Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br /> Intensity: The following discussion is organized around the Ten Significance Criteria described in 40 <br /> C.F.R. § 1508.27 and incorporated into resources and issues considered(includes supplemental authorities <br /> Appendix I H-1790-1) and supplemental Instruction Memorandum, Acts, regulations and Executive <br /> Orders. <br /> The following have been considered in evaluating intensity for this proposal: <br /> 1. Impacts may be both beneficial and adverse. <br /> The Selected Alternative would impact resources as described in the EA(See chapter 3 of the EA). <br /> Minimization and avoidance measures to reduce impacts are described in Appendix C of the EA <br /> and incorporated as design features and GCCE's Reclamation Plan. As described in Section 1.1 of <br /> the EA, the Selected Alternative would represent approximately 22 years of additional coal <br /> production at the GCCE King II Mine.The Selected Alternative covers approximately 2,462 acres <br /> of underground mining with 20 acres of surface disturbance. While the road use agreement with <br /> La Plata County allows GCCE to haul up to 1.1 million tons per year,the annual production rate is <br /> expected to be approximately 800,000 tons per year.Other indirect emissions include total cement <br /> production and general combustion of other sources such as rail lines.The indirect emissions would <br /> have a moderate impact on the region as all the coal extracted from the mine would be burned at <br /> the various cement plants,which currently operate nearly 100 percent on coal from King II Mine. <br /> The impact is considered moderate because the surrounding air quality meets all National Ambient <br /> Air Quality Standards(NAAQS),but the overall emissions are substantial enough to be more than <br /> negligible(lowest level of detection).A detailed discussion regarding these emissions can be found <br /> in the accompanying Technical Resources Report associated with the EA (OSMRE and BLM <br /> 2019), see Section 2.2.2. See Appendix C of the EA for design features addressing impacts from <br /> Air Quality. The agencies calculated that over the projected 22 year life of the mine, 450.6 mt of <br /> CO2e emissions would be produced cumulatively from all sources related to the proposed action <br /> and the produced coal's uses downstream including direct, indirect and downstream coal <br /> combustion. These emissions are then compared in the Technical Resources Report (Section <br /> 2.2.6.2) and the EA (Section 3.4.1.1) to similar local, state, national and global GHG emissions <br /> sources.The cumulative emissions from the proposed action represent approximately 0.09%of the <br /> mean face value (500 GtCO2) of the carbon budget. The agencies have determined that the <br /> proposed action is not a significant contributor to CO2e emissions over the life of the mine. <br /> None of the environmental effects discussed in detail in the EA and associated appendices are <br /> considered significant,nor do the effects exceed those described in the Resource Management Plan <br /> and associated EIS listed above. <br /> 2. The degree to which the selected alternative will affect public health or safety. <br /> The EA considered impacts associated with hazardous and solid wastes,and considered impacts to <br /> public health and safety by analyzing air quality, water quality, and noise. Air and water impacts <br /> of the Selected Alternative are discussed in the EA in Sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2, respectively. Direct <br /> emissions from the Proposed Action would produce a minor impact on an annual basis because the <br /> overall change is not substantial,but does have a measurable amount.Regionally,there would only <br /> be moderate effects from indirect emissions. The project would be responsible for only 0.28% of <br /> US and 0.038%of global greenhouse gas emissions.The agencies calculated that over the projected <br /> 22 year life of the mine, 450.6 mt of CO2e emissions would be produced cumulatively from all <br /> sources related to the proposed action and the produced coal's uses downstream including direct, <br /> indirect and downstream coal combustion. These emissions are then compared in the Technical <br /> Resources Report(Section 2.2.6.2)and the EA(Section 3.4.1.1)to similar local,state,national and <br /> global GHG emissions sources. The cumulative emissions from the proposed action represent <br /> DO]-BLM-CO-SO10.2019-0003-EA FONSI <br />