DOCSLIB.ORG

Carson Lake Geothermal Exploration Project Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Carson Lake Geothermal Exploration Project Environmental Assessment Carson Lake Geothermal Exploration Project Environmental Assessment March 2008 LEAD AGENCIES U.S. Navy Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Carson City Field Office COOPERATING AGENCY U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Lahontan Basin Area Office Carson Lake Geothermal Exploration Project Environmental Assessment March 2008 LEAD AGENCIES U.S. Navy Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Carson City Field Office COOPERATING AGENCY U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Lahontan Basin Area Office TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction and Purpose and Need...................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need ...................................................................................................... 1-5 1.3 Land Use Plan Conformance Statement...................................................................... 1-6 Chapter 2: Proposed Action and Alternatives......................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Location and Overview ................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Project Description ...................................................................................................... 2-2 2.3 Alternatives ............................................................................................................... 2-17 2.4 Applicable Statues, Regulations, and Policies ........................................................... 2-21 Chapter 3: Affected Environment............................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Air Quality.................................................................................................................... 3-3 3.3 Biological Resources ................................................................................................... 3-5 3.4 Geology and Soils ..................................................................................................... 3-15 3.5 Water Resources....................................................................................................... 3-21 3.6 Cultural Resources and Native American Religious Concerns................................... 3-26 3.7 Land Use................................................................................................................... 3-38 3.8 Wastes, Hazardous or Solid ...................................................................................... 3-40 3.9 Visual Resources ...................................................................................................... 3-41 3.10 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice.............................................................. 3-42 Chapter 4: Environmental Consequences............................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Air Quality.................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.3 Biological Resources ................................................................................................... 4-5 4.4 Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................... 4-8 4.5 Water Resources....................................................................................................... 4-10 4.6 Cultural Resources and Native American Concerns .................................................. 4-12 4.7 Land Use................................................................................................................... 4-17 4.8 Wastes, Hazardous or Solid ...................................................................................... 4-20 4.9 Visual Resources ...................................................................................................... 4-21 Carson Lake Geothermal Exploration Project TOC-i March 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.10 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice .............................................................. 4-23 4.11 Residual Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4-24 4.12 Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................... 4-25 4.13 Monitoring.................................................................................................................. 4-29 Chapter 5: Consultation and Coordination .............................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Lead Agency................................................................................................................ 5-1 5.2 Consultant Team ......................................................................................................... 5-2 5.3 Agencies/Persons Contacted....................................................................................... 5-3 Chapter 6: References............................................................................................................... 6-1 Appendix A: Biological Study Appendix B: Nevada and Federal Air Quality Standards Appendix C: Geothermal Leases Appendix D: Standard Operating Procedures from 2006 Geothermal Leasing EA List of Figures Figure 1.1-1: Land Management and Jurisdiction in the Project Area....................................... 1-3 Figure 2.1-1: Well Pad Locations and Access Roads ............................................................... 2-3 Figure 2.2-1: Typical Well Pad Site Layout............................................................................... 2-6 Figure 2.2-2: Example of Different Types of Drill Rigs .............................................................. 2-8 Figure 2.2-3: Cross-section Examples of Temperature Gradient, Slim, and Exploration Wells .............................................................................................. 2-11 Figure 2.3-1: Location of Well Pad Sites Under Alternative 1 ................................................. 2-19 Figure 3.3-1: Terrestrial Vegetation Communities in the Project Area ...................................... 3-7 Figure 3.4-1: The Carson Desert............................................................................................ 3-16 Figure 3.4-2: Regional Faulting .............................................................................................. 3-18 Figure 3.4-3: Soils in the Project Area .................................................................................... 3-19 Figure 3.5-1: Surface Waters in the Project Area ................................................................... 3-23 Figure 4.6-1: Visual Simulation of Drill Rigs Appearance from Grimes Point .......................... 4-15 List of Tables Table 2.1-1: Well Pad Locations............................................................................................... 2-2 Table 2.2-1: Ground Disturbance by Pad ................................................................................. 2-7 TOC-ii Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 2.3-1: Well Pad Locations under Alternative 1.............................................................. 2-18 Table 2.4-1: Permits and Approvals Required for Exploration Activities ................................. 2-21 Table 3.1-1: Critical Elements Pertinent to the Project ............................................................. 3-3 Table 3.2-1: 2001 EPA Emissions Report, Churchill County, Nevada ...................................... 3-5 Table 3.3-1: Potential for Occurrence of Key Great Basin Game Species ................................ 3-9 Table 3.3-2: Well Pads and Associated Habitat Type............................................................. 3-13 Table 3.3-3: Special Status Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Region................. 3-13 Table 3.4-1: Soil Types at Drill Pad Locations........................................................................ 3-21 Table 3.5-1: Groundwater Depths in Project Area .................................................................. 3-26 Table 3.5-2: Carson Desert Watershed Impaired Waters ....................................................... 3-26 Table 3.7-1: Land Ownership/Management in Churchill County............................................. 3-38 Table 3.7-2: Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Counts in the Project Vicinity ................... 3-40 Table 3.10-1: Population in the Project Area ............................................................................ 3-42 Table 3.10-2: Demographic Changes in Churchill County (1990-2000).................................... 3-43 Table 3.10-3: Earnings by Industry (in Thousands of Dollars) .................................................. 3-44 Table 3.10-4: Income and Poverty Statistics (2004) ................................................................. 3-44 Table 4.2-1: Estimated Emissions from Large
Load more

Recommended publications
  • HISTORY of the TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST a Compilation
    HISTORY OF THE TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST A Compilation Posting the Toiyabe National Forest Boundary, 1924 Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Chronology ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Bridgeport and Carson Ranger District Centennial .................................................................... 126 Forest Histories ........................................................................................................................... 127 Toiyabe National Reserve: March 1, 1907 to Present ............................................................ 127 Toquima National Forest: April 15, 1907 – July 2, 1908 ....................................................... 128 Monitor National Forest: April 15, 1907 – July 2, 1908 ........................................................ 128 Vegas National Forest: December 12, 1907 – July 2, 1908 .................................................... 128 Mount Charleston Forest Reserve: November 5, 1906 – July 2, 1908 ................................... 128 Moapa National Forest: July 2, 1908 – 1915 .......................................................................... 128 Nevada National Forest: February 10, 1909 – August 9, 1957 .............................................. 128 Ruby Mountain Forest Reserve: March 3, 1908 – June 19, 1916 ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Biogeographical Profiles of Shorebird Migration in Midcontinental North America
    U.S. Geological Survey Biological Resources Division Technical Report Series Information and Biological Science Reports ISSN 1081-292X Technology Reports ISSN 1081-2911 Papers published in this series record the significant find­ These reports are intended for the publication of book­ ings resulting from USGS/BRD-sponsored and cospon­ length-monographs; synthesis documents; compilations sored research programs. They may include extensive data of conference and workshop papers; important planning or theoretical analyses. These papers are the in-house coun­ and reference materials such as strategic plans, standard terpart to peer-reviewed journal articles, but with less strin­ operating procedures, protocols, handbooks, and manu­ gent restrictions on length, tables, or raw data, for example. als; and data compilations such as tables and bibliogra­ We encourage authors to publish their fmdings in the most phies. Papers in this series are held to the same peer-review appropriate journal possible. However, the Biological Sci­ and high quality standards as their journal counterparts. ence Reports represent an outlet in which BRD authors may publish papers that are difficult to publish elsewhere due to the formatting and length restrictions of journals. At the same time, papers in this series are held to the same peer-review and high quality standards as their journal counterparts. To purchase this report, contact the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161 (call toll free 1-800-553-684 7), or the Defense Technical Infonnation Center, 8725 Kingman Rd., Suite 0944, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6218. Biogeographical files o Shorebird Migration · Midcontinental Biological Science USGS/BRD/BSR--2000-0003 December 1 By Susan K.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbonate Deposition, Pyramid Lake Subbasin, Nevada: 2
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- ubP lished Research US Geological Survey 1995 Carbonate deposition, Pyramid Lake subbasin, Nevada: 2. Lake levels and polar jet stream positions reconstructed from radiocarbon ages and elevations of carbonates (tufas) deposited in the Lahontan basin Larry Benson U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Michaele Kashgarian Lawrence Livemore National Laboratory Meyer Rubin U.S. Geological Survey Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Part of the Geology Commons, Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons, Other Earth Sciences Commons, and the Other Environmental Sciences Commons Benson, Larry; Kashgarian, Michaele; and Rubin, Meyer, "Carbonate deposition, Pyramid Lake subbasin, Nevada: 2. Lake levels and polar jet stream positions reconstructed from radiocarbon ages and elevations of carbonates (tufas) deposited in the Lahontan basin" (1995). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 1014. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/1014 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- ubP lished Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. PhJ.d @ ELSEVIER Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology 117 (1995) 1-30 Carbonate deposition, Pyramid Lake subbasin, Nevada: 2. Lake levels and polar jet stream positions reconstructed from radiocarbon ages and elevations of carbonates (tufas) deposited in the Lahontan basin Larry Benson a, Michaele Kashgarian b, Meyer Rubin c a U.S. Geological Survey, 3215 Marine St., Boulder, CO 80303, USA b Center for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Carson River Watershed Discovery Report 2018
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 1 2 General Information .................................................................................................... 1 3 Watershed Stakeholder Coordination ......................................................................... 5 4 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................... 7 4.1 Data that can be used for Flood Risk Products ....................................................................... 8 4.1.1 Topographic Data ..................................................................................................................................... 8 4.1.2 USGS Gages .............................................................................................................................................. 9 4.2 Other Data and Information ................................................................................................ 10 4.2.1 Mitigation Plans/Status, Mitigation Projects ......................................................................................... 10 4.2.2 Coordinated Needs Mapping Study (CNMS) and National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Mapping Study Needs ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 4.2.3 Socio‐Economic Analysis .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Truckee-Carson River Basin Study
    Truckee-Carson RiverBasinStudy FinalReport JeremyPratt ClearwaterConsulting Corporation Seattle,Washington ReporttotheWesternWater PolicyReviewAdvisoryCommission Truckee-Carson River Basin Study Final Report Jeremy Pratt Clearwater Consulting Corporation Seattle, Washington Report to the Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission September 1997 The Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission Under the Western Water Policy Review Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-575, Title XXX), Congress directed the President to undertake a comprehensive review of Federal activities in the 19 Western States that directly or indirectly affect the allocation and use of water resources, whether surface or subsurface, and to submit a report of findings to the congressional committees having jurisdiction over Federal Water Programs. As directed by the statute, the President appointed the Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission. The Commission was composed of 22 members, 10 appointed by the President, including the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army, and 12 members of Congress serving ex-officio by virtue of being the chair or ranking minority member of the 6 congressional committees and subcommittees with jurisdiction over the appropriations and programs of water resources agencies. A complete roster is provided below. Commission Membership Denise Fort, Chair Albuquerque, New Mexico Appointed Members: Huali Chai Patrick O'Toole Secretary of the Interior San Jose, California Savery, Wyoming Washington, D.C. Represented by: John H. Davidson Jack Robertson Joe Sax, September 1995 - December 1996 Vermillion, South Dakota Portland, Oregon Patricia J. Beneke, December 1996 - John Echohawk Kenneth L. Salazar Secretary of the Army Boulder, Colorado Denver, Colorado Washington, DC Represented by: Janet Neuman Dr. John H.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Holocene Paleohydrology of Walker Lake and the Carson Sink in the Western Great Basin, Nevada, USA
    Quaternary Research Copyright © University of Washington. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2019. doi:10.1017/qua.2018.151 Late Holocene paleohydrology of Walker Lake and the Carson Sink in the western Great Basin, Nevada, USA Kenneth D. Adamsa*, Edward J. Rhodesb aDivision of Earth and Ecosystem Sciences, Desert Research Institute, 2215 Raggio Parkway, Reno, Nevada 89512, USA bDepartment of Geography, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S10 2TN, United Kingdom *Corresponding author e-mail address: [email protected] (RECEIVED June 8, 2018; ACCEPTED December 6, 2018) Abstract The late Holocene histories of Walker Lake and the Carson Sink were reconstructed by synthesizing existing data in both basins along with new age constraints from key sites, supplemented with paleohydrologic modeling. The repeated diversions of the Walker River to the Carson Sink and then back to Walker Lake caused Walker Lake–level fluctuations spanning ± 50 m. Low lake levels at about 1000, 750, and 300 cal yr BP are time correlative to the ages of fluvial deposits along the Walker River paleochannel, when flow was directed toward the Carson Sink. The timing and duration of large lakes in the Carson Sink were further refined using moisture-sensitive tree-ring chronologies. The largest lakes required a fourfold to fivefold increase in discharge spanning decades. Addition of Walker River flow to the Carson Sink by itself is inadequate to account for the required discharge. Instead, increases in the runoff coefficient and larger areas of the drainage basin contributing surface runoff may explain the enhanced discharge required to create these large lakes. Keywords: Carson Sink; Holocene; Lake Lahontan; Paleohydrologic modeling; Walker Lake INTRODUCTION of the Walker River, which periodically switched course from one terminal basin to the other (Russell, 1885; Benson and Paleohydrologic records from Great Basin pluvial lakes pro- Thompson, 1987a, 1987b; Benson et al., 1991; King, 1993, vide a rich source of information enhancing understanding of 1996; Adams, 2003, 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Bob Mcquivey, Retired, Nevada Department of Wildlife May 3, 2005
    SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS CARSON RIVER DRAINAGE From Bob McQuivey, Retired, Nevada Department of Wildlife May 3, 2005 INTRODUCTION - The following list of references represents all available environmental records for the Carson River drainage extracted from the following sources and submitted to Randy Pahl of the Division of Environmental Protection on May 3, 2005: 1. Extracts from the Carson River fisheries files as updated through 04/25/05. 2. Extracts from the Journals and diaries file as updated through 10/26/04. 3. Extracts from the file on dams, fish ladders and screens as updated through 04/25/05. 4. Extracts from the file on pollution as updated through 4/26/05. 5. Extracts from the file on wetlands as updated through 11/20/02. 6. Extracts from the file on rangelands as updated through 11/06/01. 7. Extracts from the file on fires as updated through 4/15/03. See Attachment A for Mr. McQuivey’s letter accompanying this information. 1844 Smith, James U. John C. Fremont's Expedition in Nevada, 1843-1844. Nevada Historical Society Papers, 1909- 1910; pages 106-152. January 18, 1844 - [Carson River] There were Indian lodges and fish-dams on the stream. There were no beaver cuttings on the river... 1848 Ricketts, Norma Baldwin – The Mormon Battalion U.S. Army of the West 1846-1848; Utah State University Press, Logan, Utah 1996. July 29, 1848 – Summit Camp, 2 miles. …They camped at the head of a level valley filled with thick brush and tree close together, with plenty of grass for the animals.
    [Show full text]
  • Explanation of Significant Differences Carson River
    SDMS DOCID# 1140552 EXPLANATION OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES CARSON RIVER MERCURY SITE Washoe, Carson City, Storey, Lyon, and Churchill Counties, Nevada NVD980813646 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 September 2013 (This page intentionally left blank) Carson River Mercury Site Explanation of Significant Differences Introduction and Statement of Purpose The purpose of this Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) for the March 30, 1995 Record of Decision (ROD) for Operable Unit 1 (OU1) of the Carson River Mercury Site (CRMS) is to address issues that have arisen as a result of the continuing implementation and management of the remedy selected in the ROD. The issues addressed by this ESD are: • The CRMS boundaries need to be better defined to assure that the remedy protects public health by focusing on areas of concern. • Cleanup levels for two of the three contaminants of concern, lead and arsenic, have changed since the ROD was signed. EPA uses an ESD to document a significant change to the ROD for a Superfund site. A significant change is defined as “a change to a component of a remedy that does not fun- damentally alter the overall cleanup approach.”1 In the case of the CRMS ROD for OU1, the overall cleanup and the goal of the remediation -- to protect public health, specifically children, from exposure to the contaminants of concern in residential settings -- is not being altered. The manner in which the remedy is implemented is being refined and improved. The site definition is being revised to be contamination-based, rather than geographic, and the cleanup levels for two of the contaminants of concern, arsenic and lead, are being updated to better protect public health.
    [Show full text]
  • ORMAT Technologies Inc. Tungsten Mountain Solar Project Churchill
    ORMAT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 2018 WILDLIFE AND VEGETATION SUPPLEMENTAL TUNGSTEN MOUNTAIN SOLAR PROJECT BASELINE SURVEY AND HABITAT ASSESSMENT ORMAT Technologies Inc. Tungsten Mountain Solar Project Churchill County, Nevada 2018 Supplemental Baseline Wildlife and Vegetation Survey and Habitat Assessment June 28, 2018 1 2018 Tungten Solar Baseline Wildlife and Vegetation Survey and Habitat Assessment_Clean ORMAT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 2018 WILDLIFE AND VEGETATION SUPPLEMENTAL TUNGSTEN MOUNTAIN SOLAR PROJECT BASELINE SURVEY AND HABITAT ASSESSMENT ORMAT Technologies Inc. Tungsten Mountain Solar Project Churchill County, Nevada 2018 Supplemental Baseline Wildlife and Vegetation Survey and Habitat Assessment June 28, 2018 Prepared for ORMAT Technologies, Inc. 6225 Neil Rd, Reno, NV 89511 Submitted to Bureau of Land Management Stillwater Field Office 5665 Morgan Mill Road Carson City, NV 89701 Fax: 775-885-6147 Phone: 775-885-6000 Prepared by Robison Wildlife Consulting, LLC 5890 Mitra Way Reno, Nevada 89523 Phone: (775) 225-5548 2 2018 Tungten Solar Baseline Wildlife and Vegetation Survey and Habitat Assessment_Clean ORMAT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 2018 WILDLIFE AND VEGETATION SUPPLEMENTAL TUNGSTEN MOUNTAIN SOLAR PROJECT BASELINE SURVEY AND HABITAT ASSESSMENT 2018 Supplemental Baseline Wildlife and Vegetation Survey and Habitat Assessment June 28, 2018 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 5 1.1 Purpose of the Desktop Habitat Assessment
    [Show full text]
  • Truckee-Carson River Basin Study: Final Report
    Western Water Policy Review Advisory River Basin Studies Commission (1997) 9-1-1997 Truckee-Carson River Basin Study: Final Report Jeremy Pratt Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/law_service_westernwater_rbs University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Recommended Citation Pratt, Jeremy. "Truckee-Carson River Basin Study: Final Report." (1997). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ law_service_westernwater_rbs/26 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission (1997) at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in River Basin Studies by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Truckee-Carson RiverBasinStudy FinalReport JeremyPratt ClearwaterConsulting Corporation Seattle,Washington ReporttotheWesternWater PolicyReviewAdvisoryCommission Truckee-Carson River Basin Study Final Report Jeremy Pratt Clearwater Consulting Corporation Seattle, Washington Report to the Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission September 1997 The Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission Under the Western Water Policy Review Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-575, Title XXX), Congress directed the President to undertake a comprehensive review of Federal activities in the 19 Western States that directly or indirectly affect the allocation and use of water resources, whether surface or subsurface, and to submit a report of findings to the congressional
    [Show full text]
  • Anglin, Ronald M. ORAL HISTORY INTERVIEW
    ORAL HISTORY INTERVIEW Ronald M. Anglin U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service October 14, 1994 Fallon, Nevada Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Interview Conducted by: Donald B. Seney Historian Bureau of Reclamation Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Oral History Program Bureau of Reclamation Anglin, Ronald M. ORAL HISTORY INTERVIEW. Transcript of tape-recorded Bureau of Reclamation Oral History Interview conducted by Donald B. Seney, Historian, Bureau of Reclamation, October 14, 1994, in the narrator's office in Fallon, Nevada. Transcription by Barbara Heginbottom Jardee. Edited by Donald B. Seney. Repository for the record copy of the interview transcript is the National Archives and Records Administration in College Park, Maryland. Interview formatted, printed, and bound 2003. i TABLE OF CONTENTS FAMILY AND EARLY LIFE ......................1 SEEKING A HIGHER EDUCATION ...............5 GOING TO WORK FOR THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE................................7 GOING INTO WILDLIFE REFUGE WORK.........15 GETTING MARRIED ...........................16 WORKING AS THE SAN LUIS REFUGE IN CALIFORNIA...........................18 DEFINING A REFUGE .........................21 THE IMPORTANCE OF HUNTERS TO THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE.....................25 WORKING IN THE SAN LUIS REFUGE...........27 GOING TO WORK IN WASHINGTON STATE......29 COMING TO THE STILLWATER REFUGE IN 1986 .......................................35 DEFINING THE GREAT BASIN..................36 Ronald M. Anglin ii LEARNING ABOUT THE PROBLEMS IN THE NEWLANDS PROJECT AREA .............38 THE SETTLEMENT II NEGOTIATIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Division of Minerals 400 W
    STATE OF NEVADA COMMISSION ON MINERAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF MINERALS 400 W. King Street, Suite 106 Carson City, Nevada 89703 (775) 684-7040 Fax (775) 684-7052 http://minerals.nv.gov/ BRIAN SANDOVAL RICHARD PERRY Governor Las Vegas Office: 2030 E. Flamingo Rd. #220, Las Vegas, NV 89119 Administrator Phone: (702) 486-4343; Fax: (702) 486-4345 COMMISSION ON MINERAL RESOURCES Bishop Manogue High School 110 Bishop Manogue Dr. Reno, NV 89511 Thursday November 5, 2015 1:00 P.M. Agenda CALL TO ORDER The Agenda for this meeting of the Commission on Mineral Resources has been properly posted for this date and time in accordance with NRS requirement. ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMENTS BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC Pursuant to N.R.S. 241, this time is devoted to comments by the public, if any, and discussion of those comments. No action may be taken upon a matter raised under this item on the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included on a successive agenda and identified as an item for possible action. All public comments will be limited to 5 minutes for each person. ACTION WILL NOT BE TAKEN I. MINUTES A. Approval of the August 27, 2015 meeting minutes FOR POSSIBLE ACTION II. NEW BUSINESS A. Update on Sage Grouse issues in Nevada as they pertain to mining. FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Allan Biaggi B. Nevada Land Withdrawals from Mineral Entry FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Presentation of historical land withdrawals by Dennis Bryan C. Discussion of the Nevada and NE California Greater Sage Grouse Land Use FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Plan Amendment and the 2014 Nevada Greater Sage Grouse Conservation Plan (State Plan).
    [Show full text]