My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1994-12-29_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980007
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
1994-12-29_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/6/2021 10:59:04 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 11:13:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
12/29/1994
Doc Name
Decision Doc Federal Lease
Permit Index Doc Type
Other Permits
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
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
the income and employment effects of the mine would be for a <br /> longer period. , At the estimated production level of 4 . 0 million <br /> tons per year of federal coal, 190 employees would be needed to <br /> • mine the coal. The mine presently employs 180 to 185 people. <br /> B. Alternative Two - No Action <br /> Environmental Consequences <br /> There are no known additional impacts to the following resources: <br /> climate, air quality, recreation, soils, mineral resources, water <br /> resources, vegetation, wildlife, land use, cultural or visual <br /> resources. If the lease is not granted, there is a high <br /> likelihood that the coal would never be mined. In that case, <br /> this alternative would result in a loss of production to the <br /> nation of 10 million tons of coal. <br /> If the coal in the proposed lease area is mined at another date, <br /> it would be done at a higher cost due to the need for reentry. <br /> While the economic benefits of Alternative One might still be <br /> enjoyed, they would be achieved at a higher cost and hence, less <br /> efficiently. Or the bypassed coal may never be mined due to <br /> technical difficulties and economic constraints. <br /> There are no Mitigation Measures or Residual Impacts resulting <br /> from Alternative Two. <br /> V. MITIGATION MEASURES <br /> • With respect to bald or golden eagle nests which may be <br /> established on the review area during the life of the project, <br /> the following shall be applied. No new permanent surface <br /> facilities or disturbances shall be located within a 1/4 mile <br /> radius buffer zone around each bald or golden eagle nest site. <br /> No surface activities would be allowed within a 1/4 mile radius <br /> buffer zone around each eagle nest site from March 1 to July 1. <br /> Any proposed activities in, or adjacent to, these buffer zones <br /> (except routine maintenance) will require approval from the BIX, <br /> on a site-specific basis, after consultation with the USFWS. <br /> Because the presence of Grand Mesa Penstemon has been documented <br /> in elevations above 7300 feet, a Threatened and Endangered plant <br /> survey will be required prior to any surface disturbance. <br /> To protect and preserve breeding and nesting habitat for the <br /> Loggerhead shrike, disturbances in sagebrush and oak stands <br /> should be avoided to the extent possible. <br /> Where possible avoid surface disturbance to areas overlain by the <br /> Fughes loam soil series. <br /> As part of the Mine and Reclamation Permit Application Package, <br /> the lessee shall furnish to the Regulatory Officer at the Office <br /> • of Surface Mining, an estimate of the average annual water <br /> depletion resulting from the proposed action. This will require <br /> the project proponent's one-time contribution to the Recovery <br /> Page 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.