Laserfiche WebLink
March 2000 Record of Decision Paae 15 <br />More specifically, the socioeconomic analysis addressed the impacts of the lease/no lease <br />decision before the agencies. The analysis took a thorough look at the role of coal in the <br />economy and the interrelationships of coal with other segments of the economy. In addition, <br />after release of the Draft EIS we were able to obtain access to the locally developed "REDP" <br />data (incorporated in the Colorado Department of Local Affairs LEIFA data set). The <br />socioeconomic modeling was rerun and the results reported in the Final EIS. Generally, the <br />results were within 10% and the causative factors were highlighted. Due to the longwall mining <br />methods being employed, the effects of the decision between the no action decision and the <br />decision to lease is not so much related to the levels of coal production per year, but rather the <br />duration of coal production from the mines over time. Ultimately, when the current and any <br />future mine reserves are depleted, the economy will feel the effects of the mine closures. <br />Transportation issues focused on railroad issues. The railroad traffic necessary to transport <br />coal to market will approximately double. This reflects the combined production of all three <br />mines in the North Fork Valley, not just the two mines making the lease applications. The <br />agencies believe they have no direct jurisdiction over railroad operations. Further, the agencies <br />see no fair, reasonable or meaningful way within their authority to deal with the issue through <br />indirect means such as setting production limits or levying additional monetary fees or <br />contributions. As stated above, we will apprize potential bidders of the commitments expected <br />in the community. <br />The EIS analyzed the impacts of increased railroad traffic and especially focused on the public <br />health and safety aspects at railroad crossings. For the Final EIS, an inventory of public <br />railroad crossings was completed and some costing estimates for safety upgrades were <br />prepared. Private crossings were not inventoried because they involve permits between private <br />parties and the railroad. However, it is recognized that safety considerations are generally the <br />same. This information is part of the administrative record and has been given to the <br />community for their further use in prioritizing crossings, preparing grant proposals, etc. We <br />believe the community efforts underway will be successful and will result insubstantial crossing <br />improvements. <br />The effects of noise are primarily associated with the operation of the railroad. As stated <br />previously, the agencies do not have direct jurisdiction over railroad operations. However, the <br />noise section was rewritten to better disclose and consider the potential impacts. For example, <br />the effects of whistles was specifically added to the discussion. The agencies determined that <br />no additional studies or inventories would add to the decision making process and consequently <br />were unnecessary at this time. We acknowledge that affects to individuals can be disturbing. <br />This is especially true for residents close to the tracks during normal sleep periods. Under <br />certain meteorological conditions, disturbances can occur at greater distances. We have <br />identified other mitigation that is available or proposed in Chapter 3. Adoption of some or all of <br />these measures could help lessen the noise impacts. <br />Subsidence induced impacts to water resources was an important consideration. Alternative D, <br />No Subsidence in Sensitive Areas, was specifically designed to address this issue and is the <br />basis of the decision. The evaluation of the subsidence and potential impacts followed <br />standard and accepted analysis practices. In addition, we subcontracted one of the foremost <br />experts in the field of subsidence and with extensive personal experience in the valley to help <br />us with the analysis. Specific mitigation measures are stipulated as part of this decision to <br />ensure the protection of important water resources. <br />Resource Issues. The following discussion is presented in related resource categories. A listing <br />of individual resource issues is found in Section S-1.4, Section 1.8, and at the beginning of <br />each resource category in Chapter 3 of the Final EIS. <br />Forest Service -Elk Creek Coal Lease Traci <br />