Laserfiche WebLink
Comment <br />. Anchor Coal Company has net negotiated a contract for the <br />purchase of its coal by Northern Indiana Public Service Cer,.;,any <br />(NIPSCO) and has not concluded any arrangement for loadine coal <br />.through Colorado 4lestmoreland, Inc.'s loadout facilities. <br />Response <br />See errata for text change. <br />Comment <br />The effect (socioeconomic) of not issuing the C4;I lease has not <br />been adequately assessed. <br />Response <br />The analysis was based on the assumption that the increased <br />production and employment sho~•:n in fable 1-1 and 1-3 would <br />affect any reduction in empioyment caused by closing this mine. <br />If this were not the case and expansion of o±her mines does not <br />reach the proportion indicated, unemployment in Delta County <br />- would increase and some of the miners would be r'orced to seek <br />jobs elsewhere. . <br />• In addition, federal, state and local revenues associated with <br />coal production would be foregone until the coal was eventually <br />mined. These revenues were calculated by the ^tontrese City Im- <br />pact Coordinator and are as follov,~s: <br />_ 1. 160 jobs in the North Fork Valley; <br />2. 51,185,341 of federal coal royalties, one half of <br />~ which are allocated io the State of Colorado for <br />• energy impact assistance funds; <br />3. 597,000 in Reclamation Tax Revenue used for recla- <br />mation of orphaned lands; <br />4. 5190>000 (1979 projection) in Severance Tax Revenues; <br />5. 5293,000 in Excise Taxes; <br />6. 53,000,000 in local payrolls; and <br />7. 700,000 tons per year of low sulphur coal at a time <br />when our nation needs to reduce its dependency on <br />foreign oil more than ever before. <br />These reductions will indirectly cause reductions in retail <br />sales and slo~a demand fpr housing and other needs rely*_ed to <br />rapid grotiti~th in the North Fork Valley. <br /> <br />