Laserfiche WebLink
Environmental Assessment <br /> ■ Economically infeasible. Development of a new 8-mile long haul road and constructing a likely <br /> Cortez bypass to mitigate coal truck traffic through the business district would cost millions of <br /> dollars. <br /> ■ Logistically infeasible, due to the duration of time to construct this alternative. <br /> ■ Environmental impacts would be greater than those under consideration for the Proposed Action <br /> and would add 10-15 additional one-way trucking miles per trip. <br /> Alternative 2 —Railroad Spur <br /> This option is based on the development of a railroad spur line from Gallup,New Mexico to Farmington, <br /> New Mexico. Several studies have estimated route options and costs. The most recent estimates to <br /> construct a railroad from Gallup,New Mexico to Farmington,New Mexico are in the range of$550 <br /> million in 2013 dollars (NMDOT 2013). An additional length of railroad would be required to reach the <br /> Hesperus region. The original 99-mile spur plus the additional length to Hesperus does not change the <br /> findings of the Economic Feasibility Study that stated"in summary, it has been demonstrated that the <br /> heavy burden of the construction cost cannot be fully serviced by the cash flow generated by the railroad <br /> in the foreseeable future." <br /> In addition to the current economic infeasibility of building a rail line to Hesperus from Gallup, the <br /> majority of the land along the rail corridor between the Gallup/Thoreau area and Farmington crosses the <br /> Navajo reservation and federal lands. Even if the economics existed to support development of the <br /> Gallup-Farmington-Hesperus railroad,the environmental review alone (including a NEPA analysis) <br /> would take years to complete. Under this alternative, coal would be bypassed within the existing King II <br /> permit area and GCC would be unable to move potential future coal to markets. <br /> The reasons for eliminating this alternative include the following: <br /> ■ Economically infeasible <br /> ■ Logistically(from a timing perspective)infeasible, as it would take years to develop this <br /> alternative <br /> ■ Because of the very high costs, extension of the rail service to the project area would require <br /> multiple other rail users (customers/investors);making development of this alternative highly <br /> speculative and remote <br /> Environmental impacts would be significantly greater than those under consideration for the Proposed <br /> Action. <br /> Alternative 9 —Aerial Tram/Conveyor <br /> Development of an aerial tram/conveyor was an alternative raised during supplemental scoping. Little <br /> detail was provided in the scoping comment other than to describe this alternative as having a"very high <br /> relative capital cost,"a"low relative operating cost,"a"medium"production volume capability(with <br /> medium undefined); and that in terms of environmental considerations it was stated that an aerial tram <br /> would be "quiet with a limited footprint."For consideration of an aerial tram or elevated conveyor; it is <br /> assumed that the alignment would follow that of alternatives 6, 7, and 8. <br /> DOI-B LM-CO-S010-2011-0074-EA <br /> September 2017 <br /> -54- <br />