My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP35525
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP35525
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:12:50 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 7:08:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1978305
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
5/18/2004
Doc Name
Environmental Assessment
From
Nat. Park Service
To
DMG
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.
/
88
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
be a cumulative, long term minor adverse impact on local/regional nonfederal mineral <br />development from all activities expected under alternative A. <br />Conclusion <br />Under Alternative A, No Action, the Dickerson Pit would not expand beyond the current limit of <br />12.4 acres, resulting in a long term, negligible to minor, adverse impact on local/regional mineral <br />supplies. There could be a cumulative, minor, long term adverse impact on mineral supplies. <br />Impacts of Alternative B, Proposed Action, on Nonfederal Mineral Development <br />Under Alternative B, Proposed Action, the Dickerson Pit would expand to its full mineral right of <br />33.16 acres {with 1.22 acres reserved as a visual buffer), which could result in a minor <br />beneficial impact on county mineral supplies. The proposed expansion would increase the <br />Dickerson Pit contribution to the county mineral supplies from 2 percent to approximately 10 <br />percent. <br />Cumulative Impacts <br />Under Alternative B, Proposed Action, the Dickerson pit could produce between 31,000 and <br />85,000 tons per year. Since mineral demand is expected to remain at least at its current level, <br />the additional supply from the Dickerson Pit would be beneficial to the county mineral supply. <br />Therefore, the cumulative impact on nonfederal mineral development in the county and <br />surrounding region would be long term, minor, and beneficial. <br />Conclusion <br />Under Alternative B, Proposed Action, the full expansion of the Dickerson Pit would result in a <br />minor beneficial impact on county mineral supplies. Cumulative impacts to IocaUregional mineral <br />V, supplies would be long term, minor, and beneficial. <br />3.2. Impacts on Air Quality <br />Methodology <br />Impacts on air quality were analyzed by reviewing current state and federal laws regarding air <br />quality and the park's approved General Management Plan. Information about regional air <br />quality was obtained from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) <br />and previously completed environmental compliance documents for the park. <br />The thresholds of change for the intensity of an impact are defined as follows: <br />Negligible: No changes would occur or changes in air quality would be below or at <br />the level of detection, and if detected, would have effects that would be <br />considered slight and short term. <br />Minor: Changes in air quality would be measurable, although the changes would <br />be small, short term, and the effects would be localized. No air quality <br />mitigation measures would be necessary. <br />Moderate: Changes in air quality would be measurable and have consequences, <br />although the effect would be relatively local. Air quality mitigation <br />measures would be necessary, and the measures would likely be <br />successful. <br />Major: Changes in air quality would be measurable, have substantial <br />consequences, and be noticed regionally. Air quality mitigation measures <br />35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.