Laserfiche WebLink
Approved Resource Management and the associated Final Environmental Impact Statement <br />(RMP/FEIS). Therefore, an environmental impact statement is not needed. <br />This finding is based on the context and intensity of the proposed action as described below: <br />Context: The proposed action is a site-specific project directly involving surface disturbances <br />on approximately 5.06 acres of private land and 0.23 acres of BLM administered land that by <br />itself does not have international, national, regional, or state-wide importance. There is no public <br />access to any of the project area. The project is generally a small-scale exploration project <br />designed to investigate for and further characterize economically recoverable coal resources <br />underlying the lands to the north and east of the existing King II Coal Mine. Coal exploration, <br />leasing and mining have occurred in the area for more than 75 years. <br />Intensity: The following discussion is organized within the context of the ten criteria for <br />significance, as described in 40 CFR 1508.27. <br />The following criteria have been considered in evaluating the intensity for the proposed action: <br />1. Impacts may be both beneficial and adverse. The proposed action would impact <br />resources as described in the EA. Mitigating measures to reduce impacts to air quality, <br />soils, wildlife, migratory birds, vegetation, invasive species, and water resources were <br />incorporated in to the design features for the proposed action. None of the environmental <br />effects from the proposed action that are discussed in detail in the EA are considered <br />significant. <br />2. The degree to which the proposed action will affect public health or safety. The <br />proposed action is not expected to pose any serious risks to public health or safety. Any <br />such concerns would most likely be related to vehicle travel to,/from and within the <br />project area and safety around drilling equipment. However, many of these concerns <br />would be mitigated or eliminated by the lack of public access to the proposed project area <br />and through the implementation of BLM required performance standards. <br />3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or <br />cultural resources, park lands, prime farm Iands, wetlands, wilderness, wild and <br />scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas. There are no prime or unique farmlands, <br />wild and scenic rivers, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs), wilderness or <br />wilderness study areas, wetlands, riparian areas, or floodplains that would be affected by <br />the proposed action. <br />4. The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely <br />to be highly controversial. There is no scientific controversy over the nature of the <br />impacts of the proposed action. <br />5. The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly <br />uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. The project is not unique or unusual. <br />The BLM has experience implementing similar actions in similar areas. The potential <br />effects of the proposed action on the human environment are fully analyzed in the EA. <br />There are no predicted effects on the human environment that are considered to be highly <br />uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. <br />2 <br />