REV102490 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page S-4 Summary February 2000 Surface Water/Groundwater: Identify and minimize impacts to water quality and hydrology to maintain the integrity of watersheds within and surcounding the lease tract areas. Maintain adequate flows to drainages and ditches above underground mining activities; Transportation: Address truck and train traffic impacts created by coal mining in the North Fork of the Gunnison Valley and the potential for accidents; Vegetation: Address the impacts to vegetation as a result of mining and exploration activities; Wetlands: Identify and minimize impacts to wetlands/riparian areas; and, Wildlife: Minimize disruption to terrestrial wildlife and wildlife habitats. S-2.0 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION The discussion of attematives is the foundation of the EIS process. The BLM and Forest Service have explored and evaluated numerous ideas and options during the selection and development of the attematives which includes a No-Action Alternative and several Action Alternatives including the plans as submitted by the applicants for the exploration license and the coal lease tracts. In total, four alternatives (including the No-Action Alternative) were developed for evaluation in the EIS. Alternatives were developed and analyzed to respond to the purpose for and need of the proposed actions, to address socla(and environmental issues, to respond to public and agency concerns and input, and to satisfy NEPA regulations. ~, Under the action attematives censidered, the 8LM would hold coal lease sales for the Iron Point and Elk Creek Coal Lease tracts, subject to coal lease stipulations of the BLM and the Forest Service, as well as any coal lease stipulations developed as part of the EIS process. It should be noted that the LBA process is, by law, an open, public, competitive, sealed-bid process whereupon the coal lease would be granted to the highest qualified bidder. S-2.1 Alternative A - No-Action This alternative assumes no leasing would occur and that the exploration license would be denied. NEPA requires that a'No-Action° alternative be considered in environmental documents. Urider the No-Action Alternative, the coal operations would continue operating under the appropriate production levels permitted by the Colorado DMG. For further information, please refer to the response to comment 16-21 in Appendix O, Public and Agency Participation and Involvement in the Draft EIS. This appendix is part of the Final EIS. S-2.2 Alternative B -Proposed Action This alternative was generated based on the original coal lease applications submitted by Bowie and Oxbow. The proposed action for the Iron Point Coal Lease Tract assumes a northern boundary south of the Terror Creek Reservoir, along with an area that would provide access under Terror Creek to coal reserves to existing federal coal (ease (C-37210) in an area known as the Bowie No. 1 "pod " There • ; would be no subsidence under the Curecanti-Rifle 23/345 kV electric transmission line which - essentially is parallel to Teror Creek. Production from the Iron Point Coal Lease Tract was assumed to be 5 million tons per year from the D coal seam via longwall mining techniques.