APPCOR12598

• Permit No: C1981015
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Date: 4/30/1991
• Doc Name: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT-MAP
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Impacts would occur during construction of the railroad but would vary
somewhat depending upon the route chosen. Impacts to wildlife would be
greater during railroad construction, but would decrease upon completion of
the track and the elimination of truck use.
Detailed descriptions of impacts are given in section 4 under Transportation.
Routes
Detailed impacts on all resources for each route are discussed in section 4,
Environmental Consequences. Impacts are also summarized on table 5 at the end
of section 2. Route locations are shown on map 5.
Route A--17.2 Miles. This route would begin at the mine and head
southwest towar Hig line Lake to East Salt Wash and then south to the
existing D&RGW railroad line west of Mack. The portion of the line from the
existing railroad up East Salt Wash is also proposed, according to local news
reports, to be used for coal transport by another coal mine--Sheridan
Enterprises. Approximately, 4 miles of this route could serve two coal mines.
Route A could be utilized for any proposed method of transporting the coal and
is this route most likely to be used.
Route B. 14.7 Miles. Route B would head generally south from the mine to
Fruita along 18 Roa It would terminate at the D&RGW railroad in Fruita.
Railroad construction following route B is not feasible due to grade
constraints. A 3 percent grade is considered the maximum for efficient
railroad operation. Some portions of this route exceed 5 percent. The
construction of a railroad along this route would require an excessive amount
of earthwork. It is a viable route for trucking the coal to a railhead near
Fruita.
Route C--16.8 Miles. This route would begin at the mine; parallel route
A to Douglas Pass Road Colorado Highway 139 and 16 Road) then follow Douglas
Pass Road to Loma and the D&RGW railroad. Route C is considered unfeasible
for a railroad route because of steep grades. If this route were chosen,
impacts would be similar to route B. Route C has been analyzed in this report
for comparative purposes; however, this route is not, at present, being
considered as a feasible transportation route by the company.
OTHER LEASING ALTERNATIVES
The leasing alternatives are analyzed to determine if adverse environmental
impacts would result from the leasing of a specific tract or combination of
tracts (see map 6). It has yet to be determined if commercial quantities of
coal are present in each tract and the mining plan has not been approved.
Therefore, all possible courses of action have been analyzed and compared.
The mining methods and transportation methods would remain the same as
outlined in the preferred alternative. Impacts specific to the transportation
routes and methods to be used are discussed in detail under Environmental
Consequence, section 4.
2-25