mitigation requirements for the Diamond Chuitna Coal Project.
Available information indicates that moderate to high value habitat for each
evaluation species is found within the project area but that none is
considered unique or irreplaceable. Therefore, the habitats for all species
have been assigned to Resource Categories 2, 3 or 4.
The determination of the relative scarcity or abundance of habitat from the
national perspective is based upon (1) the historical range and habitat
quality and (2) the current status of that habitat. A significant reduction
in either the extent or quality of habitat for an evaluation species
Indicates that it is scarce or becoming scarce, while maintenance of
historical quantity and quality is the basis for considering it abundant.
-------
Specific ways to achieve the mitigation goal for Resource Category 2 when
loss of habitat value 1s unavoidable include:
(1) physical modification of replacement habitat to convert
it to the same type which was lost; (2) restoration or
rehabilitation of previously altered habitat; (3) increased
management of similar replacement habitat so that the
in-kind value of lost habitat is replaced; or (4) a
combination of these measures. By replacing habitat value
losses with similar habitat values, populations of species
associated with that habitat may remain relatively stable
in the area over time.Jj/
The mitigation goal of in-kind replacement of lost habitat, however, cannot
always be achieved. When opposition to a project on that basis alone is not
warranted, deviation from this goal may be appropriate. Two such instances
occur when either different habitats and species available for replacement
are determined to be of greater value than those lost, or when in-kind
replacement is not physically or biologically attainable in the ecoregion.
In either case, replacement involving different habitat kinds may be
recommended, provided that the total value of the lost habitat is
compensated.
For Resource Category 3, in-kind replacement of lost habitat is preferred,
though not always possible. Substituting different habitats, or increasing
management of different habitats so that the value of the lost habitat is
replaced, may be ways of achieving the planning goal of no net loss of
habitat value.
The planning goal associated with Resource Category 4 is to minimize the
loss of habitat value. Resource Category 4 areas, possessing relatively low
habitat values, have the greatest potential for improvement; their
enhancement may be used to mitigate losses in resource categories 2 and 3.
1/FWS Mitigation Policy.
-------
Table 1. Resource Categories flnri mitigation planning goals,*
Resource
Category
Designation
CM ten' a
Mitigation Planning
Goal
Habitat to be impacted is of
high value for evaluation
species and is unique and
irreplaceable on a national
basis or in the ecoregion
section.
Habitat to be impacted is of
high value for evaluation
species and is relatively
scarce or becoming scarce on
a national basis or In the
ecoregion section.
Habitat to be impacted Is of
high to medium value for
evaluation species and is
relatively abundant on a
national basis.
Habitat to be impacted is of
medium to low value for
evaluation species.
No loss of existing
habitat value.
No net 1 oss of
in-kind habitat
value.
No net loss of
hablta't value whll e
minimizing loss of
in-kind habitat
value.
Minimize loss of
habitat val ue.
FWS Mitigation Policy (FR Vol. 46, No. 15, 23 January 1981).
-------
Table 2. Evaluation species for the Diamond Chuitna Coal Project and
Resource Category designations for associated habitat.
Common Name
Sandhill crane
Trumpeter swan
Black bear
Brown bear
Moose
Beaver
Belukha
Chinook salmon
Coho salmon
Pink salmon
Rainbow trout
Resource Categories of Associated Habitat
4
2
3
2
2/3*
4
3
2/3/4*
2
3/4*
3
*See text
-------
Project Eva! uation Species
1. Sandhill crane (Orus canadensis). The lesser sandhill crane, considered
common on a national basi s, nests throughout Alaska, as well as in northern
Canada and the northeastern Soviet Union. Although uncommon in the Diamond
Chuitna project area, cranes are abundant in Cook Inlet as summer breeders
and as spring and fall migrants. Cranes nesting in Cook Inlet form part of
the Pacific Flyway population.
Human use of Pacific Flyway cranes is primarily nonconsumptlve (bird-
watching and photography), although in Alaska cranes are hunted for sport
and subsistence. Over 30 percent of the cranes harvested for sport in
Alaska in 198? wore taken in Cook Inlet (Campbell 1984). Subsistence
hunting, which occurs predominantly fn the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, accounts
for approximately 1000 birds every year (FWS 1983).
Boise (1977) found that "human activity above minimal levels appears
incompatible with crane nesting, as reflected in nest desertion as a result
of human activity. Loss of nesting habitat as a result of land development
is a further threat to the population's stability."
Preferred nesting habitats are sedge/grass meadow and wet marsh tundra, with
an unobstructed view on all sides and with standing water nearby (Konkel et
aK 1980). ~~
Because nesting has not been documented in the project area and because
significantly better habitat can be found to the southwest and northeast
(EPA 1985), the suitable crane habitat in the coastal reaches of the Diamond
Chuitna project area is placed in Resource Category 4 (Tables 1 and 2).
2. Trumpeter swan (01 or buccinator). Nonconsumptive interest in this
species is high. Recently closeto extinction, the trumpeter swan is still
very rare in the conterminous 48 states. Historically, swans were found
throughout much of northcentral North America in summer and along the
Mississippi River and the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts in winter
(Bartonek 1983). Their favorable response to management efforts and perhaps
an amelioration in climate has made possible their removal from the
Threatened and Endangered Species List. The 1980 census indicated that
nearly 8,000 swans, or 90 percent of the world population, were on breeding
grounds in Alaska (King and Conant 1981).
Swans nest and rear in the southern half of the state, in wetlands and
shallow ponds and lakes surrounded by emergent vegetation. They are common
migrants and breeders in Cook Inlet. The mine permit area contains one
active nest, and the coastal reaches of the transportation corridors and
ports fall within a broad band of nesting habitat. Trumpeter swan surveys
in Cook Inlet indicate that the population is expanding (EPA 1985).
-------
Trumpeter swans are very susceptible to disturbance while nesting and
rearing cygnets, and the species is being excluded by recreational
developments on large lakes formerly used for nesting (Timm and Woject
1978). Approximatey two thirds of all trumpeter swan habitat in Alaska is
in private ownership and therefore potentially available for development. I
key objective of the North American Management Plan for Trumpeter Swans is
to "Preserve all current wintering and breeding trumpeter swan habitat
through whatever means necessary to protect habitat integrity." Given this
objective and the fact that the Alaskan population is expanding, all
potential and actual nesting habitat in the Diamond Chuitna project area is
placed in Resource Category 2.
3. Black bear (Ursus antericanus). This species is widespread throughout
North America; black bear habitat is considered abundant on both a national
and regional basis. Human interest in black bears has always been high,
particularly in terms of hunting, photography and wildlife observation.
Black bears would be impacted by coal development through habitat
elimination, reduction in food supply, increased human access and hunting.
Seasonal availability of foods strongly influences the distribution of black
bears in an area. Bears move from spring green-up areas to sunnier salmon
streams, and then to berry-producing shrub! and in late summer or early
fall. Black bears are common throughout the project area but prefer open,
mixed hardwood/spruce forests at the lower elevations and do not range far
from cover to feed. None of the habitats in the project area were found to
be limiting in terms of food or cover and all were classified as being of
high value for black bears (EPA 1985).
Because the study area provides good habitat and supports a large population
of black bears, and because habitat in Cook Inlet is abundant, habitat in
the project area is placed in Resource Category 3.
4. Brown bear (Ursus arctos). This species is considered a valuable big
game animal and attracts numerous resident and nonresident hunters. It also
elicits considerable nonconsumptive interest from photographers and wildlife
observers. Although not considered threatened or endangered in Alaska, the
brown bear is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in the
48 conterminous states. As such, it is a species of national interest,
whose habitat has been significantly reduced in extent and quality. It is
considered scarce from the national perspective although it is relatively
common in the project area.
Brown bears are distributed throughout the project area. They prefer open
habitats and are most common in the upland shrub and tundra communities (EPA
1985). Brown bears have extensive home ranges, with seasonal changes in
availability of food strongly influencing their movements. In spring and
fall, the entire project area provides important forage habitat, whereas in
summer and early fall the bears are drawn to the streams to feed on spawning
salmon (Diamond Shamrock 1985). Nearly all of the project area was
classified as being highly suitable as brown bear habitat (EPA 1985).
-------
7
Project impacts to areas of early green-up, the salmon fishery, the
berry-rich shrublands, and prey species will ultimately affect brown bears,
as will more direct human disturbance in the form of easier access and
increased hunting pressure.
Because of the national scarcity of the species and the high value of the
habitat in the Diamond Chuitna project area, all of this habitat is placed
in Resource Category 2 for brown bears.
5. Moose (Alces alces). Relative to its historic range, the species is
considered "aFuncTant on both a national and regional basis. Historically,
moose were an important source of food, clothing and implements along the
major rivers. The species continues to be an important source of food and
recreation, and is probably the most widely hunted species in Alaska.
Spending by hunters results in benefits throughout the state's economy. The
monetary value of moose is compounded by the number of nonresident hunters
attracted to the state. Moose also have a high nonconsumptive value to
photographers and wildlife observers.
Moose are an important evaluation species because they are common throughout
the project area, particularly in the impacted riparian zones, and are
generally responsive to mitigative habitat modifications. They will also be
subject to increased hunting pressure during and after development of the
project area.
Moose range throughout the project area. Calving takes place in the
lowlands, where the cows and calves remain all summer, while bulls and cows
without calves move to the upland tundra. The mine permit area covers most
of an upland rutting area used every year by moose in the region. Snow
brings the moose down to the lowlands; moose from the project area winter
primarily in the vicinity of Granite Point (EPA 1985).
As moose habitat is nationally, regionally and locally abundant, and as
habitat in the project area is predominantly of medium to high quality, most
of the habitat in the project area is placed in Resource Category 3. The
exception is the section of rutting area that overlaps with the mine permit
area, placed in Resource Category 2 by virtue of its importance to the
regional moose population.
6. Beaver (Castor canadensls). Abundant both nationally and regionally,
beaver play important economic and ecological roles. Beaver trapping in
Alaska continues to be an integral component of traditional lifestyles,
providing a source of revenue for bush residents. Similarly, trapping
provides recreational benefits to urban residents. Beavers have an
important ecological function in modifying habitat, often in ways that
benefit other fish and wildlife species such as coho salmon, waterfowl and
moose. Beaver dams may impede the upstream migration of spawning salmon,
particularly in years of low flow.
Beavers are cornnon throughout the project area, along the major tributaries
of the Chuitna and in backwater sloughs; concentrations are moderate and
habitat is probably of medium value (Diamond Shamrock 1985). Because of the
abundance on the national and regional level of beaver habitat comparable to
that in the Diamond Chuitna project area, beaver habitat in the project area
is placed in Resource Category 4.
-------
7, Belukha (De 1 phinapteru_s 1 cucas). While circumpolar In distribution, the
belukha does no t normallyrang e south of Alaska. It is one of the most
abundant cetaceans in the north Pacific. Belukhas are usually migratory,
but the 300-400 whales in Cook Inlet constitutea nonmigratory, relatively
isolated component of the population (USDI 1983). They feed on anadromous
fish close to shore and at the mouths of rivers. The proposed Diamond
Chuitna port facility may be in the middle of a belukha calving or nursery
area (EPA 1985).
Given the i ndigenousness of the Cook Inlet belukha population and the
probable importance of the Beluga River area as calving grounds, belukha
habitat in the Diamond Chuitna project area is placed in Resource Category 3,
8. Chinook salmon (Oncorhynch us tshawytscha). Hydroelectric projects in
the northwestern U.S. have destroyed a significant portion of the chinook
spawning habitat in the conterminous 48 states. Because of the species'
high commercial, recreational and subsistence values, there is considerable
national and regional interest in minimizing losses to chinook populations
and expanding existing stocks.
Chinook salmon support an important fishery in the Chuitna River system;
three percent of the commercial catch in upper Cook Inlet comes from set net
sites in the vicinity of the project area (EPA 1985). Chinook enter the
Chuitna River in mid-June and spawn there and in the middle and lower
reaches of streams 2002, 2003 and 2004. Although suitable spawning and
rearing habitat is available in the upper sections of these streams, the
upstream range of chinook has decreased in recent years, probably because
access has been increasingly obstructed by beaver dams (EPA 1985). The
Diamond Chuitna project would destroy chinook spawning and rearing habitat
in these streams for an unknown length of time, through the mining of
streambeds, increased sediment loads, and altered water flows and water
chemistry.
Because of the national and local emphasis on chinook salmon and the ongoing
loss of good habitat, chinook habitat in the project area that has been
rated as high or very high quality (Chuitna River, 2002, middle and lower
mainstem 2003, middle and loweer mainstem 2004) is placed in Resource
Category 2; all medium-quality chinook habitat is placed in Resource
Category 3 (upper mainstem 2003, 200304, 200305, upper mainstem 2004,
200403); and all habitat of low quality (200306) is placed in Resource
Category 4 (EPA 1985).
9. Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus k i s u t c h). On a national level hydroelectric
development in the northwestern U.S. has resulted in a significant depletion
of coho salmon stocks. The coho salmon is an important commercial and
subsistence resource and a highly prized sport fish in Alaska. The average
comnercial harvest in 1980-1984 for upper Cook Inlet was 500,000 cohos, 7
percent of which were caught in the vicinity of the project area (EPA 1985).
-------
9
Coho salmon spawn and rear throughout streams 2002, 2003 and 2004. Access
to upper reaches does not appear to be limited by beaver dams, although
beaver activity has altered spawning habitat in several tributaries, making
it unsuitable for coho (Diamond Shamrock 1985). Additional destruction or
degradation of coho habitat in anticipated as a result of mining in the
project area.
Because of the species' national and regional importance and the increasing
scarcity of good habitat, habitat in the Diamond Chuitna project area (all
rated as being of high or very high quality; EPA 1985} is placed in Resource
Category 2.
10. Pink salmon (Oncgrhynchus gorbuscha). Historically, pink salmon were
limited in range tocoastal streams in northwestern Washington and to the
north. As no significant reduction in that habitat has occurred, pink
salmon habitat is considered abundant on a national and regional basis. The
commercial, subsistence and sport value of this species is considered high.
THe commercial catch in the coastal reaches of the project area Is about six
percent of the catch in upper Cook Inlet (EPA 1985).
Pink salmon spawning has been confined in recent years, possibly as a result
of beaver dan obstructions, to the lower reaches of the Chuitna River and
streams 2002 and 2003 (EPA 1985). Additional loss of habitat is anticipated
as a result of coal mining in the project area.
Because of the abundance of pink salmon habitat nationwide, habitat in the
project area of medium or high value is placed in Resource Category 3
(Chuitna River, 2002, mainstem 2003) and habitat of low value is placed in
Resource Category 4 (200304, 200305, 200306, 2004; EPA 1985).
11 . Rainbow trout (Salinp gafrdnerf). This species is one of the most
sought-after sport fishes in North America, if not in the world. The
original range of the rainbow trout is west of the Continental Divide from
northern Mexico to the Kuskokwim River. Rainobw trout have been introduced
to every continent except Antarctica. The species is now present in every
state except Louisiana, Mississippi and Florida and has been introduced into
several lakes in Alaska (Morrow 1980). Interest in this species on a
national and state basis is high. Habitat is considered abundant in
comparison to historic levels.
The rainbow trout population in the project area is judged to be in very
good condition (ERT 1985). Juveniles are distributed throughout the
tributaries in the project area, although they are most abundant 1n the
Chuitna River, the lower mainstem of 2003 and the lower and middle mainstem
of 2002. Adults are found in the mainstem of the Chuitna (EPA 1985, ERT
1985).
Although the area is capable of supporting a limited high-quality sport
fishery, inaccessibility and lack of publicity have limited the sport
harvest (EPA 1985). Increased human access, in conjunction with loss of
habitat and prey, will have an impact on the rainbow population in the
project area.
-------
AD
Because habitat in the project area is of medium to high quality and similar
habitat is abundant on a local and national basis, rainbow trout habitat is
placed in Resource Category 3.
-------
Li tera t ure Ci ted
Bartonek, J. 1983. Management plan for Pacific Coast amd mid-continent
population of trumpeter swans (draft). Pacific Flyway Tech. Comrn.
Boise, C.H. 1977. Breeding biology of the lesser sandhill crane, Grus
can ad en si s c anjade n si s (L. ) on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska. M.S.
thesi s,Un i v. of AT ask a, Fairbanks, AK. 79 pp.
Campbell, B.H. 1984. Annual report of survey-inventory activities: Part
V. Waterfowl. Alaska Dep. Fish Game, Juneau, AK.
Diamond Shamrock. 1985. Diamond Chuitna Mine permit application to
conduct surface coal mining. Part C: Environmental resources
information. Diamond Alaska Coal Company, Anchorage, AK.
Environmental Research and Technology, Inc. 1985. Diamond Chuitna Project
Mine Component aquatic baseline report. Fort Collins, CO.
King, J.G. and B. Conant. 1981. The 1980 census of trumpeter swans on
Alaska nesting habitats. Am. Birds 35: 789-793.
Konkel, G.W., L.C. Shea, K.E. Bulchis, L.C. Byrne, D. Pengilly, and K.S.
Lourie. 1980. Terrestrial habitat evaluation criteria handbook -
Alaska. U.S. Fish Wild!. Serv., Anchorage, AK.
f^orrow, J.E. 1980. The freshwater fishes of Alaska. Alaska Northwest
Publishing Co., Anchorage, AK.
Timm, D. and L. Wojeck. 1978. Trumpeter swans. Fishtails and Game Trails,
Nov; 4-6. Alaska Dep. Fish Game, Juneau, AK.
U.S. Department of the Interior. 1983. Proposed Navarfn Basin lease
offering Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Alaska Outer Continental
Shelf Region, Anchorage, AK.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1985. Diamond Chuitna Coal Project
Peliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Seattle, WA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983. Alaska regional resource plan.
Anchorage, AK.
-------
Appendix C
Department of Army Public Notice and Section
404(b)(1) Evaluation
-------
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Public Notice
of Application
for Permit
Alaska District
Regulatory Branch
Post Office Box 898
Anchorage, Alaska 99506-0898
PUBLIC NOTICE DATE: February 2, 1990
EXPIRATION DATE: March 5, 1990
REFERENCE NUMBERS: 2-850259
2-850260
2-850261
WATERWAY NUMBERS: Cook Inlet 330
Cook Inlet 331
Cook inlet 332
This information was previously published on July 15, 1988 as a part of
the Draft Environmental Impact statement. This information is being
re^published as part of the Final Environmental Impact statement. Your
review and comments are encouraged. Please refer to page 12 of this
document for instructions on receiving the full text of the Final
Environmental impact Statement.
APPLICANTS; Granite Point Coal Port, Incorporated (Granite Point port
component); Tidewater services Corporation (Ladd port, transportation and
housing components); Diamond Alaska Coal company (mine component).
APPLICANTS' AGENT: Dan R. Harlow, President, Diamond Alaska Coal Company,
1227 West Ninth Avenue, Suite 201, Anchorage, Alaska 99501. (907)
276-6868.
LOCATION: The proposed project (known as the Diamond Chuitna Project) is
located on the northwest side of Cook Inlet, approximately 45 miles west
of Anchorage in the Kenai Peninsula Borough near the village of Tyonek.
The proposed project is comprised of four separate components: the
Diamond Chuitna Mine, the Granite Point or Ladd (alternate) Coal port,
transportation systems, and housing facilities.
PORT FACILITY; Granite Point, Sections 22, 27, T. 11 N., R. 12 W., Seward
Meridian, Ladd (alternate) sections 19 and 20, T. 12 N., R. 10 W., Seward
Meridian.
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR TO GRANITE POINT: Sections 3,4,10,15,22,27, T. 11
N., R.12W., Seward Meridianand sections 3,4,10,15,22,27,34, T. 12 N.,
R. 12 W., Seward Meridian
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR TO LAPP POINT (ALTERNATE): Sections 6,7,18,19,20,
T. 12 N., R. 10 W. Seward Meridian? section 31, T. 13 N., R. 10 W., Seward
Meridian,- sections 31,32,33,34,35,36, T. 13 N., R. 11 W., Seward Meridian;
section 36, T. 13 N., R. 12 W., Seward Meridian; sections 2, 3, T. 12 N.,
R, 12 W. Seward Meridian.
HOUSING FACILITIES: Section 14, T., 12 N., R, 12 W., Seward Meridian.
MINE FACILITY; Sections 14, 15, 21-28, and 33-36, T. 13 N., R. 12 W.,
Seward Meridian; section 4, T. 12 N., R. 12 W., Seward Meridian.
-------
PURPOSE: Diamond Alaska Coal Company proposes to develop a twelve minion
ton per year coal Company mine in the Beluga region of upper Cook Inlet.
Racoveraole coal reserves ara estimated to oe a minimum of 330 million snort
tens.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Diamond Chuitna
project. The Alaska District Corps of Engineers is a cooperating agency in
the EIS.
A permit decision regarding this project will not be made until after the
Final EIS has been prepared. This public notice reflects the applicant's
preferred alternative as well as an alternate port site. Other alternatives
being considered 1n the EIS process and a discussion of their impacts are
found in the EIS. The surface mine would be located on State coal leases in
the Chuitna River drainage approximately 12 to 15 miles north of Granite
Point. Coal production is scheduled to start at 2 million tons per year
with the planned maximum production of 12 million tons per year in the
seventh year of operation. The project life would be approximately 34
years. The basic surface mining technique would utilize a combination of
trucks, shovels, and draglines supported by the necessary complement of
front end loaders, dozers, graders, and other equipment.
WORK.; The proposed work can be described in four parts: port facility,
transportation corridors, housing, and mine facility.
1. PORT FACILITY (GRANITE POINT COAL PORT, INCORPORATED, APPLICANT,
2-860259, Cool Inlet 330):The port facility would require approximately
198 acres for the construction of the port facilities. Approximately 173
acres of wetlands would be filled as needed for the coal stockpile of
400,000 to 1,200,000 ton capacity, sediment ponds and buildings. A total of
approximately 3,360,000 cubic yards (cy) of material would be placed in
wetlands.
The following structures would be placed in the onshore port area:
a. Service buildings to house shops, warehouse, change areas, general
administration offices and interim storage for supplies.
b. Heliport including landing pad, maintenance facilities, hangar,
office lounge and toilet.
c. Main electrical control building.
d. Fire and ambulance station.
e. Water treatment plant and storage.
f. Sewage treatment plant (port only).
-------
g. Diesel fuel storage tanks for approximately four month supply to
support port, transportation, and mining operations.
h. Gasoline storage tanks for approximately four month supply to support
port, transportation, and mining operation.
1. Miscellaneous oil and coolant storage tanks to support port,
transportation, and raining operations.
j. Containerized and miscellaneous storage for interim storage of
materials and supplies.
k. Fuel distribution station.
1. Coil stockpile of 400,000 to 1,200,000-ton capacity with
stacker/reclaimer, yard conveyor system, truck dump, hopper feeder
system, coal haulage road, overland conveyor drive house, and
transfer stations for overland conveyor to stockpile conveyor and
stockpile conveyor to port (approach) conveyor.
m. Coal haulage road to transport coal prior to startup of conveyor
operations, and several access roads to link various port facility
components.
n. Electrical substation.
o. Power distribution system consisting of overland and underground
powerlines to provide power for port equipment and distribute power
to mine, transportation, and housing facilities.
p. Diesel fuel electric generating facility to support mine
transportation system, port, and housing facilities.
q. All weather parking area.
r. Sediment control structures to collect surface runoff from the port
facilities area.
s. Barge unloading beach area to receive supplies, parts, and equipment
for the port facility, transportation system, mine, and housing
facility.
Most of the wetland areas will be filled with gravel aggregate. Construction
of surface water runoff ponds located in the wetland areas would require
removal of dredge material. The sides of the sedimentation ponds will be
bermed. Wetlands disturbed by the coal piles will be filled with surrounding
earth material and covered with gravel aggregate where required.
Construction activities for the onshore facilities will include excavation,
fill, and site preparation work to establish the designed site elevations for
-------
placement of structures and roads and to estaolish surfacs drainage. Site
worx will begin by clearing and gruobing of all tress and brush. This
material will be ausnea into windrows by crawler tractors and piled for
later burning. In arsas where deposits of peat ana .miskeg are found,
drainage ditcnes will be constructed to drain the *et boggy arsas and
facilitate removal or site development. The peat material will be hauled to
an approved disposal site for final placement.
Once organic surface material Has been removed from the site, classified
fill material will be hauled from adjacent borrow areas and placed as
subgrade for building foundations. Surface drainage from the area will be
established by the subgrade material providing an elevated and drained
surface on which structures can be placed. Final grade would then include
surface material for the onshore port facilities. Placement of grade and
subgradt material will incorporate the use of scrapers, crawler tnctors,
water trucks, motor graders, compactors, and other equipment.
The major offshore facility would be an approximately 12,500' trestle with
ship breasting and mooring dolphins. The trestle would consist of
structural steel framework used to support the approach conveyor and a 51
wide roadway which will accommodate a battery powered maintenance vehicle
and personnel carrier. The piers which are required to support the trestle
will be spaced at approximately 400' intervals along the trestle. The piers
have been designed to withstand ice, tide, seismic, and wind forces present
during the year round operation. Each pier also includes cathodic
protection to withstand the chemical activity of the salt water and climatic
condition. This protection method helps to ensure long-term stability and
operation of the pier support system. Approximately 940' of the length of
the trestle would be above the mean high tide line (MHTL), thus reducing the
length of the trestle extending into the inlet. The trestle would be a
minimum of 20' above MHHW.
Coal would be transported from the onshore port facilities to the shiploader
facility at the end of the approach trestle on a covered conveyor. Although
production of 8 million tons per year requires only one 72" wide conveyor
belt, sufficient room has been included in the trestle to accommodate a
second 72" wide conveyor when procuction increases.
All coal will be loaded by use of a linear shiploader. The shiploader will
be used to discharge all coal from the approach conveyor into waiting
ocean-going vessels. This equipment will be constructed of steel support
beams and covered where necessary to protect the equipment and coal from
adverse weather. The design of the shiploader will have sufficient capacity
to receive the output of two 72" wide approach conveyors. In addition, the
shiploader will accommodate the tidal variations (approximately 23') and a
variety of vessel sizes (22,000 to 120,000 tons OWT) along with the need for
distributing the coal evenly in the ship's hatches.
A system of breasting and mooring dolphins will be used to hold the
ocean-going vessel during coal loading activities to ensure the safety of
the vessel and the sniploader facilities. These mooring dolphins have been
specifically designed to accommodate the large tide, ice, wind, and seismic
forces in the Cook Inlet.
-------
While tne vessel is moored at tne shiploading area, a fenaering system will
3e required to protect the vessel and the shiploader platform from movement
of t.ie vessel during loading activities. Vessel movement, ooth vertically
ana Horizontally, will De affectec by tides, wind, and ica 'notion in the
COOK Inlet. A slicing fenoer will De used, supported by piers, and raised
ana lowered with electric wenches. The sliding fenaer is used to minimize
effects of ice which may be encountered during winter montns by always
keeping the fender approximately 3' above water.
The design, faorication, and construction of tne Coal Port will take
approximately three years. The construction season will last from May to
October each year, shorter or longer due to weather conditions. Fabrication
of modules will be completed at factory locations. The modules
will be shipped by barge to the port for offloading, assembling, and
erection.
The offshore facilities consist of 1) above-water equipment used to support
and convey coal to a shiploader for placement into ocean-going vessels, and
2) below-water structures including piers to support the structure and
withstand effects of weather, tide, and seismic activity. Construction work
will begin by locating each monopile site along the trestle. Depending on
the approach route selected, 18 to 30 piles will be driven with hammers to
predetermined depths into the floor of the Cook Inlet for support of the
approach trestle. Similar monopiles will be driven at the end of the
approach trestle to support the shiploader, platform, and mooring and
fendering dolphins. Once the monopiles are driven, structural steel trusses
will be placed with barge-mounted cranes. The trusses serve as the platform
for containment of conveyor belts and shiploading equipment. This
equipment, which has' been fabricated and pre-assembled, will also be placed
with barge-mounted cranes. As with all structures, fabrication and
pre-assembly into easily handled modules will take place at a factory
location prior to shipment to the port for erection.
No site preparation work is anticipated to be necessary for either trestle
and/or berthing location. Sufficient survey work has been completed to show
that dredging ana filling of the offshore area will not be necessary. The
offshore construction activities will encompass two construction seasons.
Due to adverse weather, no construction work will be planned for the winter
months from November through May.
Prior to any onsite construction work, engineering, design, procurement,
fabrication, and preassembly of structures into easily handled modular
components will be carried out beginning in year 1 of the project.
Construction work on site will be started in the spring of year 2 after ice
breakup.
2. ALTERNATE PORT FACILITY (LAPP COAL PORT, TIDEWATER SERVICES COMPANY,
APPLICAiNT, 2-850260, Cook Inlet 3311: Approximately 28 acres of wetlands
would oe filled as needed for the coal stockpile, sediment ponds and
buildings.
-------
Curing construction activities in years 1, 2, and 3 all materials, supplies
ana swuipment would oe off-loaded from barges at the Ladd Port location for
transportation to oc.ner project components.
Tie port features and construction methods and sequences described in "1"
-Dove all applicaole for tne Lada Port facility, as well.
3. TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR GRANITE POINT (TIDEWATER SERVICES COMPANY.
APPLICANT. 2-850260, COOK Inlet 331):The transportation system proposed
ror tn« project consists OT the main haulage/access road and the overland
conveyor system. The transportation systems would impact a total of 170
acres with approximately 45 acres of that being wetlands.
The hay! road would be approximately 11.3 miles long and would generally run
parallel to the conveyor system. The haul road would be built in a new
right-of-way and would not use existing logging roads south of the Chuitna
River. A total of approximately 2,260,000 cy of material would be placed in
wetlands. The finished road surface will have two 35* wide traffic lanes
with 12' wide gravel shoulders on either side, The road surface will be
gravel surfaced and crowned to promote drainage from the road surface.
Drainage ditches would be provided on either side of the road in level and
cut areas.
All construction and operational activites related to the operation of the
transportation facilities would be conducted so as to minimize potential
environmental impacts. Drainage and sediment control measures would include
the construction of ditches to divert runoff from undisturbed areas around
operational areas, construction of collection ditches, installation of
culverts under roads to collect and control runoff, surfacing of main roads
and facility areas with gravel material, revegetation of road cuts,
embankments and disturbed areas, and utilization of specific localized
sediment control measures in sensitive areas.
Drainage and diversion structures have been designed to pass the peak
discharge from a 10-year, 24 hour event.
Bridges or large culverts will be constructed to carry the road traffic at
five major drainage crossings: (a) an unnamed creek north of the Chuitna
River, (b) the Chuitna River, (c) an unnamed creek south of the Chuitna
River, (d) Old Tyonek Creek, and (e) Tyonek Creek. During road
construction, temporary pontoon bridges or stream fords will be used to
provide equipment access. Permanent bridge structures will be of truss and
girder construction supported by concrete lower case piers.
There are several locations along the alignment of the haul road where the
presence of peat or muskeg deposits in combination with saturated or
semi-saturated glacial outwash ana alluvium result in adverse surface
conditions for road construction. In these areas, a special construction
technique will be used which incorporates the following fill sequence: The
-------
natural vegetative mat; a flotation material typically of wood chips or
logs; a minimally compacted layer of fill material; geotechnical fabric to
provide lateral stability, drainage and distribute bearing loads over a
large area; and, finally normal road construction techniques.
The overland conveyor system would run roughly parallel to the haul road for
a length of 9.3 miles. A light duty, minimally improved service/access road
suitable for four-wheel drive vehicles would be built immediately adjacent
to the conveyor for maintenance purposes. The right-of way would be cleared
for a width of approximately 25'. A total of approximately 225,000 cy of
material would be placed in wetlands.
Drainage and sediment control measures for the conveyor would be the same is
those described for the main haul road. Brush within the conveyor
right-of-way would be mechanically controlled; no herbicides would be used.
Limited cut and fill work would be required along the alignment of the
overland conveyor system and the adjacent access road. Generally both
conveyor alignments have been selected to avoid major topographic features.
Construction would be similar to the haul road construction described
previously.
Conveyor support bridges would be constructed at the same five drainages
briuged by the haul road. The conveyor crossing of the Chuitna River would
require an extended span supported by a cable suspension structure. In most
areas along the conveyor right-of-way the support piers of the conveyor
would be anchored to poured concrete footings; however, in those areas where
unstable surface materials will not provide adequate lateral support,
pilings, spread footings, or a combination of the two would be utilized in
the foundation structures.
At ten points, the conveyor would be buried for a minimum of 200' in large
diameter culverts or arch spans to permit moose, bear and other animals to
pass over the conveyor. There would also be three places where the conveyor
would be raised to permit existing roads to pass underneath.
During construction of the overland conveyor system, both temporary and
permanent diversion systems would be constructed to divert runoff through
culverts installed under the access road.
In certain sensitive areas such as construction areas adjacent to stream
channels, localized sediment control measures similar to those such
disturbed areas would be revegetated and mulched, if necessary, as soon
after completion of construction activities as possible to minimize surface
erosion.
4. TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR-LAPP (TIDEWATER SERVICES COMPANY, APPLICANT,
2-850260, Cook Inlet 331):The haul road for this alternate site would be
approximate1y 13" miles long. Approximately 69 acres of wetlands would be
filled. The construction methods and sequences described in "3" above are
applicable for this corridor, as well.
-------
5. HOUSING FACILITIES (TIDEWATER SERVICES COMPANY, APPLICANT,
2~J502SQ, COOK Inlet 331j: Because of the remoteness of tne project site
from nncnorage ana otner Aiasxa communities, tne applicants are planning the
construction of a housing complex to accommodate the wcr< force of 500
employees. A landing strip located approximately one nnla north of the
housing area is also proposed to allow shuttling of employees between
Ancnorage and the site. The housing complex including roads and landing
strip would impact approximately 72 acres with 6 acres Seing in wetlands. A
total of approximately 60,000 cy of fill would be placsa in wetlands.
The housing complex would include: housing buildings, arctic corridors,
dining building, recreation builaing and facilities, access roads, parking,
boiler plant, maintenance/warehouse facilities, sewer plant, and water
treatment plant. The landing strip and associated facilities include a
landing strip, terminal building and a maintenance building. A north-south
and east-west runway would be constructed. A total of approximately 90,000
cy of fill would be placed in wetlands for the landing strip.
Access to the housing complex would be provided by a one-half mile road from
the main haul road. Another road approximately one-quarter mile in length
would connect the main haul road to the landing strip. Another short road
would be constructed from the housing area north to the sewage treatment
plant.
The roads would be all weather roads suitable for bus traffic and light
vehicle use. Sufficient parking would be provided. In order to control
dust, access roads would be watered on a periodic basis.
During construction of the housing facilities, a series of diversion ditches
and a sediment pond would be constructed. These ditches and ponds would
serve to control runoff from the site and retain sediment. In order to
control wildlife in the area, protection measures woulc be taken with trash
and garbage in the area. Trash and garbage would be incinerated or disposed
of in dumpsters. The dumpsters would be enclosed to prevent wildlife access.
The sites would be landscaped with grasses, shrubs, anc trees native to this
part of Alaska. The landscaping would serve to minimize erosion and
sediment while being aesthetically pleasing.
6. MINE FACILITY ^DIAMOND ALASKA COAL COMPANY APPLICANT 2-850261» Cook
Inlet 332):Fhe mine unit is approximately 10,000 acrss althoughthe actual
area to be mined would be 5240 acres in size. This arga would be divided
into north and south pits which would be mined simultaneously but in
separate operations during the life of the project. A maximum of 450 acres
of pit would be open at any one time. An additional maximum of 150 acres
around the pit would be disturbed at any one time in clearing and grubbing
the vegetation in preparation for stripping overburden, or recontouring in
preparation for revegetation. Average pit depth would be approximately 200
feet.
8
-------
The mine araa would disturb approximately 1086 acres of wetlands, while
sediment ponas, naul roads, facilities, and overburden stockpiles would
aisturo an acaitional approximately 3 acres of wetlands.
M system of sediment ponds and collection ditches would be constructed to
ensure that discharges from drainage alterations and runoff into the pit
meet applicable water quality standards. Where other treatment was
necessary before discharge, e.g. flocculation, additional treatment
facilities would be built in conjunction with the sediment ponds.
At the start of operations, 22 million cubic yards of overburden from the
initial cut would be excavated and placed in a permanent stockpile. This
stockpile would be stabilized, graded and then revegetated to prevent "
erosion.
The permanent mine service area would be located on the southern edge of the
mining limit. This area would include the main administration building; a
service building housing the maintenance, warehouse and service facilities;
equipment ready lines; water, diesel fuel, gasoline and lubricant storage;
electrical substation; ambulance and fire station; water and sewage
treatment plants; emergency power system; explosives magazine; heliport; and
emergency and safety facilities. The coal would be crushed in the mine
serveie area and loaded to the conveyor for transport to the port. The coal
would not be washed or otherwise processed.
WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION: A permit for the described work will not be
issued until a certification or waiver of certification as required under
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (Public Law 95-217), has been received
from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT CERTIFICATE: Section 307(c}(3) of the Coastal
ZoneManagement Act of 1972, as amenaed by 16 U.S.C. 1456{c}(3), requires the
applicant to certify that the described activity affecting land or water uses
in the Coastal Zone complies with the Alaska Coastal Management Program. A
permit will not be issued until the Office of Management and Budget, Division
of Governmental Coordination has concurred with the applicant's
certification.
PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearings were held on this project on August 17,
1988 in Anchorage, Alaska and on August 18, 1988 in lyonek, Alaska. No
additional public hearings have been scheduled. Any person may request,
in writing, within the comment period of this public notice, that an
additional public hearing be heldto consider this application. Requests
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding another hearing.
CULTURAL RESOURCES: A cultural resources study has been done in the area.
If has been determined and coordinated with the State Historic Preservation
Officer that there would be no effect on cultural resources.
ENDANGERED SPECIES: The project area is within the known or historic range
of the Peregrine Falcon. However no nest sites have been located and no
impact is expected to occur.
-------
F£^£'
-------
(X) Discharge dredged or fill material into waters of the United States -
Section 404, Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Therefore, our public
interest review will consider the guidelines set forth under Section 404(b)
of the Clean Water Act (40 CFR 230).
Comments on the described work, with the reference number, should reach this
office no later than the expiration date of this Public Notice to become part
of the record and be considered in the decision. If further information is
desired concerning this notice, contact Ms. Carol Gorbics at (907) 753-2724.
District Engineer
U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers
Attachments
11
-------
If you would like a copy of the Environmental Impact Statement, please fill
this out and return to the address listed below.
NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
I would like a copy of the Final EIS for the Diamond AK Coal Project
SEND to: Mr. Rick Seaborne
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - EEB
1200 Sixth Avenue, WD 136
Seattle, Washington 98101
-------
) "*X.» . Tft^"1 - v ."" " * "'t; '."vr f-
*"*;"
-------
s.-.^^ TSSK^S^ j ,i ;
Hags;-laSsA:?
requirements for port facilities Including all
pads, roads, and coal stock piles - 3,3SO,000 yd3
TfOMfK N*?!W UMNB9 KUKMKT
«WK3t OtSCHMOC PPt
SEDIMENT TONO LOCATION
COW. STOCXP'Lf
LIMIT OF ELEV4TEO 400BEGATE
Map Coal Port Facilities
Granite Point
Diamond Chultna Project
Kenai Peninsula Borough
Sheet 2 of 15
-------
K
Ul
O
o
III
x.
o
o
I-
-I Ul
< oe
fe a:
o *
« O
Ul Z
2o5^
iy
ul
O
oc
a.
-------
O 10 20
SCALE IN MILES
FUTURE PUBLIC DOCK
EXISTING SHOMELIN!
MEAN HIGH WATER LINK
MEAN LOW WATER LINE
TRISTLI CONVEYOR TO BARGE DOCK
COAL COLLIER
PLAN VIEW
~5iS
500 1000
1": 1OOO*
2000
MAP
PROPOSED COAL LOADING
FACILITY AT LADD
XENAI PENINSULA 3OAOUQM
STATI OF ALASKA
APPLICATION BY: TtOCWATER
SERVICES CORPORATION
'4 OF 15 DATE: 5/87
-------
U.S. S«rv*y No. 4879,Lot 2
U.S., Siiv«y Mo. 127*
v/
*-.
^
i
M
ALASKA
Vicinity Map
o 10 ao
SCALE IN MILES
4O
U.S. Survoy No. 4879,Lot 1
Ifli W«t«rllp*
Qonoral
Unloadlnt
Armofflas Collula
Conerato
xNXXN
Ho«*y
Conatr
B«ffO
Unloadtn* alto
La d d Bar9*
Landlnt A Unl««dl«9
Ar«a(2 7.4 Acre*)
xl«tln« Sliorollno
Sit* Plan
Scat*
_
900- 1 2 0 O-
2400
Map
Improvttd Ladd Barg«
Landing/Unloading Araa
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH
STATE OF ALASKA
APPLICATION BY: TIDEWATER
3EHY1CE3 CORPORATION
SI-EET sQF 15 DATE: 5/87
-------
ALASKA
100* Topo Coatovr
t
IXl*tlBf llgff LtllO
Vlolaltf Hep
0 10 10 4*
1CALI IN MIL It
CMl_f-ttjtt_
Vaorflox C«H«l*ff
Co-nor«t« PavlMf !
PROFILE
Vort. Seal* 1 ! * tO*
. ! 1 ! : SOO*
!
-------
** H£
12 Ck
0 B U
£, S j.
ai <-> c
Si*
I =
g
-------
SUO/Mg
1
V
li-
i
i
Mi
into?.!'
^
1
r\
:r _ aaASTJN6 OOLPHIM
aojoooovrr
COAL cowert
a/re*$rrM& DOLPHINS
SLIDING
Typical FendeHng Systan
Cook Inlet
Of amend Chultna Project
Kenai Peninsula Borough
Of
15
-------
Map Artist Illustration
Overland Conveyor
Cook Inlet
Diamond Chuftna Project
Kenal Peninsula Borough
Sheet g of
-------
A\\\\\X////Z
srsa. rmjss if HCOUIMED
ar
CMMMHBL
o
ABUTMENT*
a'
*
-#ING WALL.
a onus nat-
r n
a-a4
NOTC
D WINS WAILS TO 9
FOUNDED ON SUITABLE MATERIAL
»IO CCNSTdUCTEO OF
CONCRETE.
Figure - Bridge Profile
Cook Inlet
Diamond Chultna Project
Kenai Peninsula Borough
ShtetlQof 15
-------
12"
2« - 0
RIGHT VI£W
Trestle and P1er
Cook Inlet
Diamond Chultni Project
Kenal Peninsula Sorougn
Sheet II Of 15
-------
(NOT TO SCAUS)
CBOSS SECTION
ixT I TN
/ 1 1 M\
Mill
1 I I 1 1
V! 1 1 1
\
1
/
«**"
i**
f
/ M^iJxf !
9 OMiee *CLO£O
wme
,StJM IS
TRASH ZACX DETAIL
- Culvert InstalUtlon
Cook Inlet
Diamond Chultna Project
Kenai Peninsula Borough
Shett
15
-------
SJTSTSJ,.^"
twf
»*
m **». WM J
)T 1
II!"
I- - . .
-t - Ji-|
>'!
r H ...
/
/"
*
'. **
'«
%
*»!
,g
A%-
»<"»
\
_1_. ^__ . ___. r*****£**3i
r
ii»*ii« *v-«i k***i mi ihTTi i» *i
I I 4
I M »
in «k
t»
W I
«*t *
M * Mk
KSKM cmrfmt
dap
Sediment Pond No. 1
Cook Inlet
Diamond Chuitna Project
Kenai Peninsula Borough
Sheet
15
-------
o
hvrt»" Hi', .pi' w !
Af^Jzwli """"'* \
r**vm»*wr ***** *-i
r
.
M HIMtlrt OXtWX PlAN"
Hap Sediment Pond No. 2
Cook Inlet
Diamond Chultna Project
Kenaf Peninsula Borough
Sheetl4of 15
-------
C/V/L ON UWB
MARINE
SHIPLOAQEX
STACXEX-
RECLAIMS3
YEAR 0
; MCTerr*
i WtStM**'
i li&Maor
*\STmt9rt£
. I I ,
Construction Scftedulc
Cook Inlet
Diamond Chuftnt Prajact
Kertai Peninsula ioraugh
J5 Of 15
-------
r
vU!
STiVE COWPBt GOVERNOR
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION / mmw** ann 465-2600
I Address:
P.O. BOX 0
Juneau, AK 99811-1800
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
FOR
STATE WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
Any applicant for a Federal license or permit to conduct any activity which
may result in any discharge into the navigable waters must first apply for
and obtain certification from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conser-
vation that any such discharge will comply with the Clean Water Act of 1977
(PL 95-217), the Alaska Water Quality Standards and other applicable State
laws. By Agreement between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation application for a Department of the
Army Permit may also serve a* application for State Water Quality Certifica-
tion when such certification is necessary.
Notice is hereby given that the application for a Department of the Army Per-
mit described in the Corps of Engineers Public Notice No.2-850259, 2-850260 & 2-8502
also serves as application for State Water Quality Certif1catToti from the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, as provided in Section 401
of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217).
The Department will review the proposed activity to insure that any discharge
to waters of the United States resulting from the referenced project will
comply with the Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217) the Alaska Water Quality
Standards and other applicable State laws.
Any person desiring to comment on the water quality impacts of the proposed
project may do so by writing to:
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
3601 C Street, Suite 1350
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Telephone: 563-6529
within 30 days of publication of this notice.
-------
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
OFF/C£ OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINA TtQN
STEVE COWPSR, GOVERNOR
CENTRAL OPRCE
P.O. BOX 4W
JUN£AU, 4t4S*4
PHONE (90?) 4«S-3S62
STATE OF ALASKA
DIVISION OP GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
Notice of Application for
Certification of Consistency with the
Alaska Coastal Management Program
Notice is hereby given that a request is being filed with the
Division of Governmental Coordination for concurrence, as provid-
ed in Section 307 (c)(3) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972, as amended [P.L. 94-370? 90 Stat. 1013? 16 U.S.C. 1456
(c) (3)] , that the project described in the Corps of Engineers
Public Notice No. SEE BELOW , will comply with the Alaska Coastal
Management Program and that the project will be conducted in a
manner consistent with that program.
Any person desiring to present views pertain-Ing to the project's
compliance or consistency with the Alaska Coastal Management
Program may do so by providing his views in i.Titing to the
Division of Governmental Coordination, Office of Management and
Budget, Pouch AW, Juneau, AK 99811, within 3t days of publication
of this notice.
Attachment 2
2-850259, 2-850260 and 2-850261
-------
APPENDIX C
DRAFT
EVALUATION OF THE DISCHARGE OF DREDG1D AND FILL
MATERIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 404(B)(D GUIDELINES
SUBPART A - GENERAL
Dredged and fill material should not be discharged into the aquatic
ecosystem unless it can be demonstrated that such a discharge would not have
an unacceptable adverse impact either individually or in combination with
other known and/or probable impacts of other activities affecting the
ecosystem of concern,
A permit for the discharge of dredged or fill material from the Corps of
Engineers (Corps), Alaska District, is required under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. The Corps approves discharges at particular sites through
application of the 404(b)(l) guidelines and a public interest review. EPA
reviews the permit application and provides comments to the Corps. The
Corps, in applying the 404(b)(l) guidelines, must determine the potential
short-term or long-term effects of the proposed discharge on the physical,
chemical, and biological components of the aquatic environment.
SUBPART B - COMPLIANCE WITH THE GUIDELINES
The proposed Diamond Chuitna Coal Project would involve discharge of fill
material into special aquatic habitats for mine development and for
construction of mine site facilities. The proposed project and alternatives
evaluated for impact analysis are discussed in Chapters two and three of the
final EIS. There are no project development alternatives which achieve the
project purpose that do not involve discharge of fill material into waters
of the United States.
In addition to being evaluated under the 404(b)(l) guidelines, the discharge
of fill material will have to be certified as being in compliance with state
water quality and toxic effluent standards pursuant to Section 307 of the
Clean Water Act (40 CFR 219). No threatened or endangered species, critical
habitat areas or marine sanctuary would be impacted by the proposed project
as discussed in chapter four of the final EIS.
As determined in Subparts C through G of this evaluation and as discussed in
chapter five of the final EIS, the proposed project or any of the action
alternatives, would contribute to adverse impacts on waters of the United
States including adverse effects on life stages of organisms dependent on
the aquatic ecosystem, ecosystem diversity, productivity and stability, and
recreational, aesthetic, and economic values.
Pertinent information about primary, secondary and cumulative impacts of the
proposed project and alternatives related to alterations of: substrate;
water circulation, fluctuation and salinity; turbidity/suspended
particulates; structure and function of aquatic ecosystems and organisms, is
contained in chapter five of the final EIS. In addition, discussions of
water quality impacts within the mixing zone of the discharge area is also
found in Chapter five of the final EIS.
-------
SUBPARTS C -THROUGH f
DRAFT
Potential impacts on the physical and chemical characteristics of the
aquatic ecosystem, biological characteristics of the aquatic ecosystem,
special aquatic sites and human use characteristics are found in chapter
five of the final EIS.
SUBPART G
The source and type of discharge material that would be used to develop the
proposed project or any of the alternatives is described in chapters two and
four of the final IIS. Gravel fill that would be used to construct roads
and other facilities would be very unlikely to be contaminated or contain
natural toxic substances; therefore, testing of gravel fill material would
not be necessary. The chemical characteristics of mine overburden that
would be excavated and then replaced in the mine pit has been examined in
detail in project baseline studies and summarized in Section 4.3.1.4 of the
final EIS. Mine overburden would be unlikely to contain toxic materials.
Nevertheless, continued monitoring of overburden chemistry, especially that
portion of the overburden to be replaced on the ground surface during
reclamation would be conducted during mine operation.
SUBPART H
Appropriate and practical steps have been identified in Chapters two and six
which would minimize potential adverse impacts of the discharge on the
aquatic ecosystem. Many of the mitigative measures which avoid or reduce
project impacts have been incorporated into each action alternative.
Additional mitigative measures will be required as part of the Corps
permit. With the addition of appropriate mitigation measures, many of which
are discussed in the final EIS, the discharge of dredged or fill material in
association with the development of this project would not cause significant
degradation of the waters of the United States.
-------
Appendix D
Proposed Final NPDES Permits
-------
APPENDIX D
PROPOSED FINAL NPDES PERMITS
This appendix contains the four NPDES permits which EPA
proposes to issue for the Diamond Chuitna Coal Project.
Written comments received during the public review period for
the draft NPDES permits are included within comment letters
from the Alaska Division of Governmental Coordination and the
Trustees for Alaska, located in Chapter 10.0 of this final
EIS. The responses to draft EIS comments. As a result of
EPA's review of the permit-related comments, appropriate
revisions were made to the draft NPDES permits. These
revisions are noted in the responses to comments and are
reflected in the following proposed final NPDES permits.
These proposed final NPDES permits are subject to final review
and certification by the State of Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation pursuant to Section 401 of the
Clean Water Act and a review and determination of consistency
with the approved Alaska Coastal Management Program by the
State of Alaska, Office of Management and Budget, Division of
Governmental Coordination.
-------
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
Application No.: AK-004357-5
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act,
33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq.. as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987,
P.L. 100-4, the "Act",
DIAMOND ALASKA COAL COMPANY
(Diamond Chuitna Mine)
is authorized to discharge from a facility located near the village of Tyonek,
Alaska, to receiving waters named Lone Creek and Chuitna River, and unnamed
tributaries to the Chuitna River, in accordance with discharge points,
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth
herein.
This permit shall become effective
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight,
Signed this day of
DRAFT
Director, Water Division, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Page 2 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover SheetIssuance and Expiration Dates
I. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
A. Specific Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
B. Other Permit Requirements
C. Definitions
II. Monitoring, Recording and Reporting Requirements
A, Representative Sampling
B. Monitoring Procedures
C. Reporting of Monitoring Results
D. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee
E. Records Contents
F, Retention of Records
G. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompllance Reporting
H. Other Noncompllance Reporting
I. Inspection and Entry
III. Compliance Responsibll1 ties
A. Duty to Comply
8. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
C. Need to Halt or-Reduce Activity not a Defense
D. Duty to Mitigate
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance
F, Removed Substances
G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
H. Upset Conditions
I. Toxic Pollutants
IV. General Requirements
A. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
B. Planned Changes
C. Anticipated Noncompliance
D. Permit Actions
E. Duty to Reapply
F. Duty to Provide Information
G. Other Information
H. Signatory Requirements
I. Availability of Reports
J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
K. Property Rights
L. Severability
M. Transfers
N. State Laws
Attachment A: 40 CFR 125, Subpart K, §125.104(a) and
-------
Page 3 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
I. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
A. Spec 1f i c Li mltat1ons and Mon1 tor ing Regu1rements.
During the term of this permit, the permittee is authorized to
discharge from outfall numbers 001-018, in accordance with the
limitations and requirements specified below.
1. Effluent Limitations During Baseflow Conditions
a. Discharges from outfalls 001-018 shall comply with the
following limitations and monitoring requirements during
baseflow conditions:
Effluent
Characteristics
Effluent Limitations
Avg. Monthly Max. Daily
Monitoring Requirements
Frequency Sample Type
Total Iron
Total Suspended 35.0 mg/1
Solids (TSS)
Settleable Solids
(SS>, ml/1
Turbidity, NTU
Receiving Stream
Turbidity, NTU
-Upstream of
Outfall
-500 feet down-
stream of outfall
pH Not less
standard
than 8.5
Effluent Flow (mgd)
Receiving Stream
Flow (cfs)
Boron
Nickel
Manganese
Ammonia (nitrogen)
Zinc
1.0 mg/1
70.0 mg/1
than 6.5
units, nor greater
standard units.
weekly
weekly
weekly
weekly
weekly
weekly
weekly
weekly
weekly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
instantaneous
instantaneous
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
There shall be no discharge of floating solids, visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
b. Discharges from outfalls 017 and 018 shall also comply
with the following limitations and monitoring
requirements, during baseflow conditions:
Effluent
Characteristics
Effluent Limitations
Avg. Monthly Max. Daily
MonJtoring Requ1rements
Frequency Sample Type
Total Hydrocarbons* 0.015 mg/1 weekly grab
*Total Hydrocarbons shall be measured by Standard Method 503(6).
P^ ^ ff5""/-'
RAF i
-------
Page 4 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
2. Effluent Limitations During Precipitation Events (Alternate
Limitations)
a. Any discharge (or increase in the volume of a discharge)
from outfalls 001 - 018 caused by precipitation within
any 24-hour period less than or equal to 5,10 Inches (or
snowmelt of equivalent depth) shall comply with the
following limitations and monitoring requirements:
Effluent
Characterlsties
Effluent Limitations
Max. Daily
N/A
Monitoring Requirements
Frequency Sample Type
weekly*
Effluent Flow (mgd)
Receiving Stream
Flow (cfs) N/A weekly*
SS 0.5 ml/1 dally
pH not less than 6.5 daily
standard units, nor greater
than 8.5 standard units
TSS N/A weekly*
Oil and Grease N/A weekly*
Total Iron N/A weekly*
Instantaneous
instantaneous
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
C* These parameters shall be measured at least once during a precipitation
event when these alternate limitations apply.]
There shall be no discharge of floating-solids, visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
b. Any discharge (or increase in the volume of a discharge)
from outfalls 001 - 018 caused by precipitation within any
24-hour period greater than 5.10 Inches (or snowmelt of
equivalent depth) shall comply with the following
limitations and monitoring requirements:
Effluent
Characteristics
Effluent Flow (mgd)
Receiving Stream
Flow (cfs)
pH
Effluent Limitations
Max. Daily
TSS
SS
Total
Iron
N/A
N/A
not less
standard
than 8.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
Monitoring Requirements
Frequency Sample Type
weekly* instantaneous
weekly*
than 6.5 dally
units, nor greater
standard units.
weekly*
weekly*
weekly*
instantaneous
grab
grab
grab
grab
[* These parameters shall be measured at least once during a
precipitation event when these alternate effluent limitations apply.]
There shall^be no discharge of floating solids
and grease which causes a sheen on the surface
water.
visible foam or oi1
of the receiving
-------
Page 5 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
c. The alternate precipitation limitations and monitoring
requirements in Parts I.A.2.a. or b. begin when a
discharge (or an increase in the volume of a discharge)
is caused by precipitation (or snowmelt of equivalent
depth), and shall continue at each outfall following
cessation of the precipitation event for the following
time periods. After this time period elapses, the
baseflow condition (Part I.A.I.) apply unless another
precipitation event causes a discharge (or an increase
discharge) from the sedimentation ponds.
In
Outfall Number
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
010
Oil
012
013
014
015
016
017
018
Time Period(days)
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
For the purpose of this part of the permit, the term
"cessation of the precipitation event" is defined as when
the discharge flow rate decreases to the flow rate
preceedlng the start of the precipitation event.
The permittee has the burden of proof to show that
discharge (or increase in discharge) resulted from
precipitation event.
the
-------
Page 6 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
B, Other Permit Requirements.
1. Watershed Monitoring Program
A monitoring program shall be established In order to define
relationships between soil type, vegetation, and precipitation
runoff, and the rate and quality of discharge from settling
ponds for the four seasons of the year. The resulting
watershed hydrographs should provide documentation for
determining the "time of concentration" of the area
contributing runoff to the sedimentation pond. The "time of
concentration" 1s the time It takes for the last of the runoff
from the hydraulically most remote point in the drainage area
to reach the inlet of sedimentation pond. The program shall
include provisions for monitoring influent to the
sedimentation pond and precipitation.
The permittee shall submit details of this program to EPA and
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
-------
Page 7 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
5. Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan
Within one year of the effective date of this permit or three
months before construction begins (whichever date occurs
first), the permittee shall submit a BMP plan to EPA for
review and approval. This plan shall be developed in
accordance with 40 CFR 125.104 (see Attachment A), and shall
also consider the BMP for water management presented 1n the
EPA "Development Document for Effluent Limitations and
Standards for the Coal Mining Point Source Category" (EPA
440/1-82/057, October 1982, pages 362, 367-376).
The BMP plan, upon approval shall become part of this permit.
A copy of the BMP plan shall be kept at the facility.
The permittee shall amend the BMP plan whenever there is a
change in facility design, construction, operation, or
maintenance which materially affects the facility's potential
for discharge of significant amounts of hazardous or toxic
pollutants to waters of the United States.
If the BMP program proves to be ineffective in achieving the
general objective of preventing the release of significant
amounts of toxic or hazardous pollutants to waters of the
United States and the specific objectives and requirements of
the BMP plan, the permit and/or the BMP program shall be
subject to modification to incorporate revised BMP
requirements.
6, Mixing Zones
The mixing zones for outfalls 001 to 018 for meeting the
Alaska Water Quality Standards for turbidity are as follows:
The downstream edge of the mixing zone shall not exceed
500 feet from the outfal1.
-------
Page 8 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
C. Definitions.
1. "Average monthly discharge limitation" means the highest
allowable average of "daily discharges" over a calendar month,
calculated as the sum of all "daily discharges" measured
during a calendar month divided by the number of "daily
discharges" measured during that month.
2. "Baseflow Conditions" refers to the sustained flow of water in
rivers and streams resulting primarily from groundwater
seepage Into the water courses.
3. "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of waste streams from
any portion of a treatment facility,
4. "Daily discharge" means the discharge of a pollutant measured
during a calendar day or any 24-hour period that reasonably
represents the calendar day for purposes of sampling. For
pollutants with limitations expressed In units of mass, the
"daily discharge" Is calculated as the total mass of the
pollutant discharged over the day. For pollutants with
limitations expressed in other units of measurement, the
"dally discharge" is calculated as the average measurement of
the pollutant over the day.
5. A "Grab" sample is a single sample or measurement taken at a
specific time or over as short a period of time as is feasible.
6. "Maximum dally discharge limitation" means the highest
allowable "daily discharge."
7. "Precipitation Event" includes any period of time for which
there has been measurable precipitation, and periods of
snowmelt (occurring at any time there is snow on the ground
within the watershed and the temperature is above OeC).
8. "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to
property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them
to become Inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of
natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur In
the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does not mean
economic loss caused by delays In production.
9. A "24-hour composite" sample shall mean a flow-proportioned
mixture of not less than 8 discrete aliquots. Each aliquot
shall be a grab sample of not less than 100 ml and shall be
collected and stored in accordance with procedures prescribed
in the most recent edition of Standard Methods for the
Examination of Mater and Mastewater.
10. "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is
unintentional and temporary noncompllance with
technology-based permit effluent limitations because of
factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee. An
upset does not Include noncompliance to the extent caused by
operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities,
inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive
maintenance, or careless or improper operation.
-------
Page 9 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
II. MONITORING, RECORDING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. Rgpns en tat 1 ve Samp 1.1ng. Samples taken 1n compliance with the
monitoring requirements established under Part I shall be collected
from the effluent stream prior to discharge Into the receiving
waters. Samples and measurements shall be representative of the
volume and nature of the monitored discharge.
B. Monitoring Procedures.
1. Settleable Solids. Fill an Imhoff cone to the one-liter mark
with a thoroughly mixed sample. Allow to settle undisturbed
for 45 minutes. Gently stir along the Inside surface of the
cone with a stirring rod. Allow to settle undisturbed for 15
minutes longer. Record the volume of settled material In the
cone as mil 11 liters per liter. Where a separation of
settleable and floating material occurs, do not include the
floating material in the reading.
2. Other Parameters. Monitoring for other parameters must be
conducted according to test procedures approved under 40 CFR
Part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified in
this permit.
C. Reporting of Honitoring Results. Monitoring results shall be
summarized each month on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form
(EPA No. 3320-1). The reports shall be submitted monthly and are
to be postmarked by the 10th day of the following month. Legible
copies of these, and all other reports, shall be signed and
certified In accordance with the requirements of Part IV.H.,
Signatory Requirements, and submitted to the Director, Water
Division and the State agency at the following addresses:
original to: United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue, WD-135
Seattle, Washington 98101
copy to: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
Southcentral Region
3601 "C" Street, Suite 1350
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
te. »*» ft.
-------
Page 10 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
0. AdditionalMonitoring by the Permittee. If the permittee monitors
any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit, using
test procedures approved under 40 CFR 136 or as specified in this
permit, the results of this monitoring shall be Included in the
calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the DMR. Such
Increased frequency shall also be Indicated.
E, Records Contents. Records of monitoring Information shall Include:
1. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
2. The IndlvlduaHs) who performed the sampling or measurements;
3. The date(s) analyses were performed;
4. The 1nd1 vlduaKs) who performed the analyses;
5. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
6. The results of such analyses.
F. Retention of Records. The permittee shall retain records of all
monitoring information, including all calibration and maintenance
records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous
monitoring Instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this
permit, and records of all data used to complete the application
for this permit, for a period of at least three years from the date
of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may
be extended by request of the Director or AOEC at any time. Data
collected on-slte, copies of Discharge Monitoring Reports, and a
copy of this NPDES permit must be maintained on-site during the
duration of activity at the permitted location.
G. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompllance Reporting.
1. The following occurrences of noncompllance shall be reported
by telephone within 24 hours from the time the permittee
becomes aware of the circumstances:
a. Any noncompliance which may endanger health or the
environment;
b. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent
limitation in the permit (See Part III,G.» Bypass of
T r e a t me n t Facilities.);
c. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the
permit (See Part III.H., Upset Conditions.); or
d. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any
of the pollutants listed in the permit to be reported
within 24 hours.
-. ?:*». JR
" !
-------
Page 11 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
2, A written submission shall also be provided within five days
of the time that the permittee becomes aware of the
circumstances. The written submission shall contain:
a. A description of the noncompliance and Its cause;
b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and
times;
c. The estimated time noncompliance Is expected to continue
if It has not been corrected; and
d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent
reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
3. The Director may waive the written report on a case-by-case
basis If the oral report has been received within 24 hours by
the Water Compliance Section in Seattle, Washington, by phone,
(206) 442-1213.
4. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses in Part II.e..
Re por t i n g of Mon1 tor1n g ResuIts.
H. Other Noncomp1i ance Report i ng. Instances of noncompliance not
required to be reported within 24 hours shall be reported at the
time that monitoring reports for Part II.C, are submitted. The
reports shall contain the Information listed in Part II.G.2.
I. Inspection and Entry. The permittee shall allow the Director,
ADEC, or an authorized representative (including an authorized
contractor acting as a representative of the Administrator), upon
the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be
required by law, to:
1. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility
or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be
kept under the conditions of this permit;
2. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that
must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment
(including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or
operations regulated or required under this permit; and
4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of
assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the
Act, any substances or parameters at any location.
-------
Page 12 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
III. COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
Duty to Comply. The permittee must comply with all conditions of
this permit. Any permit noncompllance constitutes a violation of
the Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for permit
termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or for
denial of a permit renewal application. The permittee shall give
advance notice to the Director and ADEC of any planned changes in
the permitted facility or activity which may result in
noncompllance with permit requirements.
Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions.
1. Civil Penalty, The Act provides, that any person who violates
a permit condition implementing Sections 301, 302, 306, 307,
308, 318, or 405 of the Act shall be subject to a civil
penalty, not to exceed $25,000 per day for each violation.
2. Criminal Penalties:
a. Negligent Violations. The Act provides that any person
who negligently violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor
more than $25,000 per day of violation, or by
Imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or by both.
b. Knowing Violations. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly violates a permit condition Implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor
more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or by both.
c. Knowing Endangerment. The Act provides that any person
who knowingly violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act,
and who knows at that time that he thereby places another
person In Imminent danger of death or serious bodily
Injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of
not more than $250,000 or Imprisonment of not more than
15 years, or both. A person which is an organization
shall, upon conviction of violating this subparagraph, be
subject to a fine of not more than $1,000,000.
d. False Statements. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly makes any false material statement,
representation, or certification in any application,
record, report, plan, or other document filed or required
to be maintained under this Act or who knowingly
falsifies, tampers with, or renders inaccurate any
monitoring device or method required to be maintained
under this Act, shall upon conviction, be punished by a
fine of not more that $10,000, or by imprisonment for not
more than 2 years, or by both.
-------
Page 13 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
Except as provided in permit conditions in Part III.G.. Bypass of
Treatment Facilities and PartIII.H., Upset Conditions, nothing in
this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee of the
civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense. It shall not be a
defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have
been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to
maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit.
0. Duty toMitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to
minimize or prevent any discharge in violation of this permit which
has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or
the environment.
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance. The permittee shall at all times
properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are
installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the
conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance also
Includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality
assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of
back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are
Installed by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to
achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit.
F. Removed Substances. Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other
pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of
wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any
pollutant from such materials from entering navigable waters.
-------
Page 14 of 20
Permit No.: AtC-004357-5
G. Bypass of Treatment Fac11i 11es:
1, Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any
bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to
be exceeded, but only If it also 1s for essential maintenance
to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject
to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of this section.
2. Notice:
a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of
the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if
possible at least 10 days before the date of the bypass.
b. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice
of an unanticipated bypass as required under Part II.G..
Twenty-four Hour Notice of NoncompHance Reporting.
3. Prohibition of bypass,
a. Bypass is prohibited and the Director or ADEC may take
enforcement action against a permittee for a bypass,
unless:
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life,
personal injury, or severe property damage;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass,
such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities,
retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during
normal periods of equipment downtime. This
condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up
equipment should have been installed 1n the exercise
of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a
bypass which occurred during normal periods of
equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under
paragraph 2 of this section.
b. The Director and ADEC may approve an anticipated bypass,
after considering its adverse effects, if the Director
and ADEC determine that it will meet the three conditions
listed above in paragraph 3.a. of this section.
-------
Page 15 of
Permit No.:
20
AK-004357-5
H- Upset Conditions.
1. Effect of an upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative
defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such
technology based permit effluent limitations if the
requirements of paragraph 2 of this section are met. No
determination made during administrative review of claims that
noncomptiance was caused by upset, and before an action for
noncompllance, is final administrative action subject to
judicial review.
2. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset. A
permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of
upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed,
contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence
that:
a. An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the
cause(s) of the upset;
b. The permitted facility was at the time being properly
operated;
c. The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required
under Part II.G., Twenty-four Hour Notice
of Noncompllance Reporting; and
d. The permittee complied with any remedial measures
required under Part III.D.. Duty to Mitigate.
3. Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee
seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden
of proof.
I. Toxic Pollutants. The permittee shall comply with effluent
standards or prohibitions established under Section 3Q7(a> of the
Act for toxic pollutants within the time provided in the
regulations that establish those standards or prohibitions, even if
the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement.
-------
Page 16 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
IV. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A. Changes In Discharge of Toxic Substances. Notification shall be
provided to the Director and ADEC as soon as the permittee knows
of, or has reason to believe:
1. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would
result in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of
any toxic pollutant which is not limited In the permit, if
that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels":
a. One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/1);
b. Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/1) for acrolein
and acrylonitri1e; five hundred micrograms per liter (500
ug/1) for 2,4-dlnitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4,
6-d1nitrophenol; and one milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for
antimony;
c. Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported
for that pollutant In the permit application 1n
accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g><7>; or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with
40 CFR 122.44(f).
2. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would
result in any discharge, on a non-routine or infrequent basis,
of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, If
that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels":
a. Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/1);
b. One milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for antimony;
c. Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported
for that pollutant in the permit application in
accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with
40 CFR 122.44(f).
B, Planned Changes. The permittee shall give notice to the Director
and ADEC as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or
additions to the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
1. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet
one of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a
new source as determined in 40 CFR 122.29(b); or
2. The alteration or addition could significantly change the
nature or Increase the quantity of pollutants discharged.
This notification applies to pollutants which are subject
neither to effluent limitations in the permit, nor to
notification requirements under Part IV.A.I.
D AS
-------
Page 17 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
C. An11c 1pated Noncomp 11ance. The permittee shall also give advance
notice to the Director and ADEC of any planned changes in the
permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompHance
with permit requirements.
D. Permit Actions. This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued,
or terminated for cause. The filing of a request by the permittee
for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or
termination, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated
noncompHance, does not stay any permit condition.
E. Duty to Reappjy. If the permittee wishes to continue an activity
regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit,
the permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit. The
application should be submitted at least 180 days before the
expiration date of this permit.
F. Duty to Provide Information. The permittee shall furnish to the
Director and ADEC, within a reasonable time, any Information which
the Director or ADEC may request to determine whether cause exists
for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit,
or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall
also furnish to the Director or ADEC, upon request, copies of
records required to be kept by this permit.
G- OtherInformation. Nhen the permittee becomes aware that It failed
to submit any relevant facts In a permit application, or submitted
incorrect information in a permit application or any report to the
Director or ADEC, it shall promptly submit such facts or
information.
H. Signatory Requirements. All applications, reports or information
submitted to the Director and ADEC shall be signed and certified.
1. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
a. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer.
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general
partner or the proprietor, respectively.
c. For a municipality, state, federal, or other public
agency: by either a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official.
2. All reports required by the permit and other information
requested by the Director or ADEC shall be signed by a person
described above or by a duly authorized representative of that
person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
a. The authorization is made in writing by a person
described above and submitted to the Director and ADEC,
and
A
-------
Page 18 of 20
Permit No,: AK-004357-5
b. The authorization specified either an Individual or a
position having responsibility for the overall operation
of the regulated facility or activity, such as the
position of plant manager, operator of a well or a well
field, superintendent, position of equivalent
responsibility, or an individual or position having
overall responsibility for environmental matters for the
company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be
either a named individual or any individual occupying a
named position.)
3. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph
IV.H.2. is no longer accurate because a different individual
or position has responsibility for the overall operation of
the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements
of paragraph IV.H.2. must be submitted to the Director and
ADEC prior to or together with any reports, information, or
applications to be signed by an authorized representative.
4. Certification. Any person signing a document under this
section shall make the following certification-:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and
all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision In accordance with a system designed to
assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my Inquiry
of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the
Information, the information submitted is, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility
of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations."
I. Aval 1abl11ty of Reports. Except for data determined to be
confidential under 40 CFR Part 2, all reports prepared in
accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for
public inspection at the offices of the Director and ADEC. As
required by the Act, permit applications, permits and effluent data
shall not be considered confidential.
J- Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability. Nothing in this permit
shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action
or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or
penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under
Section 311 of the Act.
K. Property Rights. The issuance of this permit does not convey any
property rights of any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does
It authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of
personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state or local
laws or regulations.
-------
Page 19 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
L. Seyerabj1.1 ty. The provisions of this permit are severable, and If
any provision of this permit, or the application of any provision
of this permit to any circumstance, is held Invalid, the
application of such provision to other circumstances, and the
remainder of this permit, shall not be affected thereby.
M- Transfers. This permit may be automatically transferred to a new
permittee If:
1. The current permittee notifies the Director at least 30 days
In advance of the proposed transfer date;
2. The notice Includes a written agreement between the existing
and new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of
permit responsibility, coverage, and liability between them;
and
3. The Director does not notify the existing permittee and the
proposed new permittee of his or her intent to modify, or
revoke and reissue the permit. If this notice is not
received, the transfer is effective on the -date specified 1n
the agreement mentioned in paragraph 2 above.
N- State Laws. Nothing In this permit shall be construed to preclude
the Institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from
any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established
pursuant to any applicable state law or regulation under authority
preserved by Section 510 of the Act.
-------
Page 20 of 20
Permit No.: AK-004357-5
ATTACHMINf A
1125.194 Bat management practice* pro.
BMP pro«ram« shall be devel-
oped In accordance with good engi-
neering practices and with the provi-
sions of this subpart.
(b) The BMP program shall:
(1) Be documented In narrative
form, and shall include any necessary
plot plans, drawings or maps:
(2) Establish specific objectives for
the control of toxic and hazardous pol-
lutants.
(i) Each facility component or
system shall be examined for its po-
tential for causing a release of signifi-
cant amounts of toxic or hazardous
pollutants to waters of the United
States due to equipment failure, im-
proper operation, natural phenomena
such as rain or snowfall, etc.
(il> Where experience indicates a
reasonable potential for equipment
failure (e.g.. a tank overflow or leak-
age), natural condition (e.g.. precipita-
tion), or other circumstances to result
in significant amounts of toxic or haz-
ardous pollutants reaching surface
waters, the program should include a
prediction of the direction, rate of
flow and total quantity of toxic or haz-
ardous pollutants which could be dis-
charged from the facility as a result of
each condition or circumstance;
(3) Establish specific best manage-
ment practices to meet the objectives
identified under paragraph (bX2) of
this section, addressing each compo-
nent or system capable of causing a re-
lease of significant amounts of toxic or
hazardous pollutants to the waters of
the United States;
(4) The BMP program: (i) May re-
flect requirements for Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure (SPCC)
plans under section 311 of the Act and
40 CFR Part 151. and may incorporate
any part of such plans into the BMP
program by reference;
EPA hat proposed section
31KJX1KO regulations (49 PR 39278) which
require facilities subject to NPDES to devel-
op and Implement SPCC plain to prevent
discharge* of reportable quantities of desig-
nated hazardous substances. While Subpart
K requires only procedural activities and
minor construction, the proposed 40 CFR
Fart 1S1 (SPCC regulations) are more strin-
gent and comprehensive with respect to
their requirements for spill prevention. In
developing BMP programs in accordance
with Subpart K, owners or operators should
also consider the requirement* of proposed
40 CFR Part 191 which may address many
of the same areas of the facility covered by
this Subpart.]
(11) Shall assure the proper manage-
ment of solid and hazardous waste in
accordance with regulations promul-
gated under the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, as amended by the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act of 1978
CRCRA) (40 TJ.S.C. 6901 et seq). Man-
agement practices required under
RCRA regulations shall be expressly
Incorporated into the BMP program;
and
(ill) Shall address the following
points for the ancillary activities fn
§ 125.102:
(A) Statement of policy;
(B) Spill Control Committee;
(C) Material inventory;
(D) Material compatibility;
(E) Employee training:
(F) Reporting and notification pro-
cedures;
(O) Visual inspections;
(H) Preventive maintenance;
(I) Housekeeping; and
< J) Security.
[Comment* Additional technical Informa-
tion on BMPs and the elements of a BMP
program is contained in a publication enti-
tled "NPDES Best Management Practices
Guidance Document." Copies may be ob-
tained by written request to Edward A.
Kramer (EN-338), Office of Water Enforce-
ment, Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, 20460.1
-------
Permit No.: AK-00468S-0
Application No.: AK-004685-0
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Nater Act,
33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq. . as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987,
P.L. 100-4, the "Act",
TIDEWATER SERVICES CORPORATION
(Ladd Coal Loading Facility)
Diamond Shamrock Chultna Coal Joint Venture
is authorized to discharge from the Ladd coal loading facility located
near the village of Tyonek, Alaska, to receiving waters named Cook Inlet,
In accordance with the discharge point, effluent limitations, monitoring
requirements and other conditions set forth herein.
This permit shall become effective
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight,
Signed this
day of
f*m
?» ;j
Director, Water Division, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Page 2 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover SheetIssuance and Expiration Dates
I. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
A. Specific Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
B. Other Permit Requirements
C. Definitions
II. Monitoring, Recording and Reporting Requirements
A. Representative Sampling
B, Monitoring Procedures
C. Reporting of Monitoring Results
D. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee
E. Records Contents
F, Retention of Records
G. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompllance Reporting
H. Other Noncompliance Reporting
I. Inspection and Entry
III. Compliance Responsibilities
A. Duty to Comply
B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
C, Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense
D. Duty to Mitigate
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance
F. Removed Substances
G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
H. Upset Conditions
I, Toxic Pollutants
IV. General Requirements
A. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
B. Planned Changes
C. Anticipated Noncompliance
D. Permit Actions
E. Duty to Reapply
F. Duty to Provide Information
G. Other Information
H. Signatory Requirements
I. Availability of Reports
J. 011 and Hazardous Substance Liability
K. Property Rights
L. Severability
M. Transfers
N. State Laws
Attachment A: 40 CFR 125, Subpart K, §125.104(a) and (b)
-------
Page 3 of 18
Permit No.: AK-Q04685-0
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
A. Specific Li'mitations and Monitoring Requirements.
During the effective term of this permit, the permittee is
authorized to discharge from outfall 001 (sediment pond) in
accordance with the following:
1, Baseflow Conditions
Discharges shall comply with the following limitations
and monitoring requirements during baseflow conditions:
Effluent Effluent Limitations Mon1 toring Requ irement s
Characteristics Avg. Monthly Max. Dai1y Frequency Sample Type
Total Hydrocarbons* 0.015 mg/1 weekly grab
Total Iron 3.0 mg/1 6.0 mg/1 weekly grab
Total Suspended 35.0 mg/1 70.0 mg/1 weekly grab
Solids (TSS)
Settleable Solids weekly grab
(SS)
pH Not less than 6.0 weekly grab
standard units, nor greater
than 9.0 standard units
Effluent Flow (mgd) weekly instantaneous
Receiving Stream weekly instantaneous
Flow (cfs)
There shall be no discharge of floating solids, visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
*Total Hydrocarbons shall be measured by Standard Method 503CB).
2, Precipitation Events (Alternate Limitations)
a. Any discharge or increase in the volume of a discharge
caused by precipitation within any 24-hour period less
than or equal to 5.10 inches (or snowmelt of equivalent
depth) shall comply with the following limitations and
monitoring requirements:
Effluent Effluent Li mi tatigns Mon i toring Requi rements
Characteristics Maximum Daily Frequency Sample Type
Effluent Flow (mgd) N/A weekly* instantaneous
Receiving Stream
Flow (cfs) N/A weekly* instantaneous
SS 0.5 ml/1 weekly grab
pH Not less than 6.0 weekly grab
standard units, nor greater
than 9.0 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids, visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
[* Flow shall be measured at least once during the period when the
alternate limitations apply.]
-------
Page 4 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
b. Any discharge or Increase in the volume of a discharge
caused by precipitation within any 24-hour period greater
than 5.10 Inches (or snowmelt of equivalent depth) shall
comply with the following limitations and monitoring
requirements:
Effluent
Characteristics
Effluent Flow (mgd)
Receiving Stream
Flow (cfs)
PH
Effluent Limitations
Maximum Dai 1y
N/A
N/A
Not less than 6.0
standard units, nor
greater than 9.0
standard units.
Monitoring Requirements
Frequency Sample Type
weekly*
weekly*
weekly
Instantaneous
Instantaneous
grab
There shall be no discharge of floating solids, visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
C* Flow shall be measured at least once during the per-1od when the
alternate limitations apply.]
c. The alternate precipitation limitations and monitoring
requirements In Parts I.A.2.a. or b. begin when a
discharge (or an increase in the volume of a discharge)
is caused by precipitation (or snowmelt of equivalent
depth), and shall continue two days following cessation
of the precipitation event.
For the purpose of this part of the permit, the term
"cessation of the precipitation event" is defined as when
the discharge flow rate decreases to the flow rate
preceeding the start of the precipitation event.
The permittee has the burden of proof to show that the
discharge (or Increase in discharge) resulted from a
precipitation event.
B. Other Permit Requirements.
1. Watershed Monitoring Program
A monitoring program shall be established in order to define
relationships between soil type, vegetation, and precipitation
runoff, and the rate and quality of discharge from settling
ponds for the four seasons of the year. The resulting
watershed hydrographs should provide documentation for
determining the "time of concentration" of the area
contributing runoff to the sedimentation pond. The "time of
concentration" is the time it takes for the last of the runoff
from the hydraullcally most remote point in the drainage area
to reach the inlet of sedimentation pond. The program shall
include provisions for monitoring influent to the
sedimentation pond and precipitation.
The permittee shall submit details of this program to EPA and
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) for
review and approval within 90 days of the effective date of
this permit. .- » vf% & f-V
-------
Page 5 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
Precipitation Monitoring Program
The permittee shall keep a record of all precipitation events.
This record shall Include as a minimum dates, time, and
precipitation amounts for each precipitation event. A copy of
this record shall be submitted with the monthly discharge
monitoring reports (DMR) see Part II.C.
3. Sanitary Haste
The discharge of sanitary waste from the Ladd Coal Loading
Facility to any waters of the United States is not authorized.
4. Use of Chemicals, Detergents, Solvents or Degreasers
Hithin six months of the effective date of this permit, the
permittee shall submit to EPA and ADEC for review and approval
a list of chemicals, detergents, solvents or degreasers that
are used to wash down equipment or are used in the maintenance
shops which may enter the sedimentation ponds through runoff.
5. Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan
Within one year of the effective date of this permit or three
months before construction begins (whichever date occurs
first), the permittee shall submit a BMP plan to EPA for review
and approval. This plan shall be developed in accordance with
40 CFR 125.104 (see Attachment A), and shall also consider the
BMP for water management presented in the EPA "Development
Document for Effluent Limitations and Standards for the Coal
Mining Point Source Category" (EPA 440/1-82/057, October 1982,
pages 362, 367-376).
The BMP plan, upon approval shall become part of this permit.
A copy of the BMP plan shall be kept at the facility.
The permittee shall amend the BMP plan whenever there is a
change in facility design, construction, operation, or
maintenance which materially affects the facility's potential
for discharge of significant amounts of hazardous or toxic
pollutants to waters of the United States.
If the BMP program proves to be ineffective in achieving the
general objective of preventing the release of significant
amounts of toxic or hazardous pollutants to waters of the
United States and the specific objectives and requirements of
the BMP plan, the permit and/or the BMP program shall be
subject to modification to incorporate revised BMP requirements.
DRAFT
DEC 1099
-------
Page 6 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
C. Definitions.
1. "Average monthly discharge limitation" means the highest
allowable average of "dally discharges" over a calendar month,
calculated as the sum of all "dally discharges" measured
during a calendar month divided by the number of "daily
discharges" measured during that month.
2. "Baseflow Conditions" refers to the sustained flow of water In
rivers and streams resulting primarily from groundwater
seepage Into the water courses.
3. "Bypass" means the Intentional diversion of waste streams from
any portion of a treatment facility.
4. "Daily discharge" means the discharge of a pollutant measured
during a calendar day or any 24-hour period that reasonably
represents the calendar day for purposes of sampling. For
pollutants with limitations expressed in units of mass, the
"daily discharge" is calculated as the total mass of the
pollutant discharged over the day. For pollutants with
limitations expressed In other units of measurement, the
"daily discharge" is calculated as the average measurement of
the pollutant over the day.
5. A "Grab" sample is a single sample or measurement taken at a
specific time or over as short a period of time as is feasible.
6. "Maximum daily discharge limitation" means the highest
allowable "daily discharge."
7. "Precipitation Event" includes any period of time for which
there has been measurable precipitation, and periods of
snowmelt (occurring at any time there is snow on the ground
within the watershed and the temperature is above 0°C).
8. "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to
property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them
to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of
natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in
the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does not mean
economic loss caused by delays in production.
9. "Upset" means an exceptional Incident In which there is
unintentional and temporary noncompliance with
technology-based permit effluent limitations because of
factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee. An
upset does not include noncompllance to the extent caused by
operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities,
inadequate treatment facilities, lack, of preventive
maintenance, or careless or improper operation.
-------
Page 7 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
II. MONITORING, RECORDING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. Representative Sampling. Samples taken 1n compliance with the
monitoring requirements established under Part I shall be collected
from the effluent stream prior to discharge Into the receiving
waters. Samples and measurements shall be representative of the
volume and nature of the monitored discharge.
B. Monitoring Procedures.
1, Settleable Solids. Fill an Imhoff cone to the one-liter mark
with a thoroughly mixed sample. Allow to settle undisturbed
for 45 minutes. Gently stir along the inside surface of the
cone with a stirring rod. Allow to settle undisturbed for 15
minutes longer. Record the volume of settled material in the
cone as mi 111 liters per liter. Where a separation of
settleable and floating material occurs, do not include the
floating material in the reading.
2. Other Parameters. Monitoring for other parameters must be
conducted according to test procedures approved under 40 CFR
Part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified 1n
this permit.
C. Report!ng of Monitoring Results. Monitoring results shall be
summarized each month on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form
(EPA No. 3320-1). The reports shall be submitted monthly and are
to be postmarked by the 10th day of the following month. Legible
copies of these, and all other reports, shall be signed and
certified in accordance with the requirements of PartIV.H.,
Signatory Requirements, and submitted to the Director, Water
Division and the State agency at the following addresses:
original to: United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue, WD-135
Seattle, Hashington 98101
copy to: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
Southcentral Region
3601 "C" Street, Suite 1350
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
-------
Page 8 of 18
Permit No.: AK-Q04685-0
D. AdditionalMonitoringby the Permittee. If the permittee monitors
any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit, using
test procedures approved under 40 CFR 136 or as specified in this
permit, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the
calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the DMR. Such
increased frequency shall also be Indicated.
E. Records Contents. Records of monitoring information shall Include:
1. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
2. The IndivlduaHs) who performed the sampling or measurements;
3, The date(s) analyses were performed;
4. The Indlvidual(s) who performed the analyses;
5. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
6, The results of such analyses.
F. Retention of Records. The permittee shall retain records of all
monitoring information, Including all calibration and maintenance
records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous
monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this
permit, and records of all data used to complete the application
for this permit, for a period of at least three years from the date
of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may
be extended by request of the Director or AOEC at any time. Data
collected on-s!te, copies of Discharge Monitoring Reports, and a
copy of this NPDES permit must be maintained on-s1te during the
duration of activity at the permitted location.
G. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompllance Reporting.
1, The following occurrences of noncompllance shall be reported
by telephone within 24 hours from the time the permittee
becomes aware of the circumstances:
a. Any noncompllance which may endanger health or the
environment;
b. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent
limitation in the permit (See Part III.G., Bypass of
Treatment Facilities.);
c. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the
permit
-------
Page 9 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
2. A written submission shall also be provided within five days
of the time that the permittee becomes aware of the
circumstances. The written submission shall contain:
a. A description of the noncompliance and Its cause;
b. The period of noncompTlance, including exact dates and
times;
c. The estimated time noncompliance 1s expected to continue
If it has not been corrected; and
d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent
reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
3. The Director may waive the written report on a case-by-case
basis If the oral report has been received within 24 hours by
the Hater Compliance Section in Seattle, Nashington, by phone,
(206) 442-1213.
4. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses in Part II.C.,
Reporting of Monitoring Results.
H. Other Noncompl1ance Reporting. Instances of noncompliance not
required to be reported within 24 hours shall be reported at the
time that monitoring reports for Part II.C. are submitted. The
reports shall contain the Information listed in Part II.G.2.
I. Inspection and Entry. The permittee shall allow the Director,
ADEC, or an authorized representative (Including an authorized
contractor acting as a representative of the Administrator), upon
the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be
required by law, to:
1. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility
or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be
kept under the conditions of this permit;
2. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that
must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment
(including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or
operations regulated or required under this permit; and
4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of
assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the
Act, any substances or parameters at any location.
-------
Page 10 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
III. COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
Dutyto Comp1y. The permittee must comply with all conditions of
this permit. Any permit noncompHance constitutes a violation of
the Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for permit
termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or for
denial of a permit renewal application. The permittee shall give
advance notice to the Director and ADEC of any planned changes in
the permitted facility or activity which may result in
noncompHance with permit requirements.
Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions.
1, Civil Penalty. The Act provides that any person who violates
a permit condition Implementing Sections 301, 302, 306, 307,
308, 318, or 405 of the Act shall be subject to a civil
penalty, not to exceed $25,000 per day for each violation.
2. Criminal Penalties:
a. Negligent Violations. The Act provides that any person
who negligently violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor
more than $25,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or by both.
b. Knowing Violations. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor
more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by
Imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or by both.
c. Knowing Endangerment. The Act provides that any person
who knowingly violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act,
and who knows at that time that he thereby places another
person i-n imminent danger of death or serious bodily
Injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of
not more than $250,000 or imprisonment of not more than
15 years, or both. A person which is an organization
shall, upon conviction of violating this subparagraph, be
subject to a fine of not more than $1,000,000.
d. False Statements. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly makes any false material statement,
representation, or certification in any application,
record, report, plan, or other document filed or required
to be maintained under this Act or who knowingly
falsifies, tampers with, or renders inaccurate any
monitoring device or method required to be maintained
under this Act, shall upon conviction, be punished by a
fine of not more that $10,000, or by imprisonment for not
more than 2 years, or by both.
-------
Page 11 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
Except as provided in permit conditions in PartIII.G., Bypass of
Treatment Facilities and Part III.H., Upset Con dIt1ons, nothing In
this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee of the
civil or criminal penalties for noncompllance.
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense. It shall not be a
defense for a permittee In an enforcement action that it would have
been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity In order to
maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit.
D. Duty to Mitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to
minimize or prevent any discharge In violation of this permit which
has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or
the environment.
E. ProperOperation and Maintenance. The permittee shall at all times
properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are
installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the
conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance also
Includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality
assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of
back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are
Installed by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to
achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit.
F. Removed Substances. Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other
pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of
wastewaters shall be disposed of In a manner such as to prevent any
pollutant from such materials from entering navigable waters.
-------
Page 12 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
G. Bypass of TreatmentFacilities:
1. Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any
bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to
be exceeded, but only if 1t also Is for essential maintenance
to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject
to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of this section.
2. Notice:
a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows In advance of
the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, 1f
possible at least 10 days before the date of the bypass.
b. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice
of an unanticipated bypass as required under Part II.G..
Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompllance Reporting.
3. Prohibition of bypass.
a. Bypass Is prohibited and the Director or ADEC may take
enforcement action against a permittee for a bypass,
unless:
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life,
personal injury, or severe property damage;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass,
such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities,
retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during
normal periods of equipment downtime. This
condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up
equipment should have been installed in the exercise
of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a
bypass which occurred during normal periods of
equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under
paragraph 2 of this section.
b. The Director and ADEC may approve an anticipated bypass,
after considering its adverse effects, if the Director
and ADEC determine that it will meet the three conditions
listed above in paragraph 3.a, of this section.
-------
Page 13 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
H. Upset Conditions.
1. Effect of an upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative
defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such
technology based permit effluent limitations if the
requirements of paragraph 2 of this section are met. No
determination made during administrative review of claims that
noncompliance was caused by upset, and before an action for
noncompliance, is final administrative action subject to
judicial review.
2. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset. A
permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of
upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed,
contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence
that:
a. An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the
cause(s) of the upset;
b. The permitted facility was at the time being properly
operated;
c. The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required
under Part II.G., Twenty-four Hour Notice
of Noncompliance Reporting; and
d. The permittee complied with any remedial measures
required under Part III.P., Duty to Mitigate.
3. Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee
seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden
of proof.
Toxic Pollutants. The permittee shall comply with effluent
standards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the
Act for toxic pollutants within the time provided in the
regulations that establish those standards or prohibitions, even if
the permit has not yet been modified to Incorporate the requirement.
-------
Page 14 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
IV. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A. Changes In Discharge of Toxic Substances. Notification shall be
provided to the Director and ADEC as soon as the permittee knows
of, or has reason to believe:
1. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would
result 1n the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of
any toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if
that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels":
a. One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/1);
b. Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/1) for acrolein
and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500
ug/1) for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4,
6-dinltrophenol; and one milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for
antimony;
c. Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported
for that pollutant In the permit application in
accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
d. The level established by the Director In accordance with
40 CFR 122.44(f).
2. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would
result in any discharge, on a non-routine or Infrequent basis,
of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if
that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels":
a. F!ve hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/1);
b. One milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for antimony;
c. Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported
for that pollutant in the permit application in
accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with
40 CFR 122.44(f),
B. PIanned Changes. The permittee shall give notice to the Director
and ADEC as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or
additions to the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
1. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet
one of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a
new source as determined in 40 CFR 122.29(b); or
2. The alteration or addition could significantly change the
nature or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged.
This notification applies to pollutants which are subject
neither to effluent limitations in the permit, nor to
notification requirements under Part IV.A.I.
*»«». t-v ft "»*Si*w?l
' "' -1 -
-------
Page 15 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
C. Antic 1 paired Noncomp1lance. The permittee shall also give advance
notice to the Director and ADEC of any planned changes In the
permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompllance
with permit requirements.
D. Permit Actions. This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued,
or terminated for cause. The filing of a request by the permittee
for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or
termination, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated
noncompllance, does not stay any permit condition.
E. Duty to Reapply. If the permittee wishes to continue an activity
regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit,
the permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit. The
application should be submitted at least 180 days before the
expiration date of this permit.
F. Dutyto Provide Information. The permittee shall furnish to the
Director and ADEC, within a reasonable time, any Information which
the Director or ADEC may request to determine whether cause exists
for modifying,- revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit,
or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall
also furnish to the Director or ADEC, upon request, copies of
records required to be kept by this permit.
G. Other Information. Nhen the permittee becomes aware that it failed
to submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted
Incorrect information in a permit application or any report to the
Director or ADEC, it shall promptly submit such facts or
information.
H. Signatory Requirements. All applications, reports or information
submitted to the Director and ADEC shall be signed and certified.
1. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
a. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer.
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general
partner or the proprietor, respectively.
c. For a municipality, state, federal, or other public
agency: by either a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official.
2. All reports required by the permit and other information
requested by the Director or ADEC shall be signed by a person
described above or by a duly authorized representative of that
person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
a. The authorization is made in writing by a person
described above and submitted to the Director and ADEC,
and
-------
Page 16 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
b. The authorization specified either an Individual or a
position having responsibility for the overall operation
of the regulated facility or activity, such as the
position of plant manager, operator of a well or a well
field, superintendent, position of equivalent
responsibility, or an Individual or position having
overall responsibility for environmental matters for the
company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be
either a named Individual or any individual occupying a
named position.)
3. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph
IV.H.2. is no longer accurate because a different individual
or position has responsibility for the overall operation of
the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements
of paragraph IV.H.2. must be submitted to the Director and
ADEC prior to or together with any reports, information, or
applications to be signed by an authorized representative.
4. Certification. Any person signing a document under this
section shall make the following certification:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and
all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision In accordance with a system designed to
assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry
of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the
Information, the Information submitted is, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility
of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations."
Aval 1ab1l1ty of Reports. Except for data determined to be
confidential under 40 CFR Part 2, all reports prepared in
accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for
public inspection at the offices of the Director and ADEC. As
required by the Act, permit applications, permits and effluent data
shall not be considered confidential.
Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability. Nothing in this permit
shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action
or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or
penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under
Section 311 of the Act.
Property Rights. The issuance of this permit does not convey any
property rights of any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does
it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of
personal rights, nor any Infringement of federal, state or local
laws or regulations.
-------
Page 17 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
Severabi11ty. The provisions of this permit are severable, and if
any provision of this permit, or the application of any provision
of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the
application of such provision to other circumstances, and the
remainder of this permit, shall not be affected thereby.
Transfers. This permit may be automatically transferred to a new
permittee if:
1. The current permittee notifies the Director at least 30 days
In advance of the proposed transfer date;
2. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing
and new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of
permit responsibility, coverage, and liability between them;
and
3. The Director does not notify the existing permittee and the
proposed new permittee of his or her intent to modify, or
revoke and reissue the permit. If this notice is not
received, the transfer is effective on the date specified in
the agreement mentioned 1n paragraph 2 above.
State laws. Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude
the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from
any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established
pursuant to any applicable state law or regulation under authority
preserved by Section 510 of the Act.
-------
Page 18 of 18
Permit No.: AK-004685-0
ATTACHMENT A
0125.104 Best
practice* pro*
(a) BMP programs shall be devel-
oped In accordance with good engi-
neering practices and with the provi-
sions of this subpart.
(b) The BMP program shall:
(1) Be documented in narrative
form, and shall include any necessary
plot plans, drawings or maps;
(2) Establish specific objectives for
the control of toxic and hazardous pol-
lutants.
(1) Each facility component or
system shall be examined for its po-
tential for causing a release of signifi-
cant amounts of toxic or hazardous
pollutants to waters of the United
States due to equipment failure, im-
proper operation, natural phenomena
such as rain or snowfall, etc.
(11) Where experience indicates a
reasonable potential for equipment
failure (e.g., a tank overflow or leak-
age), natural condition (e.g., precipita-
tion), or other circumstances to result
in significant amounts of toxic or haz-
ardous pollutants reaching surface
waters, the program should Include a
prediction of the direction, rate of
flow and total quantity of toxic or haz-
ardous pollutants which could be dis-
charged from the facility as a result of
each condition or circumstance;
(3) Establish specific best manage-
ment practices to meet the objectives
identified under paragraph (b)(2) of
this section, addressing each compo-
nent or system capable of causing a re-
lease of significant amounts of toxic or
hazardous pollutants to the waters of
the United States;
(4) The BMP program: (i) May re-
flect requirements for Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure (SPCC)
plans under section 311 of the Act and
40 CFR Part 151, and may Incorporate
any part of such plans into the BMP
program by reference;
(Comment: EPA has proposed Motion
31KJK1KO regulations (43 PR 39276) which
require faculties subject to NPDES to devel-
op and Implement SPCC plans to prevent
discharges of reporUble quantities of desig-
nated hazardous substances. While Subpart
K requires only procedural activities and
minor construction, the proposed 40 CFR
Part 191 (SPCC regulations) are more strin-
gent and comprehensive with respect to
their requirements for spill prevention. In
developing BMP programs In accordance
with Subpart K. owners or operators should
also consider the requirements of proposed
40 CFR Part 151 which may address many
of the same areas of the facility covered by
this Subpart.]
(ii) Shall assure the proper manage-
ment of solid and hazardous waste in
accordance with regulations promul-
gated under the Solid Waste Disposal
Act. as amended by the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act of 1976
(RCRA) (40 U.S.C. 6901 et seq). Man-
agement practices required under
RCRA regulations shall be expressly
incorporated into the BMP program;
and
(ill) Shall address the following
points for the ancillary activities in
S 125.102:
(A) Statement of policy;
(B) Spill Control Committee;
(C) Material inventory;
(D) Material compatibility;
(E) Employee training:
(F) Reporting and notification pro-
cedures;
(O) Visual Inspections;
(H) Preventive maintenance;
(I) Housekeeping; and
(J) Security.
[Comment* Additional technical Informa-
tion on BMPs and the elements of a BMP
program Is contained in a publication enti-
tled "NPDES Best Management Practices
Guidance Document." Copies may be ob-
tained by written request to Edward A.
Kramer (EN-338). Office of Water Enforce-
ment, Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington. DC, 20460.1
-------
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
Application No.: AK-004331-
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Nashington 98101
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Hater Act,
33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq.. as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987,
P.L. 100-4, the "Act",
GRANITE POINT COAL PORT, INC.
(Diamond Shamrock Chuitna Coal Joint Venture)
Is authorized to discharge from the port site facility located southwest
of the village of Tyonek, Alaska, to receiving waters named Cook Inlet,
In accordance with discharge points, effluent limitations, monitoring
requirements and other conditions set forth herein.
This permit shall become effective
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight,
Signed this day of
DRAFT
Director, Water Division, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Page 2 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover SheetIssuance and Expiration Dates
I. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
A. Specific Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
B. Other Permit Requirements
C. Definitions
II. Monitoring, Recording and Reporting Requirements
A. Representative Sampling
B. Monitoring Procedures
C. Reporting of Monitoring Results
0. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee
E. Records Contents
F. Retention of Records
G. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting
H. Other Noncompliance Reporting
I. Inspection and Entry
III. Compliance Responsibilities
A. Duty to Comply
B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense
D. Duty to Mitigate
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance
F. Removed Substances
G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
H. Upset Conditions
I. Toxic Pollutants
IV. General Requirements
A. Changes In Discharge of Toxic Substances
B. Planned Changes
C. Anticipated Noncompliance
D. Permit Actions
E. Duty to Reapply
F. Duty to Provide Information
G. Other Information
H, Signatory Requirements
I. Availability of Reports
J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
K. Property Rights
L. Severability
M. Transfers
N. State Laws
Attachment A: 40 CFR 125, Subpart K. §125.104(a) and (b)
-------
Page 3 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
I. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
A. Specific limitations and Monitoring Requirements.
1. During the effective term of this permit, the permittee 1s
authorized to discharge from outfall 001 (sanitary waste) In
accordance with the following effluent limitations and
nranitoring requirements:
Effluent
Characteristics
Flow (gpd)
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (6005)
Total Suspended
Solids (TSS)
PH
Fecal Coliform
Effluent Limitations
Avg. Monthly Meekly Avg.
Monitoring Requirements
Frequency Sample Type
2000
30 mg/1
30 mg/1
45 mg/1
45 mg/1
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
Not less than 6.0
standard units, nor greater
than 9.0 standard units.
monthly
Instantaneous
grab
grab
grab
grab
The monthly average percent removal of BOOR and TSS shall not be less
than 85%. Removal rates and associated calculations shall be submitted
monthly with each Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form.
There shall be no discharge of floating sol Ids, visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
2.
During the effective term of this permit, the permittee 1s
authorized to discharge from outfall 002 (sediment pond) in
accordance with the following:
a. Baseflow Conditions Discharges
following limitations and monitoring
baseflow conditions:
shall comply with the
requirements during
Effluent
Characteristics
Total Hydrocarbons*
Total Iron
Total Suspended
Solids (TSS)
Settleable Solids
(SS)
pH
Effluent Flow (mgd)
Receiving Stream
Flow (cfs)
Eff1uent Li ml tations
Avg.Monthly Daily Max.
3.0
35.0
mg/1
mg/1
0.15 mg/1
6.0 mg/1
70.0 mg/1
Mpn.1tor ing
Frequency
weekly
weekly
weekly
weekly
Not less than 6.0 weekly
standard units, nor greater
than 9.0 standard units
weekly
weekly
Requirements
Sample Type
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
instantaneous
1nstantaneous
There shall be no discharge of floating solids, visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
*Total Hydrocarbons shall be measured using Standard Method 503(8).
-------
Page 4 of 19 ,
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
b. Precipitation Events (Alternate Limitations)
(1) Any discharge or Increase in the volume of a
discharge caused by precipitation within any 24-hour
period less than or equal to 5.10 Inches (or
snowmelt of equivalent depth) shall comply with the
following limitations and monitoring requirements:
Effluent
Characteristics
Effluent Flow (mgd)
Receiving Stream
Flow (cfs)
SS
PH
Mon rtor1ngRegulrements
Frequency Sample Type
weekly*
weekly*
dally
dally
instantaneous
Instantaneous
grab
grab
Effluent Limitations
Maximum Dally
N/A
N/A
0.5 ml/1
Not less than 6.0
standard units, nor
greater than 9.0
standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids, visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
[* Flows shall be measured at least once during the period when the
alternate limitations apply.]
Any discharge or Increase in the volume of a
discharge caused by precipitation within any 24-hour
period greater than 5.10 Inches (or snowmelt of
equivalent depth) shall comply with the following
limitations and monitoring requirements:
Effluent
Characteristics
Effluent Flow (mgd)
Receiving Stream
Flow (cfs)
pH
Effluent Limitations
Maximum Dai 1y
Monitoring
Frequency
weekly*
weekly*
daily
Requirements
Samp]e Type
Instantaneous
Instantaneous
grab
N/A
N/A
Not less than 6.0
standard units, nor
greater than 9.0
standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids, visible foam or oil
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
[* Flow shall be measured at least once during the period when the
alternate limitations apply.]
and
Dfr*% A ff~*f*
RAFT
-------
Page 5 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
(3) The alternate precipitation limitations and
monitoring requirements in Parts I.A.Z.b.U) or (2)
begin when a discharge (or an increase in the volume
of a discharge) Is caused by precipitation (or
snowmelt of equivalent depth), and shall continue
two days following cessation of the precipitation
event.
For the purpose of this part of the permit, the term
"cessation of the precipitation event" is defined as
when the discharge flow rate decreases to the flow
rate proceeding the start of the precipitation event.
The permittee has the burden of proof to show that
the discharge (or increase in discharge) resulted
from a precipitation event.
B. Other Permit Requirements.
1. Watershed Monitoring Program
A monitoring program shall be established In order to define
relationships between soil type, vegetation, and precipitation
runoff, and the rate and quality of discharge from settling
ponds for the four seasons of the year. The resulting
watershed hydrographs should provide documentation for
determining the "time of concentration" of the area
contributing runoff to the sedimentation pond. The "time of
concentration" 1s the time it takes for the last of the runoff
from the hydraulically most remote point in the drainage area
to reach the Inlet of sedimentation pond. The program shall
include provisions for monitoring influent to the
sedimentation pond and precipitation.
The permittee shall submit details of this program to EPA and
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) for
review and approval within 90 days of the effective date of
this permit.
2. Precipitation Monitoring Program
The permittee shall keep a record of all precipitation
events. This record shall include as a minimum dates, time,
and precipitation amounts for each precipitation event. A
copy of this record shall be submitted with the monthly
discharge monitoring reports (DMR) see Part II.C.
-------
Page 6 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
3. Use of Chemicals, Detergents, Solvents or Degreasers
HI thin six months of the effective date of this permit,the
permittee shall submit to EPA and AOEC for review and approval
a list of chemicals, detergents, solvents or degreasers that
are used to wash down equipment or are used In the maintenance
shops which may enter the sedimentation ponds through runoff.
4. Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan
Within one year of the effective date of this permit or three
months before construction begins (whichever date occurs
first), the permittee shall submit a BMP plan to EPA for
review and approval. This plan shall be developed In
accordance with 40 CFR 125.104 (see Attachment A), and shall
also consider the BMP for water management presented in the
EPA "Development Document for Effluent Limitations and
Standards for the Coal Mining Point Source Category" (EPA
440/1-82/057, October 1982, pages 362, 367-376).
The BMP plan, upon approval shall become part of this permit.
A copy of the BMP plan shall be kept at the facility.
The permittee shall amend the BMP plan whenever there Is a
change in facility design, construction, operation, or
maintenance which materially affects the facility's potential
for discharge of significant amounts of hazardous or toxic
pollutants to waters of the United States.
If the BMP program proves to be ineffective In achieving the
general objective of preventing the release of significant
amounts of toxic or hazardous pollutants to waters of the
United States and the specific objectives and requirements of
the BMP plan, the permit and/or the BMP program shall be'
subject to modification to incorporate revised BMP
requlrements.
T
nrn 10
-------
Page 7 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
C. Definitions.
1. "Average monthly discharge limitation" means the highest
allowable average of "dally discharges" over a calendar month,
calculated as the sum of all "dally discharges" measured
during a calendar month divided by the number of "daily
discharges" measured during that month.
2. "Baseflow Conditions" refers to the sustained flow of water in
rivers and streams resulting primarily from groundwater
seepage into the water courses.
3. "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of waste streams from
any portion of a treatment facility.
4. "Daily discharge" means the discharge of a pollutant measured
during a calendar day or any 24-hour period that reasonably
represents the calendar day for purposes of sampling. For
pollutants with limitations expressed in units of mass, the
"daily discharge" Is calculated as the total mass of the
pollutant discharged over the day. For pollutants with
limitations expressed in other units of measurement, the
"daily discharge" is calculated as the average measurement of
the pollutant over the day.
5. A "Grab" sample 1s a single sample or measurement taken at a
specific time or over as short a period of time as is feasible.
6. "Maximum dally discharge limitation" means the highest
allowable "daily discharge."
7. "Precipitation Event" includes any period of time for which
there has been measurable precipitation, and periods of
snowmelt (occurring at any time there is snow on the ground
within the watershed and the temperature is above 0"C).
8. "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to
property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them
to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of
natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in
the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does not mean
economic loss caused by delays in production.
9. "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is
unintentional and temporary noncompliance with
technology-based permit effluent limitations because of
factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee. An
upset does not include noncompllance to the extent caused by
operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities,
inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive
maintenance, or careless or Improper operation.
-------
Page 8 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
II. MONITORING, RECORDING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. Representative Sampljng. Samples taken In compliance with the
monitoring requirements established under Part I shall be collected
from the effluent stream prior to discharge into the receiving
waters. Samples and measurements shall be representative of the
volume and nature of the monitored discharge.
B. Monitoring Procedures.
1. Settleable Solids. Fill an Imhoff cone to the one-liter mark
with a thoroughly mixed sample. Allow to settle undisturbed
for 45 minutes. Gently stir along the inside surface of the
cone with a stirring rod. Allow to settle undisturbed for 15
minutes longer. Record the volume of settled material in the
cone as milHliters per liter. Where a separation of
settleable and floating material occurs, do not Include the
floating material In the reading.
2. Other Parameters. Monitoring for other parameters must toe
conducted according to test procedures approved under 40 CFR
Part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified in
this permit.
C. Reporting of Monitoring Results. Monitoring results shall be
summarized each month on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form
-------
Page 9 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
D, Additional Monitoring by the Permittee. If the permittee monitors
any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit, using
test procedures approved under 40 CFR 136 or as specified in this
permit, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the
calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the DMR. Such
increased frequency shall also be Indicated,
E. Records Contents. Records of monitoring information shall include:
1. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
2. The Individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
3. The date(s) analyses were performed;
4. The 1nd1v1dual(s) who performed the analyses;
5. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
6. The results of such analyses.
F. Retention of Records. The permittee shall retain records of all
monitoring information, Including all calibration and maintenance
records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous
monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this
permit, and records of all data used to complete the application
for this permit, for a period of at least three years from the date
of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may
be extended by request of the Director or ADEC at any time. Data
collected on-slte, copies of Discharge Monitoring Reports, and a
copy of this NPDES permit must be maintained on-site during the
duration of activity at the permitted location.
G. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompllance Reporting.
1. The following occurrences of noncompllance shall be reported
by telephone within 24 hours from the time the permittee
becomes aware of the circumstances:
a. Any noncompllance which may endanger health or the
environment;
b. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent
limitation in the permit (See Part III.G., Bypass of
Treatment Facilities.);
c. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the
permit (See Part III.H.. Upset Conditions.?; or
d. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any
of the pollutants listed in the permit to be reported
within 24 hours.
-------
Page 10 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
2. A written submission shall also be provided within five days
of the time that the permittee becomes aware of the
circumstances. The written submission shall contain:
a. A description of the noncompliance and its cause;
b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and
times;
c. The estimated time noncompliance is expected to continue
if it has not been corrected; and
d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent
reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
3. The Director may waive the written report on a case-by-case
basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours by
the Water Compliance Section in Seattle, Washington, by phone,
(206) 442-1213.
4. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses in Part II.C.,
Reporting of Monitoring Results.
H. Other Noncompliance Reporting. Instances of noncompliance not
required to be reported within 24 hours shall be reported at the
time that monitoring reports for Part II.C. are submitted. The
reports shall contain the Information listed in Part II.G.2,
I. Inspection and Entry. The permittee shall allow the Director,
ADEC, or an authorized representative (including an authorized
contractor acting as a representative of the Administrator), upon
the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be
required by law, to:
1. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility
or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be
kept under the conditions of this permit;
2. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that
must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment
(Including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or
operations regulated or required under this permit; and
4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of
assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the
Act, any substances or parameters at any location.
no
-------
Page 11 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
III. COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Duty to Comply. The permittee must comply with all conditions of
this permit. Any permit noncompllance constitutes a violation of
the Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for permit
termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or for
denial of a permit renewal application. The permittee shall give
advance notice to the Director and ADEC of any planned changes in
the permitted facility or activity which may result in
noncompllance with permit requirements.
B. Penalties for Violations of Perm!tConditions.
1. Civil Penalty. The Act provides that any person who violates
a permit condition implementing Sections 301, 302, 306, 307,
308, 318, or 405 of the Act shall be subject to a civil
penalty, not to exceed $25,000 per day for each violation.
2. Criminal Penalties:
a. Negligent Violations. The Act provides that any person
who negligently violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor
more than $25,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or by both.
b. Knowing Violations. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly violates a permit condition Implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor
more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or by both.
c. Knowing Endangerment. The Act provides that any person
who knowingly violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act,
and who knows at that time that he thereby places another
person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily
injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of
not more than $250,000 or imprisonment of not more than
15 years, or both. A person which is an organization
shall, upon conviction of violating this subparagraph, be
subject to a fine of not more than $1,000,000.
d. False Statements. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly makes any false material statement,
representation, or certification In any application,
record, report, plan, or other document filed or required
to be maintained under this Act or who knowingly
falsifies, tampers with, or renders inaccurate any
monitoring device or method required to be maintained
under this Act, shall upon conviction, be punished by a
fine of not more that $10,000, or by Imprisonment for not
more than 2 years, or by both.
-------
Page 12 of 19
Permit No.: AK-Q0433I-1
Except as provided in permit conditions in Part III.G.. By pass of
Treatment FacJIJtjes and Par t III.H., Up set Cond1t i on s, nothing in
this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee of the
civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense. It shall not be a
defense for a permittee 1n an enforcement action that it would have
been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to
maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit.
D. Duty to Mitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to
minimize or prevent any discharge 1n violation of this permit which
has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or
the environment.
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance. The permittee shall at all times
properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are
installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the
conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance also
Includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality
assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of
back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are
installed by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to
achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit.
F. Removed Substances. Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other
pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of
wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any
pollutant from such materials from entering navigable waters.
-------
Page 13 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
G- Bypass of Treatment Facilities:
1. Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any
bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to
be exceeded, but only If it also is for essential maintenance
to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject
to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of this section.
2. Notice:
a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of
the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if
possible at least 10 days before the date of the bypass.
b. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice
of an unanticipated bypass as required under Part II.G..
Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncomplfance Reporting.
3. Prohibition of bypass.
a. Bypass is prohibited and the Director or ADEC may take
enforcement action against a permittee for a bypass,
unless:
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life,
personal Injury, or severe property damage;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass,
such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities,
retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during
normal periods of equipment downtime. This
condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up
equipment should have been installed in the exercise
of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a
bypass which occurred during normal periods of
equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under
paragraph 2 of this section.
b. The Director and ADEC may approve an anticipated bypass,
after considering its adverse effects, if the Director
and ADEC determine that it will meet the three conditions
listed above in paragraph 3.a. of this section.
-------
Page 14 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
Upset Conditions.
1. Effect of an upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative
defense to an action brought for noncompllance with such
technology based permit effluent limitations if the
requirements of paragraph 2 of this section are met. No
determination made during administrative review of claims that
noncompllance was caused by upset, and before an action for
noncompllance, 1s final administrative action subject to
judicial review.
2. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset. A
permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of
upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed,
contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence
that:
a. An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the
cause(s) of the upset;
b. The permitted facility was at the time being properly
operated;
c. The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required
under Part II.G., Twenty-four Hour Notice
of Noncompliance Reporting; and
d. The permittee complied with any remedial measures
required under Part III.P.. Duty to Mitigate.
3. Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee
seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden
of proof.
I. Toxic Pollutants. The permittee shall comply with effluent
standards or prohibitions established under Section 307
-------
Page 15 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
IV. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances. Notification shall be
provided to the Director and ADEC as soon as the permittee knows
of, or has reason to believe:
1. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would
result in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of
any toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if
that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels":
a. One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/1);
b. Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/1) for acrolein
and acrylonitrile; five hundred micrograms per liter (500
ug/1) for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4,
6-dinitrophenol; and one milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for
antimony;
c. Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported
for that pollutant in the permit application in
accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with
40 CFR 122.44(f).
2. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would
result In any discharge, on a non-routine or infrequent basis,
of a toxic pollutant which Is not limited in the permit, If
that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels":
a. Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/1);
b. One milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for antimony;
c. Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported
for that pollutant in the permit application in
accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7); or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with
40 CFR 122.44(f).
B. Planned Changes. The permittee shall give notice to the Director
and ADEC as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or
additions to the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
1. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet
one of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a
new source as determined in 40 CFR 122.29(b); or
2. The alteration or addition could significantly change the
nature or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged.
This notification applies to pollutants which are subject
neither to effluent limitations in the permit, nor to
notification requirements under Part IV.A.I.
-------
Page 16 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
C. Anticipated Noncompllance. The permittee shall also give advance
notice to the Director and ADEC of any planned changes In the
permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompllance
with permit requirements.
D. Permit Actions. This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued,
or terminated for cause. The filing of a request by the permittee
for a permit modification, revocation and relssuance, or
termination, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated
noncompllance, does not stay any permit condition.
E. Dutyto Reapply. If the permittee wishes to continue an activity
regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit,
the permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit. The
application should be submitted at least 180 days before the
expiration date of this permit.
F- Duty to ProvideInformation. The permittee shall furnish to the
Director and ADEC, within a reasonable time, any information which
the Director or ADEC may request to determine whether cause exists
for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit,
or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall
also furnish to the Director or ADEC, upon request, copies of
records required to be kept by this permit.
G. Other Informat1 on. When the permittee becomes aware that It failed
to submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted
incorrect information 1n a permit application or any report to the
Director or ADEC, it shall promptly submit such facts or
information.
H. Signatory Requirements. All applications, reports or information
submitted to the Director and ADEC shall be signed and certified.
1. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
a. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer.
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general
partner or the proprietor, respectively.
c. For a municipality, state, federal, or other public
agency: by either a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official.
2. All reports required by the permit and other Information
requested by the Director or ADEC shall be signed by a person
described above or by a duly authorized representative of that
person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
a. The authorization 1s made in writing by a person
described above and submitted to the Director and ADEC,
and
-------
Page 17 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
b. The authorization specified either an individual or a
position having responsibility for the overall operation
of the regulated facility or activity, such as the
position of plant manager, operator of a well or a well
field, superintendent, position of equivalent
responsibility, or an individual or position having
overall responsibility for environmental matters for the
company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be
either a named Individual or any Individual occupying a
named position.)
3. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph
IV.H.2. is no longer accurate because a different individual
or position has responsibility for the overall operation of
the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements
of paragraph IV.H.2. must be submitted to the Director and
ADEC prior to or together with any reports, information, or
applications to be signed by an authorized representative.
4. Certification. Any person signing a document under this
section shall make the following certification:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and
all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision In accordance with a system designed to
assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my Inquiry
of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the
Information, the Information submitted Is, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility
of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations."
I. Availability of Reports. Except for data determined to be
confidential under 40 CFR Part 2, all reports prepared in
accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for
public inspection at the offices of the Director and ADEC. As
required by the Act, permit applications, permits and effluent data
shall not be considered confidential.
J- 011 and Hazardous Substance Liability. Nothing in this permit
shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action
or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or
penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under
Section 311 of the Act.
K. Property Rights. The issuance of this permit does not convey any
property rights of any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does
it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of
personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state or local
laws or regulations.
-------
Page 18 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
L. Severabl1ity. The provisions of this permit are severable, and 1f
any provision of this permit, or the application of any provision
of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the
application of such provision to other circumstances, and the
remainder of this permit, shall not be affected thereby.
M- Transfers. This permit may be automatically transferred to a new
permittee If:
1. The current permittee notifies the Director at least 30 days
In advance of the proposed transfer date;
2. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing
and new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of
permit responsibility, coverage, and liability between them;
and
3. The Director does not notify the existing permittee and the
proposed new permittee of his or her intent to modify, or
revoke and reissue the permit. If this notice is not
received, the transfer is effective on the date specified in
the agreement mentioned in paragraph 2 above.
N. State Laws. Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude
the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from
any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established
pursuant to any applicable state law or regulation under authority
preserved by Section 510 of the Act.
-------
Page 19 of 19
Permit No.: AK-004331-1
ATTACHMENT A
§ 125.104 Beat manarement practice* pro-
gram.
(a) BMP program* shall be devel-
oped in accordance with good engi-
neering practices and with the provi-
sions of this subpart.
(b) The BMP program shall:
(1) Be documented in narrative
form, and shall include any necessary
plot plans, drawings or maps;
(2) Establish specific objectives for
the control of toxic and hazardous pol-
lutants.
(I) Each facility component or
system shall be examined for its po-
tential for causing a release of signifi-
cant amounts of toxic or hazardous
pollutants to waters of the United
States due to equipment failure, im-
proper operation, natural phenomena
such as rain or snowfall, etc.
(ii) Where experience indicates a
reasonable potential for equipment
failure (e,g., a tank overflow or leak-
age), natural condition (e.g., precipita-
tion), or other circumstances to result
in significant amounts of toxic or haz-
ardous pollutants reaching surface
waters, the program should include a
prediction of the direction, rate of
flow and total quantity of toxic or haz-
ardous pollutants which could be dis-
charged from the facility as a result of
each condition or circumstance;
(3) Establish specific best manage-
ment practices to meet the objectives
identified under paragraph (b)(2) of
this section, addressing each compo-
nent or system capable of causing a re-
lease of significant amounts of toxic or
hazardous pollutants to the waters of
the United States;
(4) The BMP program: (1) May re-
flect requirements for Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure (SPCC)
plans under section 311 of the Act and
40 CFR Part 151, and may incorporate
any part of such plans Into the BMP
program by reference;
(Comment* EPA has proposed section
31KJXIMC) refutations (43 PR 39270) which
require facilities subject to NPDES to devel-
op and Implement SPCC plan* to prevent
discharges of reportable quantities of desig-
nated hazardous substances. While Subpart
K requires only procedural activities and
minor construction, the proposed 40 CFR
Part 151 (SPCC regulations) an more strin-
gent and comprehensive with respect to
their requirements for spill prevention. In
developing BMP programs in accordance
with Subpart K. owners or operators should
also consider the requirements of proposed
40 CFR Part 191 which may address many
of the sane areas of the facility covered by
this Subpart)
(ii) Shall assure the proper manage-
ment of solid and hazardous waste in
accordance with regulations promul-
gated under the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, as amended by the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act of 1978
(RCRA) (40 U.S.C. 6901 et setfi. Man-
agement practices required under
RCRA regulations shall be expressly
incorporated into the BMP program;
and
(ill) Shall address the following
points for the ancillary activities in
§ 125.102:
(A) Statement of policy;
(B) Spill Control Committee;
(C) Material inventory;
(D) Material compatibility;
(E) Employee training:
(F) Reporting and notification pro-
cedures;
(G) Visual inspections;
(H) Preventive maintenance;
(I) Housekeeping; and
(J) Security.
C Comment.' Additional technical informa-
tion on BMPs and the elements of a BMP
program is contained In a publication enti-
tled "NPDES Best Management Practices
Guidance Document." Copies may be ob-
tained by written request to Edward A.
Kramer (EN-338), Office of Water Enforce-
ment, Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, 20460.)
-------
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
Application No.: AK-004356-7
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Hashington 98101
AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act,
33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq.. as amended by the Hater Quality Act of 1987,
P.L. 100-4, the "Act",
TIDEWATER SERVICES COMPANY
(Housing Fac11Ities)
Diamond Shamrock Chuitna Coal Joint Venture
1s authorized to discharge from a facility located near the village of Tyonek,
Alaska, to receiving waters named the tributaries of the Chuitna River and the
Chuitna River, in accordance with discharge points, effluent limitations,
monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth herein.
This permit shall become effective
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight,
Signed this day of
Director, Water Division, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Page 2 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover SheetIssuance and Expiration Dates
I. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements
A. Specific Limitations and Monitoring Requirements for Outfall 001
B. Specific Limitations and Monitoring Requirements for Outfalls 002
and 003
C. Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan
D. Definitions
II. Monitoring, Recording and Reporting Requirements
A. Representative Sampling
B. Monitoring Procedures
C. Reporting of Monitoring Results
D. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee
E. Records Contents
F. Retention of Records
G. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting
H, Other Noncompliance Reporting
I. Inspection and Entry
III. Compliance Responsibilities
A. Duty to Comply
B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense
D. Duty to Mitigate
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance
F. Removed Substances
G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities
H. Upset Conditions
I. Toxic Pollutants
IV. General Requirements
A. Changes in Discharge of Toxic Substances
B. Planned Changes
C. Anticipated Noncompliance
D. Permit Actions
E. Duty to Reapply
F. Duty to Provide Information
G. Other Information
H. Signatory Requirements
I. Availability of Reports
J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
K. Property Rights
L. Severability
M. Transfers
N. State Laws
Attachment A: 40 CFR 125, Subpart K, §125.104(a) and (b)
-------
Page 3 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
A. Specific Limitations and MonitoringRequirements for Outfall 001.
During the effective term of this permit, the permittee Is
authorized to discharge from outfall 001 (sanitary waste) In
accordance with the following effluent limitations and monitoring
requirements:
Effluent
Characteristics
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (8005)
Total Suspended
Solids (TSS)
PH
Flow, gpd
Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
Avg. Monthly Weekly Avq.
30 mg/1
30 mg/1
Not less
45 mg/1
45 mg/1
than 6.0
Frequency Sample Type
monthly
monthly
monthly
grab
grab
grab
standard units, nor
greater than 9.0
standard units.
50,000
Fecal Coliform, #/100ml
monthly
monthly
instantaneous
grab
The average monthly percent removal of 6005 and TSS shall not be less
than 85%. Removal rates and associated calculations shall be submitted
monthly with each Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
B. Specific Limitations and Monitoring Requirements for Outfalls 002
and 003.
During the effective term of this permit, the permittee is
authorized to discharge from outfalls 002 and 003 (sediment ponds)
In accordance with the following effluent limitations and monitoring
requi rements:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTIC
TSS
Settleable Solids
(SS>
PH
Flow, mgd
EFFLUENT LIMITATION
Avg. Monthly Max. Dai 1y
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Frequency Sample Type
20.0 mg/1
30.0 mg/1
0.2 ml/1
Not less than 6.0
standard units, nor
greater than 9.0
standard units.
weekly
weekly
weekly
weekly
grab
grab
grab
instantaneous
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam or oil and
grease which causes a sheen on the surface of the receiving water.
-------
Page 4 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
C. Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan
Within one year of the effective date of this permit or three
months before construction begins (whichever date occurs
first), the permittee shall submit a BMP plan to EPA for review
and approval. This plan shall be developed 1n accordance with
40 CFR 125.104 (see Attachment A), and shall also consider the
BMP for water management presented In the EPA "Development
Document for Effluent Limitations and Standards for the Coal
Mining Point Source Category" (EPA 440/1-82/057, October 1982,
pages 362, 367-376).
The BMP plan, upon approval shall become part of this permit.
A copy of the BMP plan shall be kept at the facility.
The permittee shall amend the BMP plan whenever there 1s a
change In facility design, construction, operation, or
maintenance which materially affects the facility's potential
for discharge of significant amounts of hazardous or toxic
pollutants to waters of the United States.
If the BMP program proves to be ineffective in achieving the
general objective of preventing the release of significant
amounts of toxic or hazardous pollutants to waters of the
United States and the specific objectives and requlremants of
the BMP plan, the permit and/or the BMP program shall be
subject to modification to Incorporate revised BMP requirements.
DEC J989
-------
Page 5 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
D. Definitions.
1. "Average monthly discharge limitation" means the highest
allowable average of "daily discharges" over a calendar
month, calculated as the sum of all "daily discharges"
measured during a calendar month divided by the number
of "daily discharges" measured during that month.
2. "Bypass" means the Intentional diversion of waste streams
from any portion of a treatment facility.
3. "Dally discharge" means the discharge of a pollutant
measured during a calendar day or any 24-hour period that
reasonably represents the calendar day for purposes of
sampling. For pollutants with limitations expressed 1n
units of mass, the "dally discharge" is calculated as the
total mass of the pollutant discharged over the day. For
pollutants with limitations expressed in other units of
measurement, the "daily discharge" is calculated as the
average measurement of the pollutant over the day.
4. A "Grab" sample is a single sample or measurement taken
at a specific time or over as short a period of time as
1s feasible.
5. "Maximum dally discharge limitation" means the highest
allowable "dally discharge."
6. "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage
to property, damage to the treatment facilities which
causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and
permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably
be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe
property damage does not mean economic loss caused by
delays in production.
7. "Upset" means an exceptional Incident in which there
is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with
technology-based permit effluent limitations because of
factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee.
An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent
caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment
facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of
preventive maintenance, or careless or improper operation.
DRAFT
-------
Page 6 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
II, MONITORING, RECORDING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. Representat1ve Samp1ing. Samples taken in compliance with the
monitoring requirements established under Part I shall be collected
from the effluent stream prior to discharge Into the receiving
waters. Samples and measurements shall be representative of the
volume and nature of the monitored discharge.
B. Moni tori ng Procedures.
1. Settleable Solids. Fill an Imhoff cone to the one-liter mark
with a thoroughly mixed sample. Allow to settle undisturbed
for 45 minutes. Gently stir along the inside surface of the
cone with a stirring rod. Allow to settle undisturbed for 15
minutes longer. Record the volume of settled material In the
cone as ml 111 liters per liter. Nhere a separation of
settleable and floating material occurs, do not include the
floating material in the reading.
2. Other Parameters. Monitoring for other parameters must be
conducted according to test procedures approved under 40 CFR
Part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified In
this permit.
C. Reporting of Monitoring Results. Monitoring results shall be
summarized each month on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) form
(EPA No. 3320-1). The reports shall be submitted monthly and are
to be postmarked by the 10th day of the following month. Legible
copies of these, and all other reports, shall be signed and
certified in accordance with the requirements of Part IV.H.,
Signatory Requirements, and submitted to the Director, Nater
Division and the State agency at the following addresses:
original to: United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue, WD-135
Seattle, Nashington 98101
copy to: Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC)
Southcentral Region
3601 "C" Street, Suite 1350
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
-------
Page 7 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
D. Additlonal Monitoring by the Permittee. If the permittee monitors
any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit, using
test procedures approved under 40 CFR 136 or as specified in this
permit, the results of this monitoring shall be Included in the
calculation and reporting of the data submitted 1n the DNR. Such
increased frequency shall also be indicated.
E. Records Contents. Records of monitoring information shall include:
1. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
2. The individual
-------
Page 8 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
2, A written submission shall also be provided within five days
of the time that the permittee becomes aware of the
circumstances. The written submission shall contain:
a. A description of the noncomplfance and Its cause;
b. The period of noncompllance, Including exact dates and
times;
c. The estimated time noncompllance Is expected to continue
If it has not been corrected; and
d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent
reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
3. The Director may waive the written report on a case-by-case
basis If the oral report has been received within 24 hours by
the Nater Compliance Section in Seattle, Washington, by phone,
(206) 442-1213.
4. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses In Part II.e..
Reporting of Monitoring Results.
H. Other Noncompliance Reporting. Instances of noncompliance not
required to be reported within 24 hours shall be reported at the
time that monitoring reports for Part II.C. are submitted. The
reports shall contain the information listed in Part II.G.2.
I. Inspection and Entry. The permittee shall allow the Director,
ADEC, or an authorized representative (Including an authorized
contractor acting as a representative of the Administrator), upon
the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be
required by law, to:
1. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility
or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be
kept under the conditions of this permit;
2. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that
must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment
(including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or
operations regulated or required under this permit; and
4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of
assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the
Act, any substances or parameters at any location.
-------
Page 9 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
III. COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
Duty to Comply. The permittee must comply with all conditions of
this permit. Any permit noncompllance constitutes a violation of
the Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for permit
termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or for
denial of a permit renewal application. The permittee shall give
advance notice to the Director and ADEC of any planned changes in
the permitted facility or activity which may result 1n
noncompllance with permit requirements.
Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions.
1. Civil Penalty. The Act provides that any person who violates
a permit condition implementing Sections 301, 302, 306, 307,
308, 318, or 405 of the Act shall be subject to a civil
penalty, not to exceed $25,000 per day for each violation.
2. Criminal Penalties:
a. Negligent Violations. The Act provides that any person
who negligently violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor
more than $25,000 per day of violation, or by
Imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or by both.
b. Knowing Violations. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $5,000 nor
more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or by both.
c. Knowing Endangerment. The Act provides that any person
who knowingly violates a permit condition implementing
Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act,
and who knows at that time that he thereby places another
person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily
injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of
not more than $250,000 or imprisonment of not more than
15 years, or both, A person which is an organization
shall, upon conviction of violating this subparagraph, be
subject to a fine of not more than $1,000,000.
d. False Statements. The Act provides that any person who
knowingly makes any false material statement,
representation, or certification in any application,
record, report, plan, or other document filed or required
to be maintained under this Act or who knowingly
falsifies, tampers with, or renders inaccurate any
monitoring device or method required to be maintained
under this Act, shall upon conviction, be punished by a
fine of not more that $10,000, or by imprisonment for not
more than 2 years, or by both.
-------
Pagt 10 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
Except as provided in permit conditions 1n Part III.G.. Bypass of
Treatment Facilities and Part III.H.. Upset Conditions, nothing in
this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee of the
civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.
C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense. It shall not be a
defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have
been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to
maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit.
D. Duty to Mitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to
minimize or prevent any discharge in violation of this permit which
has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or
the environment,
E. Proper Operation and Maintenance. The permittee shall at all times
properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are
Installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the
conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance also
includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality
assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of
back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are
Installed by a permittee only when the operation Is necessary to
achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit.
F. Removed Substances. Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other
pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of
wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any
pollutant from such materials from entering navigable waters.
-------
Page 11 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
Bypass of Treatment Fac1 Titles:
1. Bypass not exceeding limitations. The permittee may allow any
bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to
be exceeded, but only if It also Is for essential maintenance
to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject
to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of this section.
2. Notice:
a. Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of
the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, if
possible at least 10 days before the date of the bypass.
b. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice
of an unanticipated bypass as required under Part II.G..
Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting.
3. Prohibition of bypass.
a. Bypass Is prohibited and the Director or ADEC may take
enforcement action against a permittee for a bypass,
unless:
(1) The bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life,
personal injury, or severe property damage;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass,
such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities,
retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during
normal periods of equipment downtime. This
condition is not satisfied if adequate back-up
equipment should have been installed In the exercise
of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a
bypass which occurred during normal periods of
equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The permittee submitted notices as required under
paragraph 2 of this section.
b. The Director and ADEC may approve an anticipated bypass,
after considering its adverse effects, if the Director
and ADEC determine that it will meet the three conditions
listed above in paragraph 3.a. of this section.
-------
Page 12 of
Permit No.:
17
AK-004356-7
Upset Conditions.
1. Effect of an upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative
defense to an action brought for noncompllance with such
technology based permit effluent limitations If the
requirements of paragraph 2 of this section are met. No
determination made during administrative review of claims that
noncompllance was caused by upset, and before an action for
noncompllance, 1s final administrative action subject to
judicial review.
2. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset. A
permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of
upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed,
contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence
that:
a. An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the
cause(s) of the upset;
b. The permitted facility was at the time being properly
operated;
c. The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required
under Part II.G.. Twenty-four Hour Notice
of Noncompllance Reporting; and
d. The permittee complied with any remedial measures
required under Part III.P.. Duty to Mitigate.
3. Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee
seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden
of proof.
I» Toxic Pollutants. The permittee shall comply with effluent
standards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the
Act for toxic pollutants within the time provided In the
regulations that establish those standards or prohibitions, even If
the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement.
-------
Page 13 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
IV. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
A. ChangesIn Dischargeof Toxic Substances. Notification shall be
provided to the Director and ADEC as soon as the permittee knows
of, or has reason to believe:
1. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would
result in the discharge, on a routine or frequent basis, of
any toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if
that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels":
a. One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/1);
b. Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/1) for acrolein
and acrylonitr1le; five hundred micrograms per liter (500
ug/1) for 2,4-dlnitrophenol and for 2-tnethyl-4,
6-dlnltrophenol; and one milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for
antimony;
c. Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported
for that pollutant 1n the permit application in
accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7>; or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with
40 CFR 122.44(f).
2. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would
result in any discharge, on a non-routine or Infrequent basis,
of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if
that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels":
a. Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/1);
b. One milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for antimony;
c. Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported
for that pollutant in the permit application in
accordance with 40 CFR 12Z.21(g)<7); or
d. The level established by the Director in accordance with
40 CFR 122.44(f),
B. Planned Changes. The permittee shall give notice to the Director
and ADEC as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or
additions to the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
1. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet
one of the criteria for determining whether a facility is a
new source as determined in 40 CFR 122.29(b); or
2. The alteration or addition could significantly change the
nature or increase the quantity of pollutants discharged.
This notification applies to pollutants which are subject
neither to effluent limitations in the permit, nor to
notification requirements under Part IV.A.I.
-------
Page 14 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
C. An11c1 pated Noncomp11 ance. The permittee shall also give advance
notice to the Director and ADEC of any planned changes in the
permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance
with permit requirements.
D. PermitActions. This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued,
or terminated for cause. The filing of a request by the permittee
for a permit modification, revocation and relssuance, or
termination, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated
noncompliance, does not stay any permit condition.
E. Duty toReappjy. If the permittee wishes to continue an activity
regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit,
the permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit. The
application should be submitted at least 180 days before the
expiration date of this permit.
F. Duty to Provide Information. The permittee shall furnish to the
Director and ADEC, within a reasonable time, any information which
the Director or ADEC may request to determine whether cause exists
for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit,
or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall
also furnish to the Director or ADEC, upon request, copies of
records required to be kept by this permit.
G. Other Information. When the permittee becomes aware that it failed
to submit any relevant facts 1n a permit application, or submitted
incorrect information in a permit application or any report to the
Director or ADEC, 1t shall promptly submit such facts or
information.
H. Signatory Requirements. All applications, reports or information
submitted to the Director and ADEC shall be signed and certified.
1. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
a. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer.
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general
partner or the proprietor, respectively.
c. For a municipality, state, federal, or other public
agency: by either a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official.
2. All reports required by the permit and other information
requested by the Director or ADEC shall be signed by a person
described above or by a duly authorized representative of that
person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
a. The authorization 1s made in writing by a person
described above and submitted to the Director and ADEC,
and
3 "A .
-------
Page 15 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
b. The authorization specified either an Individual or a
position having responsibility for the overall operation
of the regulated facility or activity, such as the
position of plant manager, operator of a well or a well
field, superintendent, position of equivalent
responsibility, or an individual or position having
overall responsibility for environmental matters for the
company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be
either a named individual or any individual occupying a
named position.)
3. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph
IV,H.2. is no longer accurate because a different individual
or position has responsibility for the overall operation of
the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements
of paragraph IV.H.2. must be submitted to the Director and
ADEC prior to or together with any reports, information, or
applications to be signed by an authorized representative.
4. Certification, Any person signing a document under this
section shall make the following certification:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and
all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to
assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the Information submitted. Based on my inquiry
of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the
Information, the information submitted is, to the best of
my Knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility
of fine and Imprisonment for knowing violations."
Avai1ab111ty of Reports. Except for data determined to be
confidential under 40 CFR Part 2, all reports prepared in
accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for
public inspection at the offices of the Director and ADEC. As
required by the Act, permit applications, permits and effluent data
shall not be considered confidential.
Oil andHazardous Substance Liability. Nothing in this permit
shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action
or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or
penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under
Section 311 of the Act.
Property Rights. The issuance of this permit does not convey any
property rights of any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does
it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of
personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state or local
laws or regulations.
-------
Page 16 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
L. Severabllity. The provisions of this permit are severable, and If
any provision of this permit, or the application of any provision
of this permit to any circumstance, Is held invalid, the
application of such provision to other circumstances, and the
remainder of this permit, shall not be affected thereby.
M. Transfers. This permit may be automatically transferred to a new
permittee if:
1. The current permittee notifies the Director at least 30 days
1n advance of the proposed transfer date;
2. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing
and new permittees containing a specific date for transfer of
permit responsibility, coverage, and liability between them;
and
3. The Director does not notify the existing permittee and the
proposed new permittee of his or her intent to modify, or
revoke and reissue the permit. If this notice Is not
received, the transfer is effective on the date specified in
the agreement mentioned in paragraph 2 above.
N- State Laws. Nothing In this permit shall be construed to preclude
the Institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from
any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established
pursuant to any applicable state law or regulation under authority
preserved by Section 510 of the Act.
if.
*
-------
Page 17 of 17
Permit No.: AK-004356-7
ATTACHMENT A
1125.104 Bart
(a) BMP program* shall be devel-
oped In accordance with good engi-
neering practices and with the provi-
sions of tola subpart
(b) The BMP program shall:
(1) Be documented In narrative
form, and shall include any necessary
plot plans, drawings or maps:
(2) Establish specific objectives for
the control of toxic and hazardous pol-
lutants.
<1) Each facility component or
system shall be examined for its po-
tential for causing a release of signifi-
cant amounts of toxic or hazardous
pollutants to waters of the United
States due to equipment failure, im-
proper operation, natural phenomena
such as rain or snowfall, etc.
(U) Where experience Indicates a
reasonable potential for equipment
failure (e.g., a tank overflow or leak-
age), natural condition (e.g., precipita-
tion), or other circumstances to result
in significant amounts of toxic or haz-
ardous pollutants reaching surface.
waters, the program should include a
prediction of the direction, rate of
flow and total quantity of toxic or haz-
ardous pollutants which could be dis-
charged from the facility as a result of
each condition or circumstance:
(3) Establish specific best manage-
ment practices to meet the objectives
identified under paragraph (bX2) of
this section, addressing each compo-
nent or system capable of causing a re-
lease of significant amounts of toxic or
hazardous pollutants to the waters of
the United States;
(4) The BMP program: (1) May re-
flect requirements for Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure (SPCC)
plans under section 311 of the Act and
40 CPR Part 151, and may incorporate
any part of such plans into the BMP
program by reference:
(Comment: EPA hat proposed section
3UCJX1XO regulation! (43 PR 38376) whk*
require facilities subject to NPDES to devel-
op and implement SPCC plans to prevent
discharge* of reportable quantities of desig-
nated hazardous substances. While Subpart
K require* only procedural activities and
minor construction, the proposed 40 CPU
Part 111 (SPCC regulation*) are more strin-
gent and comprehensive with respect to
their requirement* for spill prevention. In
developing BMP programs In accordance
with Subpart EC, owners or operators should
also consider the requirement* of proposed
40 CPR Part 1SI which may address many
of the same areas of the facility covered by
this Subpart.]
(ii) Shall assure the proper manage-
ment of solid and hazardous waste in
accordance with regulations promul-
gated under the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, as amended by the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act of 1976
(RCRA) (40 U.S.C. 6901 et sett). Man-
agement practices required under
RCRA regulations shall be expressly
incorporated into the BMP program:
and
(ill) Shall address the following
points for the ancillary activities in
1125.102:
(A) Statement of policy;
(B) Spill Control Committee:
(C) Material inventory;
(O) Material compatibility;
(E) Employee training:
(P) Reporting and notification pro-
cedures;
(O) Visual inspections;
(H) Preventive maintenance;
(I) Housekeeping; and
(J) Security.
{Comment: Additional technical informa-
tion on BMPs and the elements of a BMP
programis contained in a publication enti-
tled " NPDES Best Management Practices
Guidance Document." Copies may be ob-
tained by written request to Edward A.
Kramer (EN-336), Office of Water Enforce-
ment, Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC. 20460.1
-------
Appendix E
Air Quality Emissions Calculations
-------
APPENDIX E
AIR QUALITY EMISSIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION E-l
2.0 CONSTRUCTION-RELATED AND TEMPORARY EMISSIONS E-l
2.1 Construction Land Clearing Fugitive Dust Emissions E-l
2.2 Construction Land Clearing Dozer Tailpipe Emissions E-2
2.3 Construction Slash Burning Emissions E-2
2.4 Temporary Overland Truck Coal Haul Fugitive Dust Emissions E-3
2.5 Temporary Truck Coal Haul Exhaust Emissions E-3
3.0 MINE AREA EMISSIONS E-4
3.1 Land Clearing/Reclamation E-4
3.2 Slash Burning Emissions E-4
3.3 Overburden Removal - Truck Shovel E-4
3.4 Overburden Removal - Dragline E-5
3.5 Overburden Hauling E-6
3.6 Overburden Dumping ., E-6
3.7 Coal Removal E-7
3.8 Coal Hauling E-7
3.9 Coal Dumping E-8
3.10 Coal Primary Crushing E-8
3.11 Wind Erosion - Mine Area E-9
3.12 Haul Road Maintenance/Graders E-9
3.13 Dozer Tailpipe Emissions E-10
3.14 Grader Tailpipe Emissions E-10
3.15 Haul Truck Tailpipe Emissions E-ll
3.16 Other Mine Area Sources E-12
4.0 MINE SERVICE AREA EMISSIONS E-12
4.1 Secondary Coal Crushing E-12
4.2 Coal Screening E-13
4.3 Coal Handling At Mine Services Area E-13
4.4 Coal Stockpile E-14
4.5 Wind Erosion - Mine Service Facilities Area E-14
5.0 PORT FACILITY EMISSIONS E-15
5.1 Coal Handling at Port Facility E-15
5.2 Coal Stockpile at Port Facility E-16
5.3 Wind Erosion - Port Facility E-16
5.4 Coal Ship Emissions E-16
5.5 Fuel Delivery and Storage Emissions E-17
5.6 Fuel and Supply Ship Emissions E-18
6,0 HOUSING FACILITY EMISSIONS E-18
6.1 Incinerator Emissions E-18
-------
7.0 GENERAL PROJECT AREA EMISSIONS , E-19
7.1 Overland Conveyor Emissions E-19
7.2 Miscellaneous Vehicle Traffic Fugitive Dust E-20
7.3 Miscellaneous Vehicle Tailpipe Emissions E-21
7.4 Other Project Sources E-21
8.0 SECONDARY POWER GENERATION EMISSIONS E-22
9.0 LEVEL 1 VISIBILITY SCREENING ANALYSIS E-22
10.0 REFERENCES E-23
ATTACHMENT A - State of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
ATTACHMENT B - (Excerpt from: California Air Resources Board, 1983.
Draft Report to the California Legislature on Air
Pollutant Emissions from Marine Vessels).
-------
APPENDIX i
AIR QUALITY EMISSIONS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This appendix contains calculations of significant air
emissions associated with the project. It includes
construction and temporary (overland truck haul) emissions,
and short-term and annual average production-phase
emissions.
Production phase emissions, where feasible, are
assigned to one of the four functional areas of the project;
the mine area, the service area, the port facility, or the
housing facility. Emissions which occur between the four
functional areas, such as overland conveyor emissions and
miscellaneous vehicle emissions, are listed separately.
Production-phase emissions are calculated for both pro-
duction year 3 and full production emissions. Pull produc-
tion corresponds to the fourth year of production.
Emissions estimates for both years were fairly close because
though year 3 would have half the coal production of year 4,
a significantly higher amount of overburden would be moved
in year 3. Therefore, emissions for both years were esti-
mated and modeled. Where production emissions show only one
annual rate, emissions would be approximately the same at
both production levels.
Emission factors, except where noted, are calculated
from State of Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation emission factor equations for surface mines
(Attachment A). Original sources for the Attachment A
equations are also indicated below where appropriate.
2.0 CONSTRUCTION-RELATED AND TEMPORARY EMISSIONS
Construction-related emissions include the land
clearing and slash burning emissions which would occur
during the first three years of the project, prior to coal
production. Temporary emissions include the emissions from
the overland coal haul by truck to the port site. This will
occur only during the first two years of coal production,
while the conveyor is being constructed. These overland
truck haul emissions are of concern because the emissions
will be significantly higher than the emissions from the
conveyor.
2.1 Construction Land Clearing^Fugitive Dust Emissions
Emission Factor = 5.7 a1*2/*!1*3 Ib/hr (1)
Source: U.S. EPA 1985, Section 8.24
E-l
-------
where s = silt content of overburden = 31%
M = moisture content of overburden =45%
EF = 5.7(31)l*2/(45)1*3
=2.49 Ib/hr
Emissions:
Annual
PM = (2.49 lb/hr)<44,548 hr/yr)*
=55.5 ton/yr
2.2 Construction Land Clearing Dozer Tailpipe Emissions
Emission Factors
NOX: 4.166 Ib/hr
S02: 0.348 Ib/hr
CO: 1.794 Ib/hr
VOC: 0.192 Ib/hr
PM: 0.165 Ib/hr
Source: U.S. EPA 1985, Table II-7.1
Emissions:
Annual
hr/yr>a
Emissions of the other pollutants are calculated in the
same manner.
2.3 ConstructionSlash Burning_Emi8sions
Emission Factors:
NOX: 64 Ib/acre
S02! 0 Ib/acre
CO: 2235 Ib/acre
HC: 384 Ib/acre
PM: 272 Ib/acre
ADEC Emission Factor. Source: U.S. EPA 1985,
Section 11.1.
Emissions:
Annual
PM - (272 Ib/acre)(150 acres/year)(ton/2000 lb)
=20.4 ton/yr
Emissions of the other pollutants are calculated
likewise using the emission factors given above.
a Letter from TBC to Dan Barlow (Diamond Alaska Coal Co.),
March 17, 1988
E-2
-------
2.4 Temporary Overland Truck Coal Haul Fugitive
Pus t _Emission s
ADEC Emission Factor. Source: U.S. EPA 1985,
Section 8.24.
Emission Factor - 0.0067w3«4L°-2 (2)
where w = number of wheels = 6
L = road surface silt loading » 40.8 g/m^
EF - (0.0067)(6)3-4(40.8)°*2
- 6.22 Ib/VMT
Control: Emissions would be 85i controlled through a
program of chemical dust supressant applica-
tion and watering.
Emissions:
Annual
PM = (6.22 lb/VMT)(99 trips/day)(22 mi/trip)
(338 day/yr)(1-0.85 control)(ton/2000 Ib)
= 343 ton/yr
2.5 Temporary Truck goal Haul Exhaust Emissions
Assume 1000 hp engines and a vehicle speed of 30 mph.
Emission Factors:
NOX: 8.15 g/hphr
S02: 0.887 g/hphr
CO: 2.28 g/hphr
HC: 0.37 g/hphr
PM: 0.502 g/hphr
Source: U.S. EPA 1985, Table II-7.1
Emissions:
Annual
NOX = (8.15 g/hphr)(1000 hp)(hr/30 mi)(99 trips/
day)(22 mi/trip)(338 day/yr)(lb/454 g)
(ton/2000 Ib)
= 220.3 ton/yr
Emissions of the other pollutants are calculated in the
same manner using the emission factors given above.
All HC emissions are assumed to be VOCS.
E-3
-------
3.0 MINI AREA EMISSIONS
Emissions in the mine area would include those asso-
ciated with land clearing and slash burning, overburden
removal , coal removal , overburden replacement , and reclama-
tion activities.
3.1 Land Clearing/Reclamation
This includes reclamation and land clearing emissions
from bulldozer work. Emissions are the same as those calcu-
lated for construction (Section 2.1).
Emissions:
Annual
2.49 Ib/hr x 44,548 hr x ton = 55.5 ton/yr
yr 2,OQ01b
PM = 55.5 ton/yr
Hourly
PM = 55.5 ton x 2,000 Ib x yr x 1 day - 13.7 Ib/hr
yr ton 338 days 24hr
3 .2 S lash Bur ni ng Emi ss ions
Emissions are the same as those calculated for
construction (Section 2.3). Slash burning would not occur
simultaneously with most of the other activities and acreage
involved in a single burn session is unknown. Therefore,
hourly slash burn emissions are not quantified.
Annual PM * 20.4 ton/yr
3.3 Overburden Removal - Truck Shovel
Emission Factor » 0. 0018k ( s/5 ) (u/5) (d/5) Ib/ton (3)
/5
U-
ADEC Emission Factor. Source: U.'S. EPA 1985,
Section 11.2.3.3.
where k = particle size factor = 0.73
s = silt content of overburden = 31%
u = annual average wind speed « 5.6 mph
d drop distance into trucks =» 5 feet
M = moisture content of overburden = 45%
Y ~ batch size of shovels =22.3
EF » (0.0018) (0.73) (31/5) (5. f/5) (5/5)
(45/2)2 (22.3/6)0-33
* 1.17 x 10~5 Ib/ton
B-4
-------
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM = (1.17 x ID"5 Ib/ton)(17.481 x 106 ton/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
= 0.1 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM * (1.17 x 10-5 ib/ton)(17.186 x 10^ ton/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
=0.1 ton/yr
Hourly
PM = (2.49 Ib/hr Mil dozers)(13.3 hr/day)
(day/24 hr)(2000 Ib/ton)
=0.02 Ib/hr
Note that overburden movement and coal movement consti-
tute the entire material movement scenario at the mine.
There are no additional catagories of material (such as top-
soil) to be handled.
3.4 OverburdenRemoval - Drafline
Emission factor * (0.04)(0.75)(365-n)/365 (4)
ADEC Emission Factor. Source: U.S. EPA 1978.
where n = number of wet days per year =100
IF - 0.02178 Ib/yd3
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM = (0.02178 Ib/yd3)(15.151 x 106 yd3/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
- 165.0 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM = (165.0 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=37.7 Ib/hr
Annual, full production
PM = (0.02178 Ib/yd3)(20.327 x 106 yd3/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
= 221.4 ton/yr
Hourly, full production
PM = (221.4 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=50.6 Ib/hr
E-5
-------
3 . 5 Overburden Hauling
Emission Factor = 6.22 Ib/VMT (see Section 2.4)
Control: 851 control with application of chemicals.
Emissions:
Annual , production year 3
PM = (6.22 lb/VMT)(483,645 VMT/yr ) ( 1-0 .85
control) (ton/2000 Ib)
* 225.6 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM = (6.22 lb/VMT)(134,837 VMT/yr )( 1-0.85
control ) ( ton/2000 Ib)
=62.9 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM - (225.6 ton/yr Hyr/365 day) (day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=51.5 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
PM - (62.9 ton/yr )(hr/36 5 day) (day/ 2 4 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=14.4 Ib/hr
3.6 Overburden Dumping
Emission Factor - See Section 3.3.
where k = 0.73, s = 31%, u = 5.6 mph, M = 45%
d = drop distance to ground = 6 feet
Y = batch size of trucks =96.9
EF = (0.0018) (0.73) (31/5) (5. 6/5) (6/5)
(45/2)2 (96.9/6)0-33
= 8.64 x ID'6 Ib/ton
Emissions:
Annual , production year 3
PM = (8.64 x 10~6 Ib/ton) (30.679 x 106 ton/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
=0.1 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM = (8.64 x 10~5 Ib/ton) (30.161 x 106 ton/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
=0.1 ton/yr
Hourly
PM - (0.1 ton/yr) (yr/365 day) (day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
= 2.3 x 10-2 ib/hr
E-6
-------
3.7 Coal_Removal
Emission Factor = 0.003 x 0.70 Ib/ton
- 2.1 x ID'3 Ib/ton
ADEC Emission Factor. Source: U.S. EPA 1978. Note
that this emission factor is also used by the State of
Wyoming Division of Air Quality.
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM = (2.1 x 10-3 Ib/ton)(6 x 106 ton/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
=6.3 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM = (2.1 x 10-3 ib/ton)(12 x 106 ton/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
=12.6 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM = (6.3 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=1.4 Ib/hr
Hourly, fully production
PM = (12.6 ton/yrMyr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=2.9 Ib/hr
3-8 Coal Hauling
Emission Factor =6.22 Ib/VMT (see Section 2.4)
Control: 85% with application of chemicals.
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM = (6.22 lb/VMT)(93,529 VMT/yr5(1-0.85
control)(ton/2000 Ib)
=43.6 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM = (6.22 lb/VMT)(187,059 VMT/yr)(1-0.85
control)(ton/2000 Ib)
* 87.3 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM = (43.6 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=10.0 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
PM = (87.3 ton/yr(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=19.9 Ib/hr
-------
3.9 Coal Pugging
Emission Factor » (See Section 3.3)
where k * 0.73, u = 5.6 mph
s * silt content of coal =6.2%
d = drop distance into hopper = 6 feet
M = moisture content of coal = 28%
Y = batch size of trucks =96.9 yd3
EP = ( 0 . 0018 ) ( 0 1 . 73 ) ( 6 . 2/5 ) ( 5 . 6/5 ) { 6/5 )
2 (96.9/6)0.33
- 4.46 x 10~6 Ib/ton
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM C4.46 x 10"6 lb/ton)(6 x 106 ton/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
=0.01 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM = (4.46 x 10-6 ib/ton5(12 x 10* ton/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib)
=0.03 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM » (0.01 ton/yr Hyr/365 day) (day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
- 2.3 x 10-3 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
PM = (0.03 ton/yr Hyr/365 day) (day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
= 6.8 x 10-3 Ib/hr
3.10 Coal Primary Crushing
Emission Factor =0.02 Ib/ton
ADEC Emission Factor. Source: U.S. EPA 1985,
Section 8.23
Control: 99% with baghouse.
Emissions:
Annual , production year 3
PM = (0.02 Ib/ton) (6 x 106 ton/yr) (1-0.99
control) (ton/2000 Ib)
= 0.6 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM = (0.02 Ib/ton) (12 x 106 ton/yr) < 1-0 .99
control) (ton/2000 Ib)
=1.2 ton/yr
1-8
-------
(2000 Ib/ton)
=0.1 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
PM = (1.2 ton/yr)(yr/365day)(day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
=0.3 Ib/hr
3.11 Wind Erosion- MineArea
Emission Factor » alCKL'V ton/acre-yr
ADEC Emission Factor. Source: U.S. EPA 1978.
where a = suspended fraction = 0.025
I = soil erodibility = 47 ton/acre-yr
C = Climatic factor =0.1
K = Roughness factor =0.7
L'= Unsheltered field width factor =0.7
V'= Vegetation Factor =1.0
Emission Factor = (0.025)(47)(0.1)(0.7)(0.7(1.)
= 0.576 ton/acre-yr
Disturbed area » mined area-reclaimed area
= 746 acres - 85 acres
= 661 acres (year 6)
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM = (0.0576 ton/acre-yr)(661 acres)
=38.0 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM = (0.0576 ton/acre-yr)(1054 acres - 430
acres)
=35.9 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM * (3.8 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=8.7 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
PM = (35.9 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=8.2 Ib/hr
3.12 Haul RoadMaintenance/Graders
Emission factor = 0.04s2-5 Ib/VMT
Source: U.S. EPA 1985, Section 8.24
E-9
-------
where s = grader speed » 4 mph
EF - CO.04)(4)2-5
=1.28 Ib/VMT
Control: 50 percent with watering
Emissions:
Annual
PM - (1.28 lb/VMT)(2 graders)(18 hr/day)
(4 mi/hr) x (338 day/yr)(ton/2000
lb)(l-0.50)
* 15.6 ton/yr
Hourly
PM = (1.28 lb/VMT>(2 graders)(4 mi/hr)
(1-0.50)
=5.1 Ib/hr
3.13 Dozer^Tailgipe Ernissions
Emissions are the same as those calculated for
construction (Section 2.2).
Hourly
NOX - (4.166 lb/hr)(44,548 hr/yr)(yr/338 days)
(day/24 hr)
=22.9 Ib/hr
Emissions of the other pollutants are calculated in the
same manner.
3.14 Grader TaiIpipe Emissigns
Emission Factors:
NOX: 0.713 Ib/hr
S02: 0.086 Ib/hr
CO: 0.151 Ib/hr
VOC: 0.040 Ib/hr
PMj 0.061 Ib/hr
Source: U.S. EPA 1985, Table II-7.1
Emissions:
Annual
NOX = (0.713 Ib/hr)(2 graders)(18 hr/day)
(338 day/yr)(ton/2000 Ib)
=4.3 ton/yr
Annual emissions of the other pollutants are calculated
in the same manner.
E-10
-------
Grader Tailpipe NOX S02 CO VOC PM
Annual Emissions 4.3 0.5 0.9 0.2 0.4
(tons/yr)
Hourly
NOX = (0.713 lb/hr)(2 graders)
- 1.4 Ib/hr
3.15 Haul Truck Tailpipe Emissions
Emission factors: See Section 2.5.
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
NOX - (8.15 g/hphr)(1000 hp)(hr/30 mi)(93,529
VMT/yr)(lb/454 g)(ton/2000 Ib)
= 28.0 ton/yr
Annual, full production
NOX - (8.15 g/hphrHlQQO hp)(hr/30 mi) (187,059
VMT/yr)91b/454 g)(ton/2000 Ib)
=56.0 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
NOX = (28.0 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
=6.4 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
NOX = (56.0 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
=12.8 Ib/hr
Emission of the other pollutants are calculated in the
same manner with the emission factors listed above. All HC
emissions are assumed to be ₯OCs.
Haul Trucks: (Overburden)
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
NOX - (8.15 g/hphr) (1000 hp) (hr/30 mi)
(483,645 VMT/yr) (lb/454 g) (ton/2000 Ib)
= 144.8 ton/yr
Annual, full production
N0x = (8.15 g/hphr)(1000 hp)(hr/30 mi)
(134,837 VMT/yr)(lb/454 g)(ton/2000 Ib)
= 40.3 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
NOX = (144.8 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=33.1 Ib/hr
B-ll
-------
Hourly, full production
N°x - (40.3 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=9.2 Ib/hr
Note: Vehicle miles travelled for coal and overburden
are found in fable 4 of "Response to Comments by ADEC
Regarding the Diamond Chuitna Project Air Quality Impact
Analysis", April 20, 1987.
3.16 Other Mine Area Sources
Other potential sources of emissions in the mine area
are the permanent landfill and secondary blasting. Blasting
will not be required for removal of the coal or the overbur-
den. Blasting would only be required occasionally when
large boulders are encountered. Activities at the permanent
landfill would also be intermittent. Because the emissions
from these sources would occur intermittently and because
they are not expected to be substantial, they are not quan-
tified.
4.0 MINE SERVICE AREA EMISSIONS
Emissions in the mine service area include those asso-
ciated with coal handling, processing, and storage.
4.1 Secondary Coal Crushing
Emission Factor =0.06 Ib/ton
Source: PEDCo 1976. This emission factor is somewhat
higher than the ADEC emission factor of
0.05 Ib/ton for secondary crushing, as given in
AP-42 Section 8.23. However, the 0.06 Ib/ton
reflects the emissions as modeled.
Control: 99% with baghouse.
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM = (0.06 Ib/ton)(6 x 106 ton/yr)(1-0.99
control)(ton/2000 Ib)
=1.8 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM - (0.06 Ib/ton)(12 x 10^ ton/yr)(1-0.99
control)(day/24 hr)(ton/2000 Ib)
= 3.6 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM = (1.8 ton/yrHyr/365 day)(day/24 hr)(2000
E-12
-------
Ib/ton)
=0.4 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
PM = (3.6 ton/yr) (yr/365 day) (day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
0.8 Ib/hr
=
4.2 Coal Screening
Emission Factor = 0.10 Ib/ton (PEDCo 1976)
Control: 99% with baghouse.
Emissions;
Annual, production year 3
PM - (0.10 Ib/ton) (6 x 106 ton/yr )( 1-0 .99
control) (day/2 4 hrX ton/2000 Ib)
= 3.0 ton/yr
Annual , full production
PM - (0.10 Ib/ton) (12 x 106 ton/yr) (1-0. 9 9
control) (day/24 hr) (ton/2000 Ib)
* 6 . 0 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM » (3.6 ton/yrO (yr/365 day) (day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
=0.7 Ib/hr
4.3 Coal Handling At Mine Services Area
There are two main coal transfer points in the mine
services area; the transfer/weight stations and the surge
pile. A control factor of 90% is assumed for enclosure.
Emission Factor = 0.0018k(s/5) (u/5) (d/10)
'
Source: U.S. EPA 1985, Section 8.24
where k = particle size multiplier =0.77
s = silt content of coal =6.2%
u = annual average wind speed = 5.6 mph
d = drop distance for the conveyor system
10 feet
M = moisture content of the coal = 28%
EF =(0.0018)(0.77)(6.2/5)(5.6/5)(10/10)/(28/2)2
= 1.0 x 10~5 Ib/ton
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM = (1.0 x 10-5 Ib/ton)(6 x 106 ton/yr)(1-0.90
control) x (ton/2000 lb)(2 transfers)
= 0.006 ton/yr
B-13
-------
Annual, full production
PM = (1.0 x 10-5 lb/ton)(12 x 1Q6 ton/yr)
(1-0.90 control) x (ton/2000 lb)(2 trans-
fers)
- 0.012 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM = (0.006 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
- 0.00 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
PM = (0.012 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
- 0.00 Ib/hr
The mine services area coal handling emissions analysis
above was based on a preliminary simplified description of
the coal handling system. A more detailed analysis, too
lengthy to include, revealed that the emissions would be
less than those presented here. The major assumptions of
this detailed analysis were: 99% control with a baghouse on
splitter hopper, secondary crusher, and associated drop
points? 90% control with enclosure for the transfer stations
and surge pile and 20% of coal volume circulated through
surge pile.
4.4 Coal Stockpile
Emission Factor = 1.6 u Ib/acre-hr
ADEC Emission Factor. Sources U.S. EPA 1985,
Section 8.24.
where u = wind speed =2.5 m/s
SF - (1.6X2.5)
=4.0 Ib/acre-hr
Controls 50% with watering.
Emissions:
Annual
PM - (4.0 lb/acre/hr)(2.35 acre)(8760 hr/yr)
(ton/2000 Ib) (1-0.50 control)
= 20.5 ton/yr
Hourly
PM » (4.0 Ib/acre/hr)(2.35 acre)(8760 hr/yr)
(1-0.50 control)
=4.7 Ib/hr
4.5 Wind Erosion - Mine Service Facilities Area
E-14
-------
Emission Factor = 0.0576 ton/acre-yr (see Section 3.11)
Emissions:
Annual
PM = (0.0576 ton/acre-yr)(173 acres)
= 10.0 ton/yr
Hourly
PM = (10.0 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=2.3 Ib/hr
5.0 PORT FACILITY EMISSIONS
Emissions at the port facility would be associated with
coal handling and storage, and coal and supply ship
emissions.
5.1 Coal Handling atPort Facility
Eight main coal transfer points at the port facility
were calculated, including the transfer station, the coal
stacker, stockpile retrieval, and the shiploader.
Emission Factor = 1.0 x 10~5 ib/ton (see Section 4.3)
Control: 90% with enclosure.
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM - (1.0 x 10~5 Ib/ton)(6 x 106 ton/yr)(1-0.90
control) (ton/2000 Ib) x 8 transfers
= 0.024 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM - (1.0 x ID'5 Ib/ton)(12 x 106 ton/yr)(1-0.90
control) (ton/2000 Ib) x 8 transfers
* 0.048 ton/yr
Hourly, production year 3
PM = (0.024 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
- 0.005 Ib/hr
Hourly, full production
PM » (0.048 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
=0.01 Ib/hr
The port facility coal handling emissions analysis
above was based on a preliminary, simplified description of
the coal handling system. A more detailed analysis, too
lengthy to include, revealed that the emissions would be
less than those presented here. The major assumptions of
the detailed analysis were: 99% control with a baghouse on
E-15
-------
transfer stations 12 and #3; 90% control with enclosure for
transfer station #1, the stackers, the shiploader, and con-
veyor drop points; 5% of coal volume to bypass silo.
5.2 Coal Stockpile at Port Facility
Emission Factor * 4.0 Ib/acre-hr (see Section 4.4)
Control: 50% with watersprays and compaction.
Emissions:
Annual
PM = (4.0 lb/acre/hr)(24.9 acres)(1-0.50
control)(8760 hr/yr) (ton/2000 Ib)
= 218.1 ton/yr
Hourly
PM - (218.1 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
=49.8 Ib/hr
5.3 Wind Erosion - Port Facility
Emission Factor = 0.0576 ton/acre-yr (see Section 3.10)
Emissions:
Annual
PM = 0.0576 ton/acre-yr)(206 acres)
=11.9 ton/yr
Hourly
PM - (11.9 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)(2000
Ib/ton)
=2.7 Ib/hr
5.4 Coa1 Ship Emissions
Emissions of the ships while "hoteling" at port, during
loading. The ships are assumed to be steamships burning 3%
sulfur fuel. Also, the ships are assumed to be of the maxi-
mum size, which is approximately 100,000 tons capacity.
Fuel use during hoteling was assumed to be 12% of the
full power fuel use of 0.58 Ib fuel per ship horsepower
hour, for a 21,000 hp vessel (GARB 1983. See Attachment
B) . Emission factors are based on AP-42 emission factors
for steamship while hoteling (U.S. EPA 1985, Table II-3.2).
Emission Factors:
NOX (as N02) 8.0 Ib/hr
SOa (3% sulfur oil) 103.8 Ib/hr
CO 1.1 Ib/hr
VOC 0.1 Ib/hr
PM 3.5 Ib/hr
E-16
-------
Emissions:
Annual
NOX - (8.0 lb/hr)(3760 hr/yr)(ton/2000 Ib)
= 15.0 ton/yr
Hourly
NOX =8.0 Ib/hr
5.5 Fuel Delivery and Storage Emissions
Most of the project's power needs would be supplied
through the use of electricity. Diesel fuel and gasoline
would be required only for the vehicles and other minor
uses. Hydrocarbon emissions from gasoline and diesel
storage tanks at the port site and mine site were calculated
according to the methodology in AP-42 Section 4.3.2 for
fixed roof storage tanks (U.S. EPA 1985). The hydrocarbon
emissions consist of vapors from breathing loss (LB) and
working loss (LW).
The following parameters were common to all calcula-
tions:
Pa = 14.7 psia, Ts = 40°F, T =^41°Fr Fp = 1.33, Kc »
lf Kn -1.0, H = 0.5 h =10 ft, Mv= 130 for diesel and
66 for gasoline, P = 0.0031 psia for diesel and 3.4
psia for gasoline.
Port site, diesel tanks
2 x 10^ gallons diesel stored in two tanks. For each
tank, D = 92 ft, H » 0.5 h - 10 ft. Also; C - 1.0, V -
2 x 106, N = 3.0.
LB = 0.64 ton/yr
Lw = 0.03 ton/yr
Lt = Lb + Lw
=0.67 ton/yr
Port site, gasoline tank
D = 50 ft, H = 10 ft, C - 1, V = 315,000 gal, N = 3.0
LB = 7.90 ton/yr
Lw = 2.54 ton/yr
Lt » Lb + Lw
= 10.44 ton/yr
Mine site, diesel tank
D - 40 ft, H = 10 ft, C - 1, V = 164,000 gal, N = 36.6
LB = 0.08 ton/yr
Lw = 0.03 ton/yr
Lt = Lb + Lw
=0.11 ton/yr
Mine site, gasoline tank
D - 14 ft, H = 10 ft, C - 0.7, V = 23,600 gal, N = 36.4
LB = 0.61 ton/yr
E-17
-------
Lw = 2.32 ton/yr
Lt - Lb 4- Lw
=2.93 ton/yr
Thus, total VOC emissions from full storage are 11.1 tons
per year at the port site and 3.0 tons per year at the mine
site.
5 .6 Fug 1 _ and Suggly_ Shi p Emi s s ions
There is currently no information available on fuel and
supply ship schedules and sizes for the project. These ship
emissions, therefore, have not been quantified. The main
pollutant of concern from the vessels would be SO2-
SO2 emissions from the coal ships (Section 5.4) were quan-
tified based on fairly conservative assumptions of 3% sulfur
fuel and maximum vessel size. The modeled impacts from
these ships were far below the PSD SC>2 increments (see EIS
Table 5-21). Therefore, emissions from the fuel and supply
ships are not expected to have any significant adverse
impact on air quality.
6.0 HOUSING FACILITY EMISSIONS
Two potential sources of emissions at the housing faci-
lity would be the incinerator and the airport. The inci-
nerator would burn only general camp refuse (household
waste) to reduce the volume of material to be landfilled.
The airport would be used to transport workers to and from
the site. Approximately two 50 person flights per day would
be required. The planes would be emitting for only a short
period of time before they reached a level where the pollu-
tants would be rapidly dispersed. Therefore, airport
emissions are not quantified. Incinerator emission calcula-
tions follow. Note that the steam boiler at the housing
facility will be electrically powered.
6.1 Inc i aerator Emi ss i ons
For a worst-case analysis, a peak load of 1000 Ib/hr
and operation 12 hours per day is assumed.
Emission Factors:
NOX: 3 Ib/ton
HC: 3 Ib/ton
CO: 10 Ib/ton
S02: 2.5 Ib/ton
PM: 7 Ib/ton
Source: U.S. EPA 1985, Table 2.3-1. Industrial-
commercial multiple-chamber incinerator
assumed.
E-18
-------
Annual emissions:
NOX = 3 Ib N0x/ton x 0.5 ton/hr x 12 hr/day x 365
day/yr x ton/2000 Ib
= 3.3 ton/yr
Hourly
NOX = (3 lb/tonM0.5 ton/hr)
=1.5 Ib/hr
Emissions of the other pollutants are calculated
likewise using the emission factors listed above.
Emiss long NOX HC CO S02 PM
Peak emissions (Ib/hr) 1.5 1.5 5 1.25 3.5
Annual emissions (ton/yr) 3.3 3.3 11.0 2.7 7.7
7.0 GENERAL PSOJECT AREA EMISSIONS
General project emissions include all emissions which
could not be assigned to either the mine area, service area,
port facility, or housing area. This includes conveyor
emissions and miscellaneous vehicle emissions.
7 . 1 Overland Conveyor Emiss ions
Conveyor emissions are typically quantified based on
the number of transfer points, rather than the conveyor
length, as the majority of emissions result from the coal
drop at the transfer points. The overland conveyor is
somewhat unusual due to its length (approximately 11 miles).
A concerted effort was made to locate an emission factor for
the conveyor itself, rather than one related to the transfer
points. This included a literature search and contacting
conveyor manufacturers. No emission factors based on con-
veyor length were found. Therefore, for lack of a better
factor, therefore, emissions were calculated via an erosion
type calculation for coal stockpiles. The exposed area was
taken to be the area of the exposed coal on the conveyor
belt. The wind speed was taken to be the speed of the con-
veyor belt. The conveyor belt would be sheltered from
crosswinds since it is hooded over the top and one side.
This hood would also help capture dust arising from conveyor
movement .
The overland conveyor emissions as quantified below are
in addition to the conveyor transfer emissions quantified
elsewhere. The shorter conveyors at the mine/mine services
area and at the port site are typical of the conveyors for
which the transfer point emission factors were developed. It
would therefore be inappropriate to include a quantification
of "wind erosion" emissions for those conveyors.
Emission Factor: 1.6c Ib/acre-hr
E-19
-------
Source: 0.S. EPA 1985, Section 8.24.
where c = the speed of conveyor belt 5.08 in/sec
Emission Factor » (1.6)(5.08)
=8.13 Ib/acre-hr
Control: 90% for conveyor belt hood
Emissions:
Annual, production year 3
PM = (8.13 Ib/acre-hr)(2 ft wide)(55,800 ft
long)(acre/43,560 ft2) x (1-0.90
control)(169 day/yr)(ton/2000 Ib)
=4.2 ton/yr
Annual, full production
PM = (8.13 Ib/acre-hr)(2 ft wide)(55,800 ft
long) (acre/43,560 ft2)(i-o.90 control)
(338 day/hr)(ton/2000 Ib)
=8.4 ton/yr
Hourly
PM - (8.13 Ib/acre-hr)(2 ft wide)(55,800 ft
long)(acre/43,560 ft)x (1-0.90 control)
- 2.1 Ib/hr
7.2 Miscellaneous Vehicle Traffic Fugitive Dust
Emission Factor - 5.9k(s/12)(S/30)(W/3)0.7(w/4)0.5
Ib/VMT
Source: U.S. EPA 1985, Section 11.2
where k = particle size multiplier =0,8
s = silt content of road material = 8%
S = vehicle speed = 30 mph
W = vehicle weight * 2 tons
w = number of wheels = 4
EF - 5.9(0.8){8/12)(30/30)(2/3)°'7(4/4)°'5
=2.37 Ib/VMT
Control: 85% control with chemical application.
Emissions:
Annual
PM = (2.37 Ib/VMT)(51,000 VMT/yr)(1-0.85
control)(ton/2000)
=9.1 ton/yr
Hourly
PM = (9.1 ton/yr)(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
=2.1 Ib/hr
E-20
-------
7.3 Miscellaneous Vehicle Tailgipe Emissions
Emission Factors:
NOX:
S02:
CO:
VOC:
PM:
Source:
1.19 g/mi
0.8 g/mi
13.29 g/mi
1.55 g/mi
0.2 g/mi
NOX, CO, and TOG are EMFAC7PC emission factors
for medium duty trucks, 50% gasoline and 50%
diesel. PM estimated from truck emission fac-
tors (GARB 1986). S02 estimated from
Tables II-7.1 and II-7.2 (USEPA 1985).
Emissions:
Annual
NOX = (1.19 g/mi)(51,000 VMT/yr)(lb/454 g)
(ton/2000 Ib)
= 0.067 ton/yr
Hourly
NOX » (0.067 ton/yr}(yr/365 day)(day/24 hr)
(2000 Ib/ton)
= 0.004 Ib/hr
Annual and hourly emissions of the other pollutants are
calculated likewise, using the above emission factors.
NO,
S02
CO
VOC
PM
Annual Emissions 0.067 0.045 0.746
(tons/yr)
0.087 0.011
Hourly Emissions 0.004 0.003 0.050 0.006 0.001
(Ib/hr)
7.4 Other ProjectSources
Other project components which would be potential
sources of air emissions include the sewage treatment
plants, water treatment plants, heliport, temporary land-
fills, and emergency generators. The temporary landfills
would only be used for construction materials. The heliport
would primarily be used during construction. These minor
sources of construction emissions are not quantified. The
water treatment plants and sewage treatment plants would be
very minor sources of hydrocarbons and possibly par-
ticulates. The emergency generator sizes and fuel types
have not been specified yet. Therefore, emissions from
these sources are not quantified.
E-21
-------
8.0 SECONDARY POWER GENERATION EMISSIONS
Power generation emissions are based on projected
emissions from a proposed Chugach Electric project to bring
a turbine on line as a baseline unit rather than a back-up
unit.
9.0 LEVEL 1 VISIBILITY SCREENING ANALYSIS
(See EPA 1980 for a discussion of variables and visibi-
lity analyses).
x » distance to nearest Class I area
* 137 km to Tuxedni National Wildlife Refuge and
Wilderness Area
Qpart * particulate mass emission rate
= (885.2 ton/yr)(yr/338 day)(2000 Mt/2200 ton)
=2.38 Mt/day
QNOX - (186.5 ton/yr)(yr/338 day)(2000 Mt/2200 ton)
= 0.502 Mt/day
QS02 = (216.5 ton/yr)(yr/338 day)(2000 Mt/2200 ton)
- 0.582 Mt/day
x is greater than 100 km, therefore, Sz = 100 m
p = 2.0 x 108/S2 x
= 2.0 x 108/(100 m)(137 km) = 1.46 x 104
rvo = 170 km (highest visibility area)
Taerosol = (1.06 x 10~5)(170 km)(2.38 + 1.31 (0.582)
- 5.66 x 10-3
Tpart = 10(10-75(p)(Qpart)
= 10(10-7)(1.46 x 1Q4)(2.38)
- 0.0347
TNOX = 1.7(10~7)(p)(QNOX)
- 1.7 (10-7)(1.46 x 104)(0.502)
- 1.25 x 10-3
Cl - [1.25 x 10-3/CQ.0347 + 1.25 x 1Q-3)][1 - exp
(-0.0347 - 1.25 x 10-3)]
[exp(-0.78(137/170)]
= 6.55 x 10-4
C2 » [1 - (1/(C1 + 1)) exp(- Tpart - TN02)1[exp(-1.56
x/rvo)]
= [1 - (1/(1 + 6.55 x 10-4) exp(-0.0347 - 1.25 x
10-3)3
[exp(-l.56(137/170)1
«" 0.0102
C3 - 0.368 [1 - exp(-Taerosol)]
= 0.36811 - exp(-5.66 x 10~3)]
- 2.07 x 10-3
Since Cl, C2, and C3 are all well below 0.10, there
will be no impact of the project on visibility in any Class
I area.
E-22
-------
10.0 REFERENCES
California Air Resources Board (CARS). 1983. Draft report
to the California legislature on air pollutant
emissions from marine vessels. Volume I. June, 1983.
_. 1986. Methodology to calculate emission factors for
on-road motor vehicles, California Air Resources
Board. November, 1986.
PIDCo. 1976. "Evaluation of fugitive dust from mining,
Task 1 report, Identification of Fugitive Dust Sources
Associated With Mining", Prepared for U.S. EPA, April.
TRC Environmental Consultants. 1986. Diamond Chuitna
project air quality impact anslysis. December 11,
1986.
1987a.
Responses to comments by the Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation regarding the
Diamond Chuitna Project Air Quality Impact Analysis.
April 20, 1987.
. 1987b. Additional responses to comments by the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
regarding the Diamond Chuitna project air quality
impact analysis.
USEPA. 1978. "Survey of fugitive dust from coal mines,"
by PEDCo Environmental, Inc., February.
. 1980. Workbook for estimating visibility impairment.
EPA-450/4-80-031. Nov., 1980.
. 1985. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors.
Document AP-42. 4th Ed. Volume I: stationary point and
area sources and Volume II: mobile sources. United
States Environmental Protection Agency. September,
1985.
E-23
-------
ATTACHMENT A
STATE OF ALASKA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
FUGITIVE EMISSION FACTORS. SURFACE MINES
SOURCE
Overburden Removal
- Truck/Shovel
- Scraper, Dozers
- Dragline
Overburden Drilling
Overburden Blasting
Overburden Hauling
Overburden Dumping
(batch drop)
Product Drilling
Product Blasting
Product Removal
Product Hauling
Reclamation
Haulroad Repair/
Construction
Mind Erosion
- stripped area
- overburden stockpiles
- wash stockpiles
- product stockpiles
- tailings ponds
EMISSION FACTOR
.OOlBk («/5)(u/5)(d/5)
32(365-N)/365
.04x0.75(365-N)/365
SOlbs/blast x 0.75
.0067*3.4 10.2 or
5.9k(B/12)(S/3Q)(H/3)0.7(w/»)0.5(365-N)
365
0.017k
coals 35 Ibs/blast x 0.75
coal? .003 x 0.70
0.0067 *3.4 |_0.2 or
5.9k(s/12)(S/30)W3)0.7(w/4)0.5(365-N)
365
k 4.8 sO.6
32(365-N)/365
alCKL'V
.0756 sf(365-N)/235
.0756 sf(365-N)/235
coal; 1.6u
alCKL'V1
UNITS
Ib/ton
Ibs/hr
lba/yd3
Ib/VMT
Ib/ton
Iba/ton
Ib/VMT
Ib/acre
Ibs/hr
tons/acre/yr
Ib/day/acre
Ib/day/acre
lbs/acre/hr
tons/acre/yr
1 of 3
-------
SOURCE
Product Preparation
conveyors/transfer points/
truck dump
stackers - raw
- surge
- fines
C ruaing - primary
- secondary
- tertiary
Screening
Graders/compacting
on stockpiles
Load Out/Tipple
Additional Sources
Slash Burning
Miscellaneous Road Traffic
Ship Traffic
Fuel Storage
Incineration
Power Generation
ATTACWENT A
(continued)
EMISSION FACTOR
0.017 x 0.75 (coal)
.0018k (s/5Ku/5)(H/10)
(M/2)2
EPA-AP-42
EPA-AP-42
32(365-N)/365
272
5.97
M4
EPA-AP-42
EPA-AP-42
BACT or EPA-AP-42
BACT or EPA-AP-42
f: % time - windspeeds >12 mph
Ns Nr. days - precip. >0.01 inch/year - table
Ms (surface) moisture content - %
L: Surface silt loading (g/ra2)
k: Particle size mulitplier - table
Ss Silt content (3) - table
LI: Average wind speed (M/S)
H;d: Drop distance (feet)
Ys Batch size (yd3)
w: Mean number of wheels
W: Mean vehicle weight (tons)
UNITS
Ib/ton
Ib/ton
Ibs/hr
Ibs/acre
Ib/VMT
2 of 3
-------
ATTACHMENT A
(continued)
Ai Fraction Mind erosion losses becoming suspended )
I: Surface erodability )
C: Climatic factor ) Tables AP-42
K: Surface roughness factor ) ,
Us Unsheltered field width factor ) Use 1.0
V: Vegetation cover factor )
Surface soil type A I (tons/acre/yr)
Rocky, gravelly 0.025 38
Sandy 0.010 134
Fine 0.041 52
Clay loam 0.025 47
3 Of 3
-------
B
(EXCERPT FROM: CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD, 1983. DRAFT REPORT TO
THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE ON AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM MARINE
VESSELS).
3. Factors Affecting Fuel Consumption
For a given fuel sulfur content, emissions of sulfur dioxide are directly
related to a vessel's fuel consumption rate. The fuel consumption rate in
turn depends on the size (shaft horsepower or SHP) and the type (diesel, steam
turbine, gas turbine) of the powerplant used to drive a vessel and on the
amount of power used to perform various operations. A 14,000 deadweight ton
(OrtT) general freighter would consume fuel at a rate of about 60 tons per day
while a 70,000 OWT tanker would consume about 110 tons per day of fuel at
cruising speed. Those vessels are of a size that typically visit California
Coastal Waters. Marine diesel engines burn 0.28 to 0.44 pound of fuel per SHP
hour and marine steam engines burn 0.51 to 0.65 pound per SHP hour,-
a. Ship Powerplant Size
The power required of a ship's powerplant is a function of the size of the
ship and the speed at which the ship is intended to operate. Tankers and bulk
carriers are designed to carry large loads, and a high speed is not essential
to their operation. Maximum cruising speeds for these types of vessels are
Q /
generally in the range of 16 knots.- Modern passenger and container-
carrying ships, on the other hand, operate at speeds of 20 to 25 knots.
Container vessels carry cargoes that have high worth to weight ratios, are
perishable, or for other reasons must be delivered rapidly. Thus for the same
tonnage of cargo carrying capacity, bulk carriers and tankers have smaller
powerplants than container ships, general cargo carriers, and other
1 of 6
-------
ATTACHMENT B (continued)
specialized types of dry cargo vessels. Military vessels usually have at
least three to four times the total shaft horsepower of commercial vessels of"
11 / '"*1
equivalent size.'
Power requirements for commercial vessels typically range from about-^fOgf
SHP for a 12,000 OWT vessel to about 45,000 SHP for an LNG carrier.* Typical
horsepower requirements for tankers are shown in Table VH-4. As the table
shows, the maximum power requirement for a tanker is approximately 65,000
SHP. However, tankers larger than about 280,000 OWT do not visit California
Coastal "Waters. Typical maximum power requirements for other types of ships
are shown in Table V1I-5. As Table VII-5 shows, container ships can have much
larger powerplants than either tankers or bulk carriers.
Table VII-6 shows the average shaft horsepower for ships which visited
various California ports in 1976 and 1979. In developing emissions
inventories, the staff took into account the differences in powerplant sizes
of vessels that operate in California Coastal Waters.
Shoreside facilities for whicn sulfur dioxide emission controls are
required are comparable in size to marine vessel boilers and engines, and many
are smaller than typical marine vessel power plants. Industrial ooilers and
process heaters in the South Coast Air Basin have heat input capabilities as
127
small as 25 million Btus/hr;- steam generators used in oil production
operations in Kern County have heat input capacities of 20 to 60 mi 11 ion
Btus/hour.To control sulfur dioxide emissions in the South Coast Air
Basin, boilers and heaters that b-jrn oil are required to burn low sulfur fuel
oil and most steam generators in Kern County are equipped with stack gas
* However, a small commercial fishing vessel can have a power rating of 100
to 200 SHP.
2 of 6
-------
ATTACHMENT B (continued)
TABLE VII-4
POWERPLANT REQUIREMENTS
FOR TANKERS, BY DEADWEIGHT TON
Sources:
Displacement
D.W.T.
10,000
15,000
25,000
50,000
100,000
200,000
300,000
500,000
550,000
Air Pollution Impact
Power
SHP
6,000
10,000
12,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
40,000
60,000
65,000
of Maritime Shipping Operations in the Port
ofHouston, Texas A & M University, November 5, 1973.
The Tanker Register, H. Clarkson & Company Limited, London,
England, 19817
TABLE VI1-5
MAXIMUM POWERPLANT REQUIREMENTS
FOR COMMERCIAL MAKINE VESSELS
Type of
Vessel
Bulk Carrier
Oi 1 Tanker
Container Ship
Maximum Power
SHP
40,000
65,000
80,000
Sources: Air PollutlonImpact of MaritimeShipping OperationsinthePort
ofHouston, Texas A & M University, November 5, 1973.
The Tanker Register, H. Clarkson & Company Limited, London,
England, 1981.
Kerr Steamship Company, Inc. January 21, 1981, response to ARB
staff October 22, 1980, questionnaire on marine vessel traffic,
bunkering, and fuel systems.
3 of 6
-------
ATTACHMENT B (continued)
52. it. Commander James Oliver, U. S. Coast Guard, San Francisco,
California: Personal communication to Air Resources Board Staff,
December 10, 1982.
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER VIII
1. Responses to Air Resources Board staff questionnaire, "Marine Petroleum
Terminals," July 22, 1980.
c. Shipboard Guide to Pollution-Free Operations. United States Department
of Commerce, December 1976.
3. Responses to Air Resources Board staff questionnaire, "Marine Vessel
Emissions Task Force; Information Request - Housekeeping Operations,"
June 10, 1982.
4. Annual Petroleum Rev Jew. California Energy Commission, April 1982.
5. Responses to Air Resources Board staff questionnaire, "Black Oil Tanker
Equipment and Operations," January 21, 1981.
6. Responses to Air Resources Board staff questionnaire, "Marine Transfer ot
Petroleum and Petroleum Products," July 22, 1980.
7. Roy L. Nersesian, Ships and Shipping. (Tulsa, Oklahoma: PennWell
Publishing Company^1981).
8. Alex Marks, ElIements of Oi1-Tanker Transportation. (Tulsa, Oklahoma:
PennWell Publishing Company, 1982).
9. J. F. Mackenzie and C. T. Rau, "Gaseous Hydrocarbon Emissions During the
Loading of Marine Vessels," TheAnnual Meeting of the Air Pollution
Control Association, Portland, Oregon, June 27-July1, 1976.
10. Responses to Air Resources Board staff questionnaire, "Lightering," Ju1 -
15, 1980.
11. Hydrocarbon Emissionsfrom CrudeTankers. Exxon Corporation, October 2,
1978.
12. Consolidated 8-31 Marine Emission Study Final Report. 8-31 Technical
Advisory Committee, December 1978.
13. Hydrocarbon Emissions During Marine Loading of Crude Oil, Ventura _Cou,''.l/
California!Western Oil and Gas Association, August 1977.~~
14. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. AP-42, Supplement No. .«.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, July 1979.
15. W. C. Kelly, L. R. Reckner and G. D. Maines, Inventory of Emissions from
Marine Operations within the California CoastalMaters.(San Bernardino.
California:Scott Environmental Technology, Inc.for the California An
Resources Board, June 26, 1981).
4 of 6
-------
ATTACHMENT B (continued)
16. Considerationof Model Rule for the Control of Sulfur Oxides and Organic
Gas £m1ssIons from Marlne Vessel Operat ions.(Sacramento, California:
California Air Resources Board, October 1978).
17. Atmospheric Hydrocarbon Emissions from Marlne Vessel Transfer
Operations. Pub1icat ion 2514A (Wash i ng ton, D.C.: American Petro1eum
Institute, September 1981).
18. QuarterlyFuel and Energy Summary, First Quarter 1979, Second Quarter
1979, Third Quarter 1979, Fourth Quarter 1979. California Energy
Commission, 1979.
19. Personal communication from Margaret Felts, California Energy Commission,
to Air Resources Board staff, January 10, 1983.
20. Personal communication from William Collett, Omnipure Inc., to Air
Resources Board staff, December 20, 1982.
21. United States Code of Federal Regulations, Title 33, §157.132 and
§157.166, 1982.
22. McGill, Inc. (Tulsa, Oklahoma: Promotional Brochure).
23. Vapor-Disposal Uni ts: Three Models to Match Any Appjicat ion. Bulletin
3 9C (Ph(Tade1phi ia, Term sy1v an i a: Nat i onal Ai rOi1 Burner Company, Inc.).
24. Air Pollution Control Manual - Vapor .Recovery Equipment for Hydrocarbons
and Conden sab1e Gases. (Pompton PIains, New Jersey: E dw ar d s E n gi neer i ng
Corp.}.
25. Personal communication from R. G. Pongetti, Celanese Chemical Company, to
Air Resources Board Staff, July 2, 1979.
26. James Karas, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, at the Marine
Vessel Emissions Task Force Meeting, July 14, 1982.
27. Vapor Balance LineScreening Study - Control of HydrocarbonEmissvons
from Offshore Sant a Ynez Crude Load ing^ Exxon Research and Engi neering
Company, December 9, 1977.
28. C. E. Burklin, V. 0. Collins, and M. I. Owen, Background Information on
Hydrocarbon Emissions fromMarine Terminal Operations. (Research
Triang1e Park,North Caro1ina:Prepared by Radian Corporation, Austin,
Texas, for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, November, 1976).
29. "Nelson Cost Indexes", Oi1 and Gas Journal, April 2, 1979.
30. -"Nelson Cost Indexes", Oil and Gas Journal, September 6, 1982.
31. Control of Hydrocarbon Emissions from Statignary Sources in the
Caj i forni a South Coast Air fiasi n~. (Tus t in, Ca 11 f orni a: prepared by KVB,
Inc.for the California Air Resources Board, June 1978).
5 of 6
-------
ATTACHMENT B (concluded)
32. Exxon Corporation's response to Air Resources Board staff questionnaire
"Marine Vessel Traffic, Bunkering, and Fuel Systems," October 22, 1980.'
33. Robert H. Perry, Cecil H. Chilton, and Sidney D. Kirkpatrick, Editors
Chemical Engineer's Handbook - Fourthi Edition. (New York, N.Y.: "'
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1963).
34. Air Quality ManagementPlan, 1982 Revision. South Coast Air Quality
Management 0istrict arid Southern California Association of Governments,
August 1982.
35. Annual EnergyProduction and Consumption 1980. California Energy
Commission, 1980.
36. C. F. Day, et al. "The Development and Operation of an Inert Gas System
for Oil Tankers," Transact i ons of the Roy a1 Inst1 tut i on of Nava1
Architects. Volume 114,London, England, 1972.
37. R. Swanek, Evaluation of liquidCargo TankOverpressure. (Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Coast Guard, September 1978).
38. Inert FlueGasSystem Operating Instructions. B. P. Tanker Co, Limited,
July 1971.
39. Shell Inert Gas Qperat i ng Instructions. Shell International Petroleum
Company Limited,Decemb'er3,1975.
40. Lt. Commander James Oliver, U.S. Coast Guard, at the Marine Vessel
Emissions Task Force Meeting, June 9, 1982.
41. Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District Rule 327.
REFERENCE FOR CHAPTER IX
1. Mortada International, Marine Bunker Fuels Analysis and Forecast of Price
Availabi1ity. (Springfield, Virginia: Prepared for the Maritime
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, October 1978).
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER X
1. Bonner and Moore Associates, Inc., The 1985 Cali forn i a Oi1 Scenar i o
Study. (Houston, Texas: Prepared for the Ad Hoc Group of California
Industry and Government Representatives, March 20, 1980).
2. A Statistical Analysis of the World's Merchant Fleet. (Washington,
0.C.:Maritime Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, December 31,
1979).
3. Revel Shinnar and Ofer Dressier, "The Self-Accelerating Effects of
Inflation", Chemical Engineerjjg Progress. December 1982.
6 of 6
-------
Appendix F
Procedures for Wetlands Protection -
Statement of Findings
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
PROCEDURES ON WETLANDS PROTECTION
Executive Order 11990 entitled "Protection of Wetlands," dated May 24,
1977, requires federal agencies to take action to avoid adversely impacting
wetlands wherever possible, to minimize wetlands destruction, and to preserve
the values of wetlands. Procedures have been established (40 CFR Part 6,
Appendix A, Section 6) for review of proposed EPA actions to determine whether
such actions will affect wetlands, and if so, then to conduct a wetlands
assessment, act to minimize potential harm to wetlands, evaluate alternative
actions, and to prepare a Statement of Findings. The Statement of Findings
outlines the basis for the decision, alternatives considered, actions to
minimize harm to wetlands, and overall wetland effects. These procedures,
including the appropriate public notice requirements, may be incorporated into
the EIS process where an EIS is required. Because the proposed Diamond
Chuitna coal project will be located in and affect wetlands, the above
procedures have been incorporated into this EIS. The Statement of Findings is
included below.
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
The proposed EPA action is Issuance of NPDES permits, authorizing
discharges of wastewater associated with the coal mine operations, housing
area, and (alternative) port sites at Ladd and Granite Point. The applicant
wishes to retain two transportation corridor/port site options
(southern/Granite Point and northern/Ladd). Two alternatives Incorporating
these options are therefore identified in this FEIS as the applicant's
Proposed Project. The applicant's proposal entails ultimate development of
only one of these transportation corridors. The haul road and conveyor would
both be constructed within the same corridor leading to the associated port
site (either Ladd or Granite Point). The preferred agency alternative, as
discussed in this FEIS, Incorporates the eastern corridor and port site at
Ladd. However, NPDES permits are not required for the transportation
corridor, so EPA does not have direct permitting authority affecting selection
of either the (preferred) eastern or (proposed) northern corridor to the Ladd
port.
By far the greatest project-related wetland losses would occur at the
actual mine site. Smaller wetland losses would occur within the alternative
transportation corridor/port sites. This Statement of Findings addresses the
three EIS action alternatives, all of which incorporate the same mine site
location. Additional supporting information is provided in the FEIS as noted.
Reasons, Proposed Project Must Be Located In Wetlands Including Consideration
of Alternatives
The process by which the various Diamond Chuitna project component
options were evaluated and alternatives selected Is described in Chapter 3 of
this FEIS. Optional mine site and mine service area component locations were
not evaluated in the EIS. The mine site is located on state coal lease land
-------
in the Beluga/Chultna region of Alaska where geological studies have shown
coal reserves to exist. Economically recoverable coal reserves exist at the
proposed mine site, where the coal seams are relatively shallow and thick,
resulting In a minimum necessary amount of overburden excavation and surface
disturbance. Surrounding Beluga/Chuitna coal reserves are generally deeper
and/or in thinner seams. Optional mine service area component locations were
not addressed due to logistical constraints and the necessity for the service
area to be located in direct proximity to the mine.
Optional locations for the non-mine project components (coal
transportation corridors, port site, overburden stockpile, and housing
area/airstrip) were evaluated in the EIS (see Chapter 3 of this FEIS). These
options, when combined with the mine site/service area components, were used
to formulate the alternatives evaluated 1n detail In the EIS. The optional
port site locations were constrained by relative distance from the mine, and
technical, economic, and environmental considerations. The general
transportation corridor alignments were constrained by the location of the
mine service area and the respective optional port sites to which they
connect.
Wetlands occur throughout the Beluga region, both within and outside the
area affected by the project alternatives. Wetland losses would occur under
all of the alternatives addressed in the EIS. No other alternatives are
available which would impact fewer wetlands while allowing the project to
proceed.
ProjectEffects on Natural and Beneficial Values of Wetlands
The functional values of the wetlands 1n the project area are discussed
in Section 4.3.2.3 of this FEIS. Wetland Impacts are discussed in Section
5.3.1.4 (and in other sections referenced) of this FEIS. The acreages of
wetlands Impacted, by project component, are shown on Table 5-2 of this FEIS.
By far the largest proportion of wetlands (1,353 acres) would be directly
impacted by the mine site component. The amount of wetlands directly Impacted
by the alternative transportation corridors/port sites would be approximately
31, under the eastern/ladd alternative, 51, under the northern/Ladd
alternative, and 141, under the southern/Granite Point alternative, of the
total direct wetland losses resulting from the entire project.
The wetlands in the project area are not alone high value habitat, but
the habitat diversity and forest edge associated with the interspersed
wetlands and uplands contributes significantly to the overall moderate to high
habitat value of the area. Wetland-related plant and animal productivity
would be directly impacted as mining progresses southwesterly, while
reclamation will follow the mining in stages. The acidic, muskeg-type
wetlands which are widely dispersed throughout the area are not highly
productive and the net primary productivity of replacement communities could
be as high or higher than the communities that now exist. Therefore adverse
impacts to primary wetland productivity would not be significant on a
-------
regional scale. Food webs would be interrupted In the Immediate vicinity of
pre-tnlning wetland areas but such interruption would probably not be
significant on a regional basis because of the isolated nature of most area
wetlands and the large extent of similar wetlands outside the project area.
Significant impacts to local hydrologic regimes could occur as a result
of the direct loss of wetlands at the mine site. Netlands in the project area
store large quantities of water and play an important role in surface water -
ground water interactions. Removal of the deep organic layers underlying the
muskeg on the sides of the stream valleys could disrupt post-mining shallow
groundwater baseflows to area streams. Soil porosity and deeper groundwater
recharge rates could increase as a result of removal of water-retaining
organic deposits. An extensive sediment pond system will be constructed which
may, during the period they are In operation, enhance groundwater recharge and
moderate flood peaks in the Chultna drainage.
The removal of wetlands could alter the quality of surface water runoff
from the reclaimed mine area. Wetlands tend to remove suspended sediment from
inflowing waters therefore postreclamation runoff would likely contain more
sediment than at present. The acidity of postreclamation runoff should be
reduced due to the net loss of peat deposits. The planned sediment pond
system will control the flow of sediment Into streams during the period of
mining, as reclamation proceeds. Planned undisturbed vegetative buffers
between the mined area and surrounding streams will also reduce sediment in
the runoff.
Actions Taken to Minimize Potential Harm to Netlands
The project reclamation plan, as required by the State Surface Coal
Mining Permit, includes a plan for the restoration of wetlands in the mining
area. This plan provides for the enhancement of wetlands development through
creation of two to five acre peat-filled depressions throughout the reclaimed
mine area, and the rehabilitation of certain sediment control ponds. The
permit also requires construction of a minimum of four 1/2 acre coho salmon
rearing ponds. These requirements are subject to further review and possible
revisions as necessary with the goal of achieving the desired restoration of
wetland functions. The wetland restoration measures would reduce net wetland
losses expected as a result of the project. Postreclamation wildlife habitat
value could be less than pre-mlnlng conditions due to reductions in habitat
diversity now contributed by the interspersed wetland/upland areas; however,
this diversity is expected to re-establish over the long-term.
An extensive sediment pond system is planned, which is expected to reduce
the hydrologic and water quality impacts associated with the direct loss of
wetlands during the period of mining, as reclamation proceeds.
-------
Measures will also be undertaken to minimize the adverse effects of
non-mine project components on wetlands. Project roadways and facilities have
been designed to avoid wetland areas. The specific transportation corridor
alignments are routed around wetlands wherever feasible Instead of traveling
the shortest distance through wetlands. Drainage and sediment control
measures, Including construction of runoff diversions and collection ditches,
Installation of culverts, revegetatlon of roadcuts, and site-specific sediment
control measures will be undertaken for project facilities and roads. In
areas where the roadway crosses bogs or muskegs, a construction technique will
be used which will effectively "float" the road over the undisturbed
underlying vegetation mat.
------- |