Laserfiche WebLink
CHAPTERTWO <br />Alternatives <br />Table 2-1 <br />ALTERNATIVES -SECONDARY SCREENING <br />Alternative Issues/Impacts Action <br />Conveyor system • Wetlands - No reduction in impacts if loadout is located north No Further Analysis <br />from mine to Mack of the Highline Canal. <br />or other location . Air Quality -Conveyor would be covered, but it would generate <br />(continued) coal dust, especially at transfer stations. <br /> • Socioeconomics -Same as trucking alternative if loadout is <br /> located north of Highline Lake. <br /> • Wildlife -Conveyor would be on the ground as much as <br /> possible, creating a wildlife movement barrier. <br /> • Recreation -Loadout noise would be audible at portions of the <br /> recreation facilities. <br />Alternative rail route • Noise - No difference from proposed action. No Further Analysis <br />along CR X to East . Eriogonum contortum -Alignment would be sited in fewer <br />Salt Creek areas of Eriogonum contortum. Impacts would be less. <br /> • Visuals -Alignment would require a bridge over SH 139, <br /> resulting in a long, easily visible bridge and embankments. <br /> Loadout maybe located closer to SH 139. Materials pit(s) of <br /> 40 acres or more would create new scar on BLM-managed <br /> lands. <br /> • Costs -Costs would be higher due to bridge, embankment, and <br /> fill requirements. Alignment maybe slightly longer than <br /> proposed action. <br /> • Wetlands - No change, as rail spur connection with UPRR <br /> would be the same as the proposed action. <br /> • Air Quality - No difference from proposed action. <br /> • Socioeconomics - No difference from proposed action. <br /> • Wildlife - No difference from proposed action. <br /> • Recreation - No difference from proposed action. <br />Notes: <br />BLM = Bureau of Land Management <br />CR = County Road <br />SH = State Highway <br />UPRR = Union Pacific Railroad <br />Slurry Pipeline <br />Use of a slurry pipeline would require mixing water and coal to pump from the mine to a railroad <br />loadout or to a specific end-user destination. This would require substantially more water than <br />CAM-Colorado, LLC (CAM) has water rights for. Since CAM's plan is to sell coal on the open <br />market, there is no specific end user. If the coal were to be loaded on rail cars, a dewatering and <br />drying facility would need to be constructed at the loadout facility. <br />2-4 <br />