Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Roca Honda Mine

Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
interested participants, including government entities, tribes, and the public, are grouped together
under the term “consulting parties.”
Entities with a demonstrated interest in the undertaking or its effects on historic properties play a
role in the Section 106 compliance process as consulting parties. Consulting parties are involved
in the findings and determinations made during the Section 106 process by providing the lead
agency, in this case the Forest Service, information and other input at all stages of the process.
The lead agency uses this input to guide its decisions throughout the process. The NMSHPO is a
consulting party who advises the Forest Service in carrying out its Section 106 responsibilities,
and ensures that historic properties are taken into consideration at all levels of project planning
and development. In addition to the NMSHPO, the Forest Service initially identified five
government entities, two nongovernmental organizations, two private entities, and eight tribes as
potentially interested parties. This identification was based upon a specific request, or by virtue of
their standing as a party with a demonstrated interest. The Forest Service sent these parties a letter
on March 30, 2011, inviting them to participate in the Section 106 process as consulting parties.
There are 15 entities total who indicated their intent to participate in the Section 106 process as
consulting parties: NMSHPO, NMSLO, MMD, NMED, Acoma Pueblo, Laguna Pueblo, Hopi
Tribe, Navajo Nation, Zuni Tribe, McKinley County, Cibola County, the private landowner, Roca
Honda Resources, LLC, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and the New Mexico
Archeological Council. The Jicarilla Apache Nation and the Pueblos of Jemez and Sandia did not
respond to the invitation. At the same time, letters to the Cebolleta and Cubero Land Grants, and
the Juan Tafoya Land Corporation, were sent seeking information on cultural resources within or
near the proposed project area to incorporate into the analysis for the EIS and the Section 106
documentation. No responses were received. After the EPA became a cooperating agency for the
EIS, they were also invited by the Forest Service to be a consulting party; however, no response
was received.
The consulting parties have been given the opportunity to provide input to findings and decisions
made throughout the Section 106 process. This has involved an extensive process of information
sharing between the Forest Service and the consulting parties through meetings, project area
visits, document sharing and review, phone calls, and emails. The first meeting of the Section 106
consulting parties was held in June 2011 and included a fieldtrip to the project area to familiarize
the parties with the project area and project proposal. The second meeting of the Section 106
consulting parties was held in September 2011. This meeting also included a field trip to Section
16 of the proposed project area to observe and discuss the archaeological site testing that was
underway. A third meeting was in October 2012. The Forest Service has provided the consulting
parties with extensive documentation regarding the proposed project facilities, proposed
operations plans, and cultural resource investigations and results. In turn, the Forest Service has
requested and received input from the consulting parties on the designation of the APEs, the
identification and NRHP eligibility of cultural resources in the APEs, and the methodology of
archaeological test excavations.
During the time between the availability of this draft EIS and issuance of the final EIS and Forest
Service’s ROD, consultation with the consulting parties will continue in order to fulfill the
requirements of Section 106. The Forest Service is continuing to consult with the parties
regarding NRHP eligibility of cultural resources, the results of archaeological testing, the results
of the geomorphological study, and its formal determination of the effect of the proposed project
on historic properties. If a determination is made that the proposed project will have an adverse
effect on historic properties, as is anticipated, the Forest Service will continue consultation with
DEIS for Roca Honda Mine, Cibola National Forest 313