2024-09-20_REVISION - M1980038 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

For All levels of NEPA analysis: NP =The resource is Not Present in the area impacted by the proposed action.Logically,if the resource is not present,no further analysis,design features or mitigations are necessary. NI=The resource is present,but there are only Negligible Impacts:The resource is present,but not impacted to a degree that analysis is required in the body of the EA(Chapter 3).For your remarks under this determination,explain what design feature is reducing impacts to the present resource,this will be included in an Analysis In Brief"AIB"section within the chapter 1 scoping section.Confirmation of the design features within the proposed action is a collaborative effort between the resource specialist and the project lead. PI =The resource is present,and the current proposed action,including the design features still have a Potential to Impact negatively a given resource,with a need to disclose and mitigate/condition the proposed action.In some cases an impact may be non-compliant with the RMP or relevant laws,and needs to be analyzed in an EIS or have other alternatives developed that still meet the purpose and need.Draft an"issue statement"(talk to the P+EC for direction on issue statement development)for the determination in the checklist.Development of issue statements may take some time,creating notes and other decisional documentation for the AR is a crucial step for analysis.If a resource specialist needs more space to develop resource issue statements,impact indicators,potential direct,indirect or cumulative impact statements,then sperate notes sheets with references made in the ID Team checklist are appropriate and expected.All notes should be saved in the project file for the AR. MITIGATION/DESIGN FEATURES:Check this box when adding a mitigation(externally generated proposals)or a design feature(external or internally generated proposals)to make sure it is obvious.Mitigations may be necessary to bring impacts under significance,RMP or law thresholds,if so,please make that clear in the Rationale for Determination section,based in the level of NEPA analysis.The Project Lead may discuss it with you and ensure it is feasible to add the mitigation to the project,and how much analysis may be required to incorporate it.If a necessary mitigation is not feasible,different mitigations,additional analysis or project re-design may be necessary.WORK TOGETHER! Determ- Assigned Specialist ination Resource (X) Rationale for Determination. Initials Date RESOURCES AND ISSUES CONSIDERED(INCLUDES SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES APPENDIX 1 H-1790-1) (M)F.Cook(SO) Dust(primary concern)and other pollutants(including GHGs) (E) emissions that would occur with operations(product extraction and processing,associated traffic,and any other surface disturbing activities)would be minimal and not at levels that would cause adverse human health(or climate change for GHGs)impacts.The operator will comply with Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment(CDPHE) permitting requirements that could include following a formal dust control plan and employing mitigation.There are no "sensitive"public receptors(residences,etc.)in the vicinity of Air Quality/ the pit and dust(primary concern)settles out of the air NI Greenhouse Gas (deposits to surface)quickly and relatively close to emissions FC 6/13/2024 (GHG)Emissions sources. X Mitigation:If possible,the operator should employ best management practices including: • reducing vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to and from the pit, • reduce vehicle/equipment idling and • minimize product extraction/processing and surface disturbing activities during dry and windy conditions. (M)B.Yaquinto No historic properties will be affected by the proposed Cultural (❑) undertaking.The current expansion area will avoid historic NI Resources property 5SM.511 by 20 meters. BY 6/12/2024 El Mitigation: Disappointment Valley Gravel Pit Expansion EA DOI-BLM-CO-S010-2024-0021 EA Tres Rios Field Office 20