Laserfiche WebLink
MAR-17-2003 MON 0820 AM FAX N0. P, 03 <br />03-14-09 09:15P64 FRD~i FOREST SERVICE TD PAONIA R6 <br />Tb 1'ROFOSED ACTION <br />The T'roposed Action is do allow MCC to conduct a geotechnical datagathp:Rng effort in <br />S}~lvester Gulch, and to approve a geophysieal.prospecting permit submitted by MCC for <br />the purpose of collecting subsutfacc infaamsdon pettainirtg'to soil'aad slope stability. <br />Tho informationwould be used in determining the feasibility of designing a sight use road <br />in tits bottom of Sylvester Gulch. <br />Ttte geotechpical data will be collected using a series of 21 soil barirtgs along about rant, <br />mile.of existing ATV trail. The borings would be.drillcd using a track mounted, ATVs. <br />tyiae rig, and.wouldbedrilledw adepda ofabout 30 fcU. No surfactclairinp u aeoded <br />with this tyn~ of drilline ne• Soil samples will be collected from each boring and tekerr- <br />ro a dab for geotechnical property testing. Drill cuttings gctterated from fire borings will • <br />ba used to backfiq the drill holgs, <br />The geophysical data will bo collected using sbhallow Beistnlc iofraetion tttrv>;y. This <br />typt of survey involves opening a one-inch diameterhole to a depth of thrce.feet witlt.a <br />hartdramrod: A,smallscistaicrbarge'isthen,loadediatotheholesaddetortatcd.•77ae <br />seismic data is collected with a portable recorder. This survey will be performed on fo~t_ <br />These surveyg would be undertakra as soon as approvals are given. MCC proposes to <br />completzi these in March 2003. It is expected that the surveys wptild ba cotnplgted'ovcra <br />2-~eek period. <br />III. SCUPINC AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT <br />This proposal was prestmted to the North Fork Coal Working Group at their ]enuary 10,... <br />2003 meeting., The Eroup was also asked to comment vn the proposal via e3ech+oaic mai} <br />on March 4, 2003. The DcltaCounty,BOard of County Commissioners responded wit}t, <br />no ntrjruiorrs to. the proposal; A dirCCt coruact was made on Mardi 4, 2003'with the <br />Director of the Westcm Slope Eavironmenlal ResouroeCouncil; who reapondtd lharthr. <br />proposed surveys were a prudent step to take. <br />The I'aonia pistrict Wildlife Siologisl reviewed the Siologieal Assessment/Biolpgicsl <br />lsva]uations completediutheprtviousMDW NEPA atralyses, and indicated therc.~vould <br />by na effects to threatened, endangered or seosirive,spectes (pmjrct rile) frmr th+o <br />proposed action. It was also determined that there would be minimal effects to <br />Management indicator species (M15), and that there would be minimal impacts to elk end' <br />riser. <br />Previous archaeological surveys performed in the arcysbowrdar~atiyezc~ts. <br />A Paonia District Geologist, Forest gcolechnical eng/sneer, and roads engineers reviewed, <br />the proposal and provided comments For data needs and re5aement'of the Empas~+iars <br />PG3 <br />gathering (proj cct.fi~e) <br />