PERMFILE134363

• Permit No: C2008086
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Date: 12/7/2006
• Doc Name: Public Scoping Report for the Environmental Impact Statement
• From: BLM
• To: DRMS
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

SEC'iIONTHREE
Scoping Results '
• Consideration of mitigation measures should encompass not only the immediate

proposal, but reasonably foreseeable expansions as well. '
• The Red Cliff Mine will boost current McClane Canyon Mine production to nearly 8
million tons of coal, annually. This volume will contribute not only to the health of our ,
economy, but will also keep the lights on in Colorado for decades to come.
• CAM and the BLM should continue a practice of working with the people in the azea to '
ensure public buy-in and support of the project.
• Coal has a long history in Grand Junction and coal will continue to have a great future if

this mine expansion is completed. '
• Some local residents expressed concern about how this rail spur and coal mine would
detract from their serene and peaceful lifestyles they've come to appreciate in this area. '
• Some comments expressed concern at the way the mine is being put together and how
they believe the community and people are being circumvented. '
• An adequate and cleaz Purpose and Need statement will need to be developed and
included in the EIS.
• Th
EIS
h
ld i
l
d
b
b
li
i
d
"
b
ild"
l
i '
e
s
ou
nc
u
e,
ut not
e
m
te
to, a
no-
u
a
ternat
ve.
• The EIS should provide a detailed and accurate description of the vazious components of
the proposed action. All individual components that make up the project azea, or any ,
other project infrastructure, should be identified.
Some questions that arose and that will be addressed: '
• Does Garfield County have a history of issues with CAM at the McClane Canyon Mine?
• How will the schools be impacted with the increased number of people coming into this

azea? '
• What is the life of the mine and railroad spur?
Wh
i '
• at
s the likelihood of increased activity over the period of mine use?
3.2
SOCIOECONOMIC /ALLOCATED DOLLARS '
• The amount of money that could be brought in during the construction of this project
would be monumental and would be a great benefit to trucking companies and other '
vendors who supply the mine.
• Dollars awazded under energy grants are based on the amount of natural resource

development within their respective counties. Citizens strongly urge the BLM, when '
writing the Red Cliff Mine EIS, to consider how many dollars aze returned to Garfield
and Mesa counties through useful energy impact grants. '
• The EIS needs to include the potential multiplier for how many local companies could be
positively affected by the new mine as well as the economic benefits of energy grants
being made available through the State of Colorado. ,
3-2 ,