2008-02-22_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2008086 (46)

Home Browse Search

CHAPTERTWO Alternatives Table 2-1 ALTERNATIVES -SECONDARY SCREENING Alternative Issues/Impacts Action Trucking coal over a • Noise -Trucks would be hauling 24 hours/day, 7 days/week. No Further Analysis designated private . Eriogonum contortum -Haul road maybe designed to avoid haul road some areas but would be substantially wider than railroad. • Visuals -Haul road would be substantially wider and require a bridge over SH 139. Loadout facilities would be located within 1 mile of Highline Lake and SH 139. Loadout facilities would be within 1 mile of Mack Lake and Highline Lake and be very visible to recreationists. • Costs -Estimated five 240-ton trucks at $3 million/trnck would be required. Rail construction costs reduced by $4 million/mile. Trncks consume about 33 gallons of diesel fuel per hour and require substantial regular maintenance. Large trnck- maintenance facility would be required. Long-term maintenance costs greater than proposed action. • Wetlands - No reduction in impacts, as rail spur would still be required. • Air Quality -Haul road would not be paved and would require substantial watering to reduce dust. Haul trucks diesel engine emissions would add to train engine emissions. • Socioeconomics - No change to rail operations on private land and crossing CR M 8 and CR 10. Loadout operations would be approximately 5 miles closer to residences. Additional truck maintenance jobs would be created. • Wildlife -For safety concerns, haul road maybe fenced, limiting wildlife movement. • Recreation -Trnck and loadout noise would be audible at portions of the recreation facilities. Conveyor system • Noise -Conveyor would operate 24 hours/day, 7 days/week. No Further Analysis from mine to Mack The noise level, particularly near the loadout facility, could be or other location substantial. • Eriogonum contortum -Conveyor footprint would be narrower than the railroad, but would still require construction of an access road along its entire length. Cuts and fills would be less than either rail or haul road. • Visuals -Conveyor would cross over SH 139. Loadout would be within 1 mile of Highline Lake and SH 139. Loadout and conveyor would be visible from Mack Mesa Lake and Highline Lake and would be visible to recreationists. • Costs -Conveyor would be cheaper to build and operate than haul trucks. Long-term maintenance would be greater than proposed action. Additional power requirements would require review/assessment of electrical supply capacity. 2-3