Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT <br /> The GCC Rio Grande Pueblo Plant(Table 3-3) has a permit (#98PB0893) condition that limits annual firing <br /> fuel (coal and tire derived fuel (TDF))to no more than 198,418 tons on a rolling 12-month basis.The King <br /> II Mine currently supplies 105,000 tons of coal annually(approx. 53 percent by weight)to the facility and <br /> expects this to remain constant going forward. The GCC Rio Grande Tijeras Plant (Table 3-4) has similar <br /> operations to that of the Pueblo facility and is covered under NM Title V permit #532. The permit and <br /> underlying construction permits provide for all the same source requirements (controls and monitoring) <br /> as the Pueblo facility and is publicly available from the Albuquerque Environmental Health Department <br /> for review. Unlike the Pueblo facility the Tijeras kiln is fired entirely on coal (a minor amount of natural <br /> gas is used for startup) and the kilns themselves do not appear to have fuel throughput limits, but rather <br /> performance-based clinker production limits (33.7 tons/hour). <br /> Table 3-3. Pueblo Facility King II Mine Emissions(tpy) <br /> Source PM10 PM2.5 CO NOx VOC S02 CO2e1 Hg <br /> (lb/yr) <br /> Facility 221 217 588 604 52 505 735,230 25 <br /> 1CO2e emissions are based on 2017 Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) FLIGHT reported emissions <br /> Table 3-4. Tijeras Facility King II Mine Emissions(tpy) <br /> Source PM10 PM2.5 CO NOx VOC S02 CO2e1 Hg <br /> (lb/yr) <br /> Facility 135 66 790 772 79 21 306,846 10 <br /> 1 CO2e emissions are based on 2017 EPA FLIGHT reported emissions <br /> Other indirect emissions include total cement production and general combustion of other sources such <br /> as rail lines.The indirect emissions would have a moderate impact on the region as all the coal extracted <br /> from the mine would be burned at the various cement plants,which currently operate nearly 100 percent <br /> on coal from King II Mine.The impact is considered moderate because the surrounding air quality meets <br /> all National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), but the overall emissions are substantial enough to <br /> be more than negligible (lowest level of detection). A detailed discussion regarding these emissions can <br /> be found in the accompanying TRR(OSMRE and BLM 2019) (Section 2.2.2). <br /> Cumulative Actions and Effects <br /> The cumulative impact assessment for air quality considers air emissions from mine operations and coal <br /> transport when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.The cumulative <br /> impacts to air quality in the King II Mine area would result primarily from emissions of PM2.5/10 from the <br /> current and future activities occurring within the region such as agriculture, ranching and grazing, and <br /> vehicle traffic. <br /> To examine potential cumulative air quality impacts from activities that it authorizes, BLM initiated the <br /> CARMMS. The study version 2.0 was primarily concerned with assessing statewide impacts of projected <br /> oil and gas development (both federal and fee (i.e., private)) out to year 2025 for three development <br /> scenarios (low, medium, and high), but also included a statewide mining impact assessment. Projections <br /> Dunn Ranch Area Coal Lease by Application COC-78825 and Mine Plan Modification EA 3-10 <br />