My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL39459
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL39459
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:58:54 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 10:10:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
11/5/2007
Doc Name
Mining Plan Decision Document Federal Lease C-1362 (TR109)
From
Mountain Coal Company, LLC
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
Other Permits
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• Factors Other Than Environmental Effects Considered In Makingthe Decision <br />The purpose and need of this project is to protect public health and safety, to prevent lass of leased federal <br />coal resources, and to facilitate safe and efficient production of compliant and super compliant coal <br />reserves. The purpose and need also support the rights of the Federal Coal Lessee to constrict structures <br />which may be necessary to exercise lease rights (EIS, Chapter I Purpose and Need). My decision <br />supports the Purpose and Need for this project. <br />My decision fulfills the Federal Government's policy to foster and encourage mineral development <br />(Mining and Mineral Policy Act of 1970), the Federal Land and Management Policy Act (FLPMA), and <br />complies with the GMUG Forest Plan direction. <br />Coal in the North Fork Valley is desirable because it is considered "compliance coal" under the Clean Air <br />Act emissions standards. The coal from the area is low sulfur, low ash, and has high burning capabilities. <br />Facilitating its recovery is beneficial to the energy needs of the country. <br />Identification of the Environmental Documents Considered in Making the Decision <br />This decision was made after carefully considering the contents of the EIS, public comments, agency <br />response to comments, and the supporting project record. The GMUG Forest Plan was reviewed and this <br />decision is determined to be consistent with it (EIS, Chapter 1 Authorizing Actions, Forest Plan). The <br />numerous other environmental documents (EIS, Chapter 1, Other Analysis Completed in the Vicinity of <br />the Project Area) prepared for activities in the area were also consulted. <br />How Considerations Were Weiehed And Balanced In Arrivine At The Decision <br />• The resource impact analyses presented in the EIS (Chapter 3, and summarized in Table 2-3) show that <br />potential impacts to surface resources would be minor, and are minimized by the Design Criteria for the <br />action given in Exhibit A. Further, I considered the rights of the coal lessee conveyed under the federal <br />coal lease, as well as the needs to comply with other agency requirements. <br />I have also considered Executive Order 13212, which directs federal agencies to take steps to increase the <br />energy supply to our nation, and the Energy Policy Act of 2005. <br />I understand other federal agencies and private interests are concerned about release of methane from the <br />mine into the atmosphere. For this reason, I have committed to working with the Bureau of Land <br />Management to pursue the competitive sale of gas ]ease parcels that are coincident with the Federal coal <br />]eases in the area to mitigate the release of methane to the atmosphere. If MCC were the successful <br />bidder on those potential gas leases, the Forest Service would continue working with the company in <br />support of US Environmental Protection Agency's Coalbed Methane Outreach Program to reduce <br />greenhouse gas emissions and put the methane to beneficial use. <br />Relationship to Public Involvement <br />Public comments were sought throughout this project (refer to Public Involvement Section of this <br />document for a summary of public involvement, and Chapters 4 & 5 of the FEIS). <br />I recognize that some parties are concerned about construction activities occurring during winter in big <br />game winter range. In consultation with the CDOW, we find that the area of the shaft is not within <br />mapped winter range as known by CDOW. Further, the CDOW advises that there is low or limited use <br />by big game in the area of the shaft. Therefore, my decision to allow one season of winter use will not <br />• adversely affect winter range in the area <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.