My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL39727
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL39727
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:59:06 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 10:19:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999002
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
7/22/1999
Doc Name
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT VOLUME 1 CHAPTER 3
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.
/
26
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
CNAPTERTHREE <br />Environmental Consequences <br />3.5.2 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts <br />Some unavoidable adverse impacts would remain under the Agency Preferred Alternative. Some <br />air pollutants would be emitted and would contribute to the pollutant loading in the region. <br />These, however, would not cause any exceedance of the National or Colorado Ambient Air <br />Quality Standazds or of increments established to prevent significant deterioration of the existing <br />air quality. These impacts were described for the Proposed Action. There would also be some <br />contribution to the fine particulate in the region, which can contribute to an increase in regional <br />haze and a reduction of visual range. The contribution resulting from this project, however, is <br />expected to be localized and not to have a significant effect on the federally protected pazks and <br />wilderness azeas (federal PSD Class I azeas). <br />3.6 NOISE <br />3.6.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts <br />Piceance Site <br />Sources of duect and indirect impacts of construction and operational noise under the Agency <br />Preferred Alternative would be the same as described for the Proposed Action. Section 4.6.2.1 of <br />the Draft EIS (page 4-35) has been modified to address the effects of drilling and truck <br />transportation in more detail. <br />Pipeline Corridor <br />Sources of direct and induect impacts of construction and operational noise under the Agency <br />Prefeaed Alternative would be the same as described for the Proposed Action. <br />Parachute Site <br />Sources of direct and indvect impacts of construction and operational noise under the Agency <br />Preferred Alternative would be the same as described for the Proposed Action, except for the <br />proposed reactivation of the rail spur for hauling construction-related equipment and supplies to <br />the Parachute Site. <br />The following assessment ofrail-associated noise was presented to Garfield County as part of <br />American Soda's Special Use Permit application. The noise study is based on review of existing <br />studies performed on various railroad operations and is representative of noise impacts to be <br />associated with the American Soda's rail spur operations. The assessment applies to train <br />activity during construction or operation under the Proposed Action and Agency Preferred <br />Alternative. <br />Trains moving at 20 mph and 50 mph generate noise levels of approximately 71 to 72 dB(A) and <br />80 dB(A) at a distance of 50 feet, respectively. Trains associated with the American Soda rail <br />spur would travel at a maximum speed of 10 mph. Therefore, moving train noise would be less <br />than 71 dB(A) at a distance of 50 feet. The state noise standard classifies railroad operations as <br />Noise 3-7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.