GENERAL50821 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Public Involvement The Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) 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 Delta County Independent and Grand Junction Daily Sentinel as papers of record and sent approximately 35 scoping letters to required agencies, Tribes, and interested parties list. 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 and January 16, 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. Issues The Forest Service separated the issues into two groups: significanC and non-significant issues. Significant issues were defined as those directly or indirectly caused by implementing the proposed action. Non-significant issues were identified as those: 1) outside the scope of the proposed action; 2) already decided by law, regulation, Forest Plan, or other higher level decision; 3) irrelevant to the decision to be made; or 4) conjectural and not supported by scientific or factual evidence. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations explain this delineation in Sec. 1501.7, "...identify and eliminate from detailed study the issues which are not significant or which have been covered by prior environmental review (Sec. 1506.3)...." Significant Issues The Forest Service identified the following issues which will be analyzed in detail in the EIS. In most cases, a design criteria has been developed to minimize impacts (Table 2-2), one was used to develop another alternatives (Inventoried Roadless Areas), and the remainders were addressed through impact analysis in Chapter 3. Socioeconomic Loss of coal mining at the West Elk Mine would be a loss of revenue to the local economy. Local impact on social and economic conditions may be measured in Cerms of revenue generated and jobs maintained. Wildlife The addition of roads and pads may fragment or destroy habitat for threatened, endangered, sensitive and management indicator species. Noise and ground disturbing activity may disrupt an area that is important area for big game winter range and migration routes. Granting relief from the timing restriction for the construction of the ventilation shaft and escapeway could affect big game on their winter range. Soils and Geologic Hazards Constmction activities in areas with geologic hazards and fine textured soils may cause slope instability and increased erosion potential. Vegetation The addition of roads and pads may fragment or destroy habitat for threatened, endangered or sensitive plants. Surface disturbance of riparian vegetation and associated habitats may increase sedimentation and erosion in surface waters. The addition of roads and pads will remove vegetative cover necessary for forage and ground cover. Ground disturbing activities may increase the potential for noxious weeds. Il L_~ 10 Deer Creek Ventilation Shaft and E Seam Methane Drainage Wells DEIS '