Laserfiche WebLink
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING <br />PROPOSED ACTION <br />2.1 Introduction <br />Two alternatives were considered for analysis in this EA: the Proposed Action <br />(Alternative A) and the No Action Alternative (Alternative B). The No Action <br />Alternative is required to be considered by NEPA and the CEQ implementing regulations <br />under 40 CFR 1500 -1508. This chapter describes both of these alternatives in detail. <br />2.2 Alternative A — Proposed Action <br />The current proposal includes six prospecting permit applications and associated <br />Exploration Plan(s), potentially resulting in the construction of exploration drill pads and <br />drilling up to six sites (Figure 2). In addition, existing road alignments would be used <br />for access; no new roads would be constructed. However, short segments of potential <br />access roads en -route to Drill Sites 2, 4, and 6 would need substantial improvement to <br />accommodate drilling equipment, including, but not limited to, blading, graveling, and /or <br />road -fill. Because these specific roads are infrequently travelled and require substantial <br />improvement, this is being treated as `new disturbance' for the purposes of calculating <br />disturbance area in this document. <br />Drill Site 1 is located immediately adjacent to a state highway and Drill Sites 3 and 5 are <br />located immediately adjacent to existing county roads. Some road maintenance may <br />occur as- needed, but no substantial improvements have been identified and these access <br />roads are not treated as `new disturbance'. <br />The following subsections detail the specific construction and operational procedures that <br />comprise the Proposed Action and are the subject of the analysis of this EA. <br />RM Potash Exploration Project 14 <br />Environmental Assessment <br />