Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />CRAPTERTHREE affected Environment <br />3.!4.5.4 Utilities <br />Electrical service is provided by the White River Electrical Association in the vicinity of the <br />Piceance Site and by Public Service Company of Colorado via an existing 230kV line in the <br />vicinity of the Pazachute Site. It is expected that these services would likely be extended to the <br />American Soda sites. Several private vendors throughout the study area provide natural gas. <br />Natural gas would be provided to the Piceance Site via a new pipeline route extending from <br />existing pipelines served by a private vendor. An existing natural gas pipeline would serve the <br />Pazachute Site. <br />Potable water would be trucked to both the Piceance and Pazachute sites and stored in potable <br />water storage tanks. Most of the water required for solution mining and processing at the <br />Piceance Site would be recycled water returned from the Parachute Site processing facilities. <br />Process water used at the Pazachute Site would be pumped from the Colorado River and/or <br />alluvial wells along Parachute Creek, and heated prior to use. American Soda proposes to <br />provide water from existing surface water rights on the Colorado River. This water would then <br />be transported via pipeline to the Parachute and Piceance sites. <br />It is understood that most study area cities and towns have adequate wastewater treatment <br />' facilities. The City of Parachute and the community of Battlement Mesa both developed <br />additional wastewater treatment facilities during the oil shale boom of the late 1970s. As a <br />result, sufficient excess water treatment capacity exists to accommodate additional population <br />growth for the next 20 yeazs (Steigers 1998b). <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br />3.14.6 Environmental Justice <br />The Yankee Gulch Project is being assessed under the principles set forth in Executive Order <br />12898 by identifying and avoiding those effects that could disproportionately impact low-income <br />or minority populations. The first step in assessing potential community effects is to determine if <br />there are Native American, low-income, or minority populations within the study area. <br />Accordingly, this baseline section presents data related to income and minorities in the study <br />area, which includes both Garfield and Rio Blanco counties since most of the social and <br />economic impacts would occur in this area. One of the issues raised in scoping was the potential <br />effect of additional growth in the area and the effect on low-income people, especially with <br />respect to the availability of affordable housing. The closest communities to the proposed <br />facilities are Pazachute, which is 2.5 miles from the proposed Pazachute site, and Meeker, which <br />is 22 miles from the Piceance site. Both of these communities are relatively small, with less than <br />3,000 people. There aze no residences immediately adjacent to the facilities; the nearest resident <br />to either the Piceance or Pazachute site is more than one mile away (Steigers 1998b). <br />Low-Income Communities <br />Table 3.14-2 (Personal Income and Poverty Level by Jurisdiction) presents relevant data for <br />Garfield and Rio Blanco counties and nearby incorporated towns. Per capita income in Garfield <br />County was $17,338 in 1992 and rose to $20,947 in 1996 (CDLG 1998b). In Rio Blanco <br />County, per capita income was $17,656 in 1992, and declined to $16,719 in 1996. By <br />Socioeconomics 3-59 <br />