My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL51080
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL51080
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:37:30 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 6:31:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981035
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Name
MINE PLAN RECOMMENDATION PACKAGE
From
OSM & BLM
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.
/
67
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
ALTERNATIVE D -- NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE <br />This alternative will explore the impacts of not authorizing the lease <br />sale scheduled in response to lease application C-29125, submitted by <br />tational King Coal, Inc. This is the environmentally preferred alternative; <br />however, this alternative would not meet the requirements of the federal <br />coal regulations or the Durango-Chromo Management framework Plan. <br />If a Secretarial decision were made not to authorize a lease sale, <br />National King Coal would continue its present mining on federal coal <br />lease P-058300. At the present rate of mining, they will exhaust reserves <br />in 1981. According to USGS, there are 1,670,000 tons of reserves in- <br />place in the application area. At the average recovery of 50 percent <br />(USGS recovery rate) for underground coal there are 835,000 recoverable <br />tons. If not leased, the reserves would remain in place unless leased <br />at a future date. The mine would remain inactive as long as the company <br />was unable to obtain additional reserves. King Coal will be forced to <br />discontinue operations in 1981 which will involve laying off approximately <br />70 employees. <br />This alternative could prevent up to 160 acres of potential subsidence, <br />and the associated increase in soil erosion, loss of wildlife habitat, <br />and decrease in water quality. <br />® The potential for destruction of unknown archaeological and historical <br />sites would be decreased. <br />Truck traffic would be reduced. <br />Unemployment would place a greater burden on the State and local relief <br />agencies. Many miners would be forced to take substantial salary decreases <br />working in other jobs. Over 51,000,000 per year in payroll would be <br />lost to the local economy. Federal, State, and local governments would <br />lose approximately 5467,000 in tax revenues. <br />Displaced workers who desired to work as miners would be forced to leave <br />their home towns to find employment. Local residents would lose an <br />important source of home heating fuel. Two economically important <br />tourist trains would be forced to find other coal sources. <br /> <br />11ITIGATItJG t4 EASURES OF THE PROPOSED ACTION <br />The leasing of the coal would be subject to the standard leasing stipu- <br />lations and special stipulation listed below. <br />-~~. <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.