Laserfiche WebLink
CHAPTERTWO Alternatives <br />2.4 MEANS AND ROUTES FOR DELIVERING THE REQUIRED ELECTRICAL <br />POWER TO THE MINE FACILITIES <br />2.4.1 Overhead Transmission Line <br />Grand Valley Power (GVP) reviewed alternatives for power supply and determined that the only <br />reasonable delivery point for the power requirements of the Red Cliff Mine is the Xcel Energy <br />Uintah Substation at Fruita. For ease of construction and quicker response during transmission <br />outages, GVP prefers to construct the transmission lines adjacent to existing roads whenever <br />possible. GVP initially reviewed several routes to connect the substation with the proposed <br />facilities. GVP's preference was to build the line on a route adjacent to SH 139. During agency <br />scoping and review, it was determined that this route would have unacceptable visual impacts, <br />and GVP filed an application with the BLM to construct the proposed action as shown on <br />Figure 1-1, Proposed Action. In response to other agency concerns, three additional transmission <br />line alternative routes were developed and are described in Table 2-2, Alternatives Considered <br />Summary. <br />Four transmission line alternatives are under consideration, and, they are described and analyzed <br />in detail in this DEIS. The alternative that GVP proposed to construct along SH 139 is not being <br />considered for further analysis. <br />2.4.2 Underground Transmission Line <br />Another alternative would be to build all or a portion of the transmission line underground. This <br />would result in substantially higher construction and maintenance costs. GVP estimates that <br />underground construction costs are eight to ten times higher per mile of construction than <br />overhead construction. <br />2.5 WATER DELIVERY ROUTES <br />CAM owns water rights on Mack Wash, so the point of diversion must be on the wash below <br />(downstream of) more senior water rights. Under the proposed action, the pipeline would be <br />constructed in the rail spur ROW (Section 2.10.1). If another route-rail, road, or conveyor- <br />was selected, the pipeline could be constructed in that ROW instead. <br />Due to the nature and location of CAM's water rights, there are no feasible alternatives to <br />diverting the water from Mack Wash. <br />2.6 WASTE ROCK DISPOSAL <br />A waste rock disposal area encompassing approximately 190 acres was originally proposed. <br />During agency scoping, CDOW expressed concern regarding impact to the sage-covered terraces <br />at the south end of the disposal area. To lessen the impact to this important wildlife habitat, this <br />feature was redesigned to impact fewer acres of this habitat. Figure 2-6, Refuse Disposal Areas, <br />shows both the original area and the redesigned waste rock pile. <br />2-25 <br />