GENERAL39459 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I also recognize the concern for continued heavy equipment use on County (CR 710) and Forest Road (NFSR 710) during shaft construction. MCC has reached agreement with the county for the road use (project file). The use of NFSR 710 and 711 will be managed under a FS Road Use Permit approved by the Paonia District Ranger. This road use for the construction of the shaft/escapeway will be short term (less than one year). I am also aware of concerns for activities occurring in the West Elk IRA; however, these are not applicable to the approval of the shaft/escapeway and access as they lie outside the IRA boundary. OtiterA/ternafives Considered The No Action Alternative (FEIS, Chapter 2, Alternative 1), and an alternative that considered no activity in Inventoried Roadless Area (FEIS, Chapter 2, Alternative 3) were the other alternatives that were studied in detail. With respect to the Deer Creek Shaft and Escapeway, Alternative 3 is the same as the alternative selected in this decision (Proposed Action, Alternative 2). The No Action Alternative was the environmentally preferred alternative, because no surface disturbance would occur. A more detailed comparison of these alternatives can be found in the FEIS on Table 2-3. Under the No Action alternative, current management plans, existing approvals related to coal mining, and non-coal related activities would continue to occur or guide management of the project area (see FEIS Chapter 2, Alternative I). Under the No Action Alternative construction of the ventilation shaft and escapeway would not occur. The existing pad location would be reclaimed and the access road obliterated. Selection of the No Action Alternative would essentially cause the West Elk Mine to cease operations because the shaft is critical to maintaining required ventilation in the E Seam workings. Without it, the mining company could not receive approval from other Federal or State agencies for mining and ventilation plans. This could result in a reduced capacity for MCC to meet its coal contractual • obligations resulting in a decreased ability to recover currently leased federal coal reserves which would have expanded negative effects on local economy. Selection of this alternative would not meet the purpose and need, and would be,inconsistent wish rights granted by the coal lease, the Forest Plan, and national policy. Public Involvement The Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Deer Creek Shaft and E Seam Methane Drainage Wells was published in the Federal Register on September 18, 2006. The NOI asked for public comment on the proposal from September 18 through November 2, 2006. In addition, as part of the public involvement process, the agency published Legal notices in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel and Delta County Independent as papers of record and sent approximately 35 scoping letters to required agencies, Tribes, and interested parties list (project file). The NOI was posted on the GMUG's public planning webpage, and the project was included on the GMUG's Quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions. GMUG personnel briefed the North Fork Coal Working Group at its quarterly meetings on October 10, 2006, January 16, April 10, and Ju]y 10, 2007. An additional article was published in the Delta County Independent on November 1, 2006 written by an unknown source. Five comments were received during initial scoping. Using the comments from internal scoping, the public, other agencies, and associations and the interdisciplinary team, a list of issues was developed (EIS, Chapter 1, Issues). ' A Draft EIS was prepared, and the Notice of Availability for comment appeared in the Federal Register on March 23, 2007. Legal notice of opportunity to comment appeared in the Grand Junction Daily • Sentinel (April 5, 2007) and the Delta County Independent (April 4, 2007). Seven (7) parties, comprised of other agencies and interested parties, submitted comments on the Draft EIS. Responses were prepared