Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Roca Honda Mine

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action One of the six dewatering wells in figure 20 is at the same location as the proposed development drill hole. The drill hole would be completed first and then converted to a mine dewatering well. To accommodate the one production shaft alternative, this well would be converted at a later date to a backfill material transport access hole from the surface into the mine through which engineered backfill material would be introduced by gravity into the mine. This area would require a surface work area footprint larger than the typical dewatering well pad, i.e., approximately the same size as the footprint of the ventilation shaft. The surface disturbance footprint of the typical dewatering well would be less than an acre. The anticipated surface disturbance footprint of the backfill hole would be approximately 5 acres, sufficient to accommodate backfill material stockpiling and equipment. In addition, because this area would be the receiving point for imported backfill material, the access road through Section 11 into Section 10 would be needed in the one production shaft alternative. While the purpose of use and length of the haul road would differ from the proposed action, the road would still be constructed up to the location of the backfill hole. Under this alternative, the overall volume of materials mined (ore and nonore) and the configuration of underground mining tunnels and rooms within the ore-bearing Westwater Canyon Formation would not differ substantially from the proposed action. In other respects as well, the modified plan of operations alternative would be essentially the same as the proposed action. Thus, the description of the three phases in the proposed action—mine development, mine operation, and final reclamation—is applicable to this alternative as well, except that mine development and operation would be more limited to State lands on Section 16 and avoid most of the disturbance to surface lands in Cibola National Forest on Sections 9 and 10. Project-Specific Forest Plan Amendment Before either could proceed, alternative 2 and alternative 3 would both require approval by the Cibola National Forest supervisor of a project-specific amendment to the Cibola National Forest plan. The land and resource management plan, in force since 1985, guides management decisions concerning the Cibola National Forest and its resources. Among many other topics, the plan includes standards for the treatment of historic properties on lands managed by the Cibola National Forest. These standards only apply to lands and resources managed by the Cibola National Forest. With regard to the proposed project and its potential for impacts on historic properties, it is important to note the following: • Standard No. 4 states that historic properties “will be managed during the conduct of undertakings to achieve a ‘no effect’ finding in consultation with the SHPO and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.” (USFS, 1985:63) • Standard No. 5 addresses instances where resource management conflicts occur. It gives a list of conditions under which “preservation of cultural resources in place will be the preferred option.” These conditions include: Where the cultural values derive primarily from qualities other than research potential, and where those values are fully realized only when the cultural remains exist undisturbed in their original context(s) (e.g., association with significant historical persons or events, special ethnic or religious values, or unique interpretive values). (USFS, 1985:63) 52 DEIS for Roca Honda Mine, Cibola National Forest
Figure 20. Layout of surface facilities under alternative 3 (one productive shaft alternative) Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action DEIS for Roca Honda Mine, Cibola National Forest 53
Page 1 and 2:
United States Department of Agricul
Page 3 and 4:
Environmental Impact Statement for
Page 5 and 6:
Summary Roca Honda Resources, LLC (
Page 7 and 8:
• Potential effects on the charac
Page 9 and 10:
Mine Operation Summary Mine operati
Page 11 and 12:
Resource Impacts and Mitigation •
Page 13 and 14:
Resource Impacts and Mitigation num
Page 15 and 16:
Contents Chapter 1. Purpose of and
Page 17 and 18:
Contents Table 29. State of New Mex
Page 19 and 20:
Contents Table 94. Food stamp enrol
Page 21 and 22:
Contents Figure 66. Aerial image of
Page 23 and 24:
H1N1 Influenza A virus, subtype H1N
Page 25:
STD sexually transmitted disease SW
Page 28 and 29: Chapter 1. Purpose of and Need for
Page 56 and 57: Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including
Page 83 and 84: Land Use Chapter 2. Alternatives, I
Page 85 and 86: Treated Water Discharge in an Alter
Page 89 and 90: Table 3. Impact comparison matrix T
Page 91 and 92: Topic Alternative 1 - No Action Res
Page 93 and 94: Vegetation Topic Alternative 1 - No
Page 95 and 96: Topic Alternative 1 - No Action Sen
Page 97 and 98: Topic Alternative 1 - No Action Rec
Page 99 and 100: Topic Alternative 1 - No Action Cul
Page 101 and 102: Transportation Topic Alternative 1
Page 103 and 104: Topic Alternative 1 - No Action Hum
Page 105 and 106: Topic Alternative 1 - No Action Alt
Page 107 and 108: Topic Alternative 1 - No Action Leg
Page 109 and 110: Other Actions and Projects Consider
Page 113 and 114: Marquez Canyon Exploration Current
Page 115: Chapter 2. Alternatives, Including
Page 118 and 119: Chapter 3. Affected Environment and
Page 129 and 130:
Chapter 3. Affected Environment and
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141:
Figure 33. Permit area watershed an
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Environmental Consequences Surface
Page 175 and 176:
Construction Phase Effects Chapter
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Table 12. Storm water controls for
Page 181 and 182:
Best Management Practices Chapter 3
Page 183 and 184:
Effects on Sediment Transport and D
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Figure 45. Modeled hydrograph for S
Page 199 and 200:
Figure 47. Modeled hydrograph for C
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Pollutant and Averaging Time Chapte
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Climate and Greenhouse Gases Chapte
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Regulatory Review Chapter 3. Affect
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Radon-222 Emissions Chapter 3. Affe
Page 223 and 224:
Figure 48. Vegetation communities i
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
State Listed Plant Species Chapter
Page 233 and 234:
Species Status Habitat and Distribu
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Common Name (Scientific name) Black
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Common Name (Scientific Name) Gunni
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Table 39. Criteria for rating impac
Page 257 and 258:
Wildlife Mortality Chapter 3. Affec
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Table 40. Impact characterization f
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Transportation Chapter 3. Affected
Page 285 and 286:
Figure 57. Nearby recreation sites
Page 287 and 288:
Table 41. Impact characterization f
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Minority Populations Chapter 3. Aff
Page 293 and 294:
Figure 58. Distribution of minority
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
High school graduates, percent of p
Page 309 and 310:
Earnings Chapter 3. Affected Enviro
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Public Finance Chapter 3. Affected
Page 315 and 316:
providing an estimate of the “rip
Page 317 and 318:
Tax Revenue Chapter 3. Affected Env
Page 319 and 320:
Table 61. Household characteristics
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Tribal History Chapter 3. Affected
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Natural Resources Chapter 3. Affect
Page 347 and 348:
Physical APE Chapter 3. Affected En
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Agricultural Fields Chapter 3. Affe
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
• Removal of a property from its
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Impacts to Natural Resources with C
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Site No. Project Section Land Statu
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Visual Resources Affected Environme
Page 389 and 390:
Figure 64. View looking north from
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Alternative 1 Chapter 3. Affected E
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Environmental Consequences Chapter
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
New Mexico 1.11 (0.98 - 1.25) Cibol
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419 and 420:
Page 421 and 422:
Page 423 and 424:
Page 425 and 426:
Page 427 and 428:
Page 429 and 430:
Magnitude Descriptor Precedence or
Page 431 and 432:
Page 433 and 434:
Noise Chapter 3. Affected Environme
Page 435 and 436:
Page 437 and 438:
Page 439 and 440:
Page 441 and 442:
Page 443 and 444:
Page 445 and 446:
Page 447 and 448:
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
Page 453 and 454:
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Page 459 and 460:
Page 461 and 462:
Page 463 and 464:
Page 465 and 466:
Page 467 and 468:
Page 469 and 470:
Page 471 and 472:
Resource Area Cultural and Historic
Page 473:
Cumulative Effects Chapter 3. Affec
Page 476 and 477:
Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordin
Page 478 and 479:
Chapter 4. Consultation and Coordin
Page 481 and 482:
Glossary Air-Quality Control Region
Page 483 and 484:
References Cited (ACHP, 2005). Advi
Page 485 and 486:
References Cited (Basin Coordinated
Page 487 and 488:
References Cited (Brugge et al., 20
Page 489 and 490:
References Cited (Census, 2011). U.
Page 491 and 492:
References Cited (DesertUSA, 2011).
Page 493 and 494:
References Cited (Gordon, 1961). Go
Page 495 and 496:
References Cited (Jackson, 2002). J
Page 497 and 498:
References Cited (Lyford et al., 19
Page 499 and 500:
(NatureServe, 2010a). NatureSevere.
Page 501 and 502:
References Cited (NMDH, 2010c) New
Page 503 and 504:
References Cited (NRGNHA, 2011). No
Page 505 and 506:
References Cited (RHR, 2011a). Roca
Page 507 and 508:
References Cited (Stacier and Guzy,
Page 509 and 510:
References Cited (USEPA, 1975). U.S
Page 511 and 512:
References Cited (USFS, 2001). U.S.
Page 513 and 514:
References Cited (USFWS, no date).
Page 515:
References Cited (WildEarth Guardia
Page 518 and 519:
Index E economic impacts - 15, 73,
Page 520 and 521:
Index N National Environmental Poli
Page 522:
Index W waste - 18, 40, 46, 56-57,
show all

Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Roca Honda Mine

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?