PERMFILE46481 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CHAPTER 1 - PURPOSE AND NEED AND INTRODUCTION Numerous small and large coal mines have operated in the North Fork Valley since before the turn of the century, Today, several coal facilities oper- ate "up" the valley to the east of Colorado Westmoreland Inc ,'s (CWI) Orchard Valley Mine, and even with the depressed demand forcing significant layoffs, coal mining remains an important part of the local and regional ec o noiny . CWI mines primarily Federal, low sulfur coal and, consistent with the national policy to reduce reliance on imported energy resources, supplies it to public utilities, private industry, and governmental facilities, These users rely on the Orchard Valley Mine for a dependable and economic supply of high quality, compliance coal. CWI is the cornerstone of this vital western slope industry, The largest underground producer in Colorado, CWI employs approximately 250 persons and annually contributes approximately $988,000.00 in property taxes, 13% of the Delta County tax base in 1983. About 5514,000.00 in severance taxes and 59,000,000.00 in payroll, part of which are paid to local and state govern- ments, are also annually contributed, For Colorado Westmoreland ]nc, to continue operation, coal must economically be transported from the Orchard Valley Mine to the storage and loadout area (see Drawing N1), in levels consistent with the market conditions of annual tonnage and contract term, This facet of the operations must be conducted in an acceptable manner, • Over the years, transportation of coal from CWI's portal site to its train loadout has been a subject of concern, In anticipation of a long-term coal lease sale in February, 1984, CWI embarked on a renewed investigation of coal transport modes in 1982, and by 1983 began reporting and discussing its work on various alternatives to small groups of potentially affected per- sons, governmental agencies, and others. CWI first held small, private meetings in order to gain information, ideas, and criticism which might not emerge at public meetings and to ensure that those persons known to have intcrest in the subject received the consideration they deserved. Then on May 4, 1984, CWI hosted a public meeting in which it proposed a list of coal haulage alternatives for evaluation: 1) Aerial tram; 2) Overland conveyor; 3) Frontage road parallel to State Highway 133; 4) Modification of State Highway 133 to three or four lanes; 5) Pneumatic capsule pipeline; 6) Trucking to a short conveyor across CWI right of way; 7) Private haul road across CWI right of way; 8) Existing transportation system. CWI presented design, construction, operation, maintenance, and reclamation features for each of the alternatives, along with prospective environmental impacts. Twenty environmental criteria were used to evaluate and compare impacts. • 1