2008-02-22_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2008086 (39)

Home Browse Search

CHAPTERFOUR Environmental Consequences and Mitigation potentially impact local government facilities and services-housing, schools, domestic water systems, etc. In the context of the broader regional and national energy economy, the development of the Red Cliff Mine would increase the domestic fossil fuel supply, improving the reliability of our national energy system. The No Action Alternative would avoid a potential increase in demand for local government services and disruption of human activities near the proposed project, but would also forego the employment, public revenue, and energy supply benefits associated with the action alternatives. Most of the socioeconomic impacts would be felt in the Grand Valley of Mesa County. This area has a large population, a number of sizeable established communities, and awell-developed community infrastructure located within a 15- to 45-minute commute from the proposed coal mine. Construction workers who do not already reside in the area would find temporary residence in local motels or other rental housing facilities. The majority of permanent mine employees would reside in the Grand Valley. Similarly, local project expenditures for fuel, housing, equipment, services, and supplies needed for construction, development, and operation of the mine would take place in the Grand Valley. Jurisdictions within Mesa County would receive much of the sales tax associated with the proponent's local expenditures and the ad valorem taxes (property taxes) on the railroad spur. However, because the mine and most of the coal resource would be located in Garfield County, the ad valorem taxes associated with the mining operation itself would flow to jurisdictions within Garfield County. The United States and the State of Colorado would share the federal royalties generated by the mine, and Colorado would receive additional revenues based on the state severance tax. In general, socioeconomic impacts are described here in terms of the entire project-the mine and facilities, the railroad spur, and all related facilities such as the water pipeline and the transmission line. When impacts can be attributed to a specific project element, it is noted. The timing of project implementation is unknown, but this analysis assumes in general that the ramp- up to full production would be fairly rapid-about 2 years-since this scenario would produce the strongest potentially adverse impacts. 4.1.5.1 No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the Red Cliff Mine would not be developed and no rail spur would be constructed. There would consequently be no socioeconomic impacts, with one possible exception. The proponent has already purchased a substantial amount of property along the proposed route of the rail spur. Should the project not go forward, the disposition of those properties could have a potential socioeconomic impact if they were disposed of rapidly, putting downward pressure on prices, or if they were developed by the proponent in some way to increase the economic return of the properties. The No Action Alternative would avoid increased demand for local government services and disruption of human activities near the proposed project, but would also forego the employment, public revenue, and energy supply benefits associated with the action alternatives. 4.1.5.2 Proposed Action Alternative The proposed Red Cliff Mine would have two phases, a construction phase, during which the railroad spur from the mine to the Union Pacific Railroad and the facilities at the mouth of the 4-13 DBMS 568