OCR Text |
Show sufficient information to completely evaluate the potential effects of tar sand projects on park waters. The agency's ability to prevent or mitigate impacts through stipulations on operations would be less. Any monitoring efforts begun at the time of operation approval would be less meaningful due to lack of comparative data from previous years. Alternative B: Implement baseline monitoring ( preferred alternative) Under this alternative the monitoring plan recommended by Flug ( 1985) would be required in all leases issued for tar sands. As many as eleven sites would be monitored for physicochemical parameters defining water quality and quantity. The monitoring program would be initiated prior to final approval of any tar sand Plan of Operation. If monitoring data indicates that a particular Plan of Operation would cause significant water resource impacts that could not be mitigated, the operation would not be approved. III. M. 3. Recommended course of action. Implementing the monitoring program in Alternative B would be expensive and require a level of expertise beyond the immediate capability of the recreation area to provide; yet the data resulting would be the minimum needed to fully understand tar sand project effects and the types of mitigation necessary. Therefore, it is recommended that the monitoring program be made a precondition of development, with full costs to be borne by the developers, particularly since the need for the monitoring is caused by the existence of development proposals. A minimum of one to two years of data would be required before surface- disturbing development activities could commence. This recommendation is feasible because large- scale mineral projects normally require several years to complete the permitting and design phases prior to actual development. 11 I. N. Energy- Related Wastes III. N. 1. Statement of the problem. The Salt River Project Agricultural and Improvement District ( SRP) operates the Navajo Generating Station east of Page, Arizona, and south of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. The Navajo Power Plant is rated at 2250 megawatts ( mw) and burns coal from Black Mesa, Arizona, that has an ash content of approximately 16 percent. Ash emissions from the plant are controlled by means of electrostatic precipitators. Fly ash is collected in hoppers and trucked to a disposal area approximately 3.5 miles east of the power plant site. The disposal area is at the head of a small ephemeral tributary to Lake Powell. Fly ash and bottom ash are placed in terraces behind a dam constructed across the canyon of the tributary. The ash disposal area, which has approximately 35 years remaining in its planned operating life, is " active" due to the on- going disposal operations, so revegetation of the area has not occurred. 59 |