DOCSLIB.ORG

Western Energy Company Federal Coal Lease Modification MTM 80697 Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Western Energy Company Federal Coal Lease Modification MTM 80697 Environmental Assessment U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Miles City Field Office Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-MT-C020-2016-0115-EA October 2018 Western Energy Company Federal Coal Lease Modification MTM 80697 Environmental Assessment Location: Rosebud County, Montana Applicant/Address: Western Energy Company 138 Rosebud Lane PO Box 99 Colstrip, MT 59323 Phone: (406) 748-5100 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Miles City Field Office 111 Garryowen Road Miles City, MT 59301 Phone: (406) 233-2800 Fax: (406) 233-2921 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Purpose and Need ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Proposed Action & Background ................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Existing Rosebud Mine & Federal Coal Lease ..................................................................... 1 1.1.2 Proposed Lease Modification ................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Purpose and Need ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Decision to be Made ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Conformance with Land Use Plan ................................................................................................ 4 1.4.1 Coal Screens .......................................................................................................................... 5 1.5 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, Other NEPA Documents .................................................. 6 1.5.1 Statutes and Regulations Administered by Other Agencies ................................................. 6 1.5.2 Previous NEPA Analyses ...................................................................................................... 7 1.6 Public Involvement, Consultation and Coordination .................................................................... 7 1.6.1 Scoping ................................................................................................................................. 7 1.6.2 Public Comments .................................................................................................................. 8 1.6.3 Consultation and Coordination ............................................................................................. 8 1.6.4 Resource Issues Identified for Analysis ................................................................................ 8 1.7 Resource Issues Eliminated from Further Analysis ...................................................................... 9 Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives ......................................................................................... 10 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 10 2.2 Alternatives Considered, but Eliminated .................................................................................... 10 2.3 Alternative A – Proposed Action ................................................................................................ 10 2.3.1 Lease Modification ............................................................................................................. 10 2.3.2 Foreseeable Mining Activities ............................................................................................ 10 2.4 Alternative B – No Action Alternative ....................................................................................... 15 Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ................................................. 16 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 16 3.2 General Setting ............................................................................................................................ 17 3.3 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions ................................................................... 17 3.4 Resource Issue 1 - Wildlife ......................................................................................................... 20 3.4.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 20 3.4.2 Environmental Impacts – Alternative A (Proposed Action) ............................................... 21 3.4.3 Environmental Impacts – Alternative B (No Action) ......................................................... 21 3.4.4 Mitigation and Residual Effects .......................................................................................... 22 3.4.5 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................................................................ 22 3.5 Resource Issue 2 - Air Quality .................................................................................................... 23 October 2018 i Table of Contents 3.5.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 23 3.5.2 Environmental Impacts – Alternative A (Proposed Action) ............................................... 25 3.5.3 Environmental Impacts – Alternative B (No Action) ......................................................... 30 3.5.4 Mitigation and Residual Effects .......................................................................................... 31 3.5.5 Cumulative Effects .............................................................................................................. 31 3.6 Resource Issue 3 - Climate.......................................................................................................... 34 3.6.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 35 3.6.2 Environmental Impacts – Alternative A (Proposed Action) ............................................... 35 3.6.3 Environmental Impacts – Alternative B (No Action) ......................................................... 37 3.6.4 Mitigation and Residual Effects .......................................................................................... 37 3.6.5 Cumulative Effects .............................................................................................................. 37 3.7 Resource Issue 4 - Noise ............................................................................................................. 39 3.7.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 39 3.7.2 Environmental Impacts – Alternative A (Proposed Action) ............................................... 39 3.7.3 Environmental Impacts – Alternative B (No Action) ......................................................... 40 3.7.4 Mitigation and Residual Effects .......................................................................................... 41 3.7.5 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................................................................ 41 3.8 Resource Issue 5 - Waste and Pollution ...................................................................................... 41 3.8.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 41 3.8.2 Environmental Impacts – Alternative A (Proposed Action) ............................................... 42 3.8.3 Environmental Impacts – Alternative B (No Action) ......................................................... 43 3.8.4 Mitigation and Residual Effects .......................................................................................... 43 3.8.5 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................................................................ 43 List of Preparers ....................................................................................................................................... 45 References .................................................................................................................................................. 46 October 2018 ii Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Tons of Coal that could be Permitted and Mined in Association with the Proposed Action. ....... 14 Table 2. Estimated Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Associated with Coal Production Under the Proposed Action, tons/year ......................................................................................................................... 26 Table 3. Trace Metal Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Fugitive Coal Dust Associated with Coal Production Under the Proposed Action1...................................................................................... 27 Table 4. Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions Associated with Coal Production Under the Proposed Action ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 Table 5. Global Warming Potential of Greenhouse Gasses as Carbon Dioxide Equivalents .................... 35 Table 6. Estimated Maximum Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Big Horn County Growth Policy May 2014
    2014 Big Horn County Growth Policy May 1, 2014 Prepared by Cossitt Consulting PO Box 1493, Helena, MT [email protected] RESOLUTION OF ADOPTION……………………………..………………………………….vi 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Geographic Scope ................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Authority ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Comprehensive Planning in Big Horn County ..................................................................... 1 1.5 Planning Process ................................................................................................................... 4 1.6 How This Plan is Organized ................................................................................................. 4 2. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND SETTING ............................................................... 7 3. TRENDS AND ISSUES ...................................................................................................... 10 3.1 Developments and Trends 2002-2012 ................................................................................ 10 3.2 Recent Trends/Issues .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Open-File Report 79-082 1979 COAL RESOURCE OCCURRE
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Text to accompany: Open-File Report 79-082 1979 COAL RESOURCE OCCURRENCE AND COAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL MAPS OF THE COALWOOD QUADRANGLE, POWDER RIVER COUNTY, MONTANA [Report includes 17 plates] By Colorado School of Mines Research Institute This report has not been edited for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or stratigraphic nomenclature. CONTENTS Page Introduction - -------- -~-_ ____ ___ _____ __________________ Purpose---------- ------- ___--___--_ - _ - ____ __ _ i Location-------- -- - ---- ____________ __ _____ ___ - _ j Accessibility---- ----- --- _______________ ____ ______ } Physiography----- ---- --------- ______ __ ______ ___ 2 Climate 2 Land Status 3 General geology------- ---- - ___- ___ ___ _____________ _ 3 Previous work-- - -------- _____________ ____ _____ __ 3 Stratigraphy------------------------ ------ - - __---------_- 3 Structure----- --------------- - ________ ________ _________ 4 Coal geology---------------- ----------------------- ____________ _ 4 Contact coal bed- 5 Terret coal bed------------------------------- ------------ --- 6 Broadus coal bed ----------- ----- _____ _____ ______ _ 5 Knobloch coal bed-------------- --- ----- - _____________ 7 Sawyer coal bed- ------ _________ __ __ _____ ________ 7 Mackin-Walker coal bed -------------- - --- _____ -- --- g Local coal bed-------------- -- ------- _________ ____ _ 9 Coal resources--------- ---------------------------------- ________ 9 Coal development potential- -----------------
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Mineral Resource Information for the Crow Indian Reservation, Montana
    STATUS OF MINERAL RESOURCE INFORMATION FOR THE CROW INDIAN RESERVATION, MONTANA By W. J. Mapel R. N. Roby J. C. Sarnecki Michael Sokaski B. F. Bohor George McIntyre U. S. Geological Survey U. S. Bureau of Mines Administrative report BIA-7 1975 CONTENTS SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1 PRESENT STUDY ............................................................... 2 GEOLOGY ..................................................................... 2 Setting ................................................................... 2 Rock Units ................................................................ 2 Structure.................................................................. 7 Folds............................................................... 7 Bighorn and Pryor Uplifts ........................................ 7 Subsidiary Folds................................................ 8 Faults .............................................................. 8 MINERAL RESOURCES .......................................................... 9 General ................................................................... 9 Energy ................................................................... 9 Coal ............................................................... 9 General ....................................................... 9 Coal in the Cloverly Formation ................................... 10 Coal in the Parkman Sandstone ..................................
    [Show full text]
  • 31762100136116.Pdf (8.488Mb)
    A survey of big game animals on a proposed strip mining site at Sarpy Creek in southeastern Montana by John Matthew Edwards A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fish and Wildlife Management Montana State University © Copyright by John Matthew Edwards (1977) Abstract: Field studies were conducted on a proposed strip mining site in 1975 and 1976 to obtain baseline information. The study area lies astride the western foothills of the Little Wolf Mountains. Vegetation in the region is mostly a ponderosa pine savannah with sagebrush flats to the west and north. A bottomland type occurs along Sarpy Creek and its two major tributaries: Horse Creek and East Fork Sarpy Creek. Due to the more mesic properties of these drainages, they have been put under intensive cultivation. Mule deer usage of these bottomlands increased during the summer months of the study. Two female mule deer were tagged with radio collars in late spring of 1976. Return data indicates a small sized home range during the summer. Fawn/doe counts were 75 and 59/100 does in 1975 and 1976, respectively. Antelope usage was almost exclusively in the sagebrush or field types. Antelope fawn/doe counts were 69/100 in 1975 and 39/100 in 1976. Patterns of usage indicate that any change in the water drainage systems will have a major impact on wildlife. The topography of the reclaimed land will be important in the distribution and abundance of wildlife in the area. STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO COPY In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for an advanced degree at Montana State University, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for inspec­ tion.
    [Show full text]
  • DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, Jr., Secretary
    CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS, INCLUDING STABLE-ISOTOPE RATIOS, OF SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER FROM SELECTED SOURCES IN AND NEAR EAST FORK ARMELLS CREEK BASIN, SOUTHEASTERN MONTANA, 1985 by Rodger F. Ferreira, John H. Lambing, and Robert E. Davis U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 89-4024 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT and the MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF STATE LANDS Helena, Montana 1989 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, Jr., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section 428 Federal Building Federal Center, Bldg. 810 301 S. Park, Drawer 10076 Box 25425 Helena, MT 59626-0076 Denver, CO 80225-0425 CONTENTS Page Abstract. .................................. 1 Introduction. ................................ 1 Purpose and scope ............................. 2 Description of study area ......................... 2 Physical setting. ............................ 2 Geology ................................. 4 Hydrology ................................ 5 Sample collection .............................. 5 Methods of analysis ............................. 7 Stable-isotope ratios ........................... 7 Cluster analysis. ............................. 10 Stream base-flow characteristics. ...................... 11 Chemical characteristics of surface water .................. 13 Onsite water quality and major
    [Show full text]
  • Geochronology of Clinker and Implications For
    Geological Society of America 3300 Penrose Place P.O. Box 9140 Boulder, CO 80301 (303) 447-2020 • fax 303-357-1073 www.geosociety.org Chapter 10: “Geochronology of clinker and implications for evolution of the Powder River Basin landscape, Wyoming and Montana” (Heffern et al.), in Stracher, G.B., ed., Geology of Coal Fires: Case Studies from Around the World: Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering Geology, v. XVIII. This PDF file is subject to the following conditions and restrictions: Copyright © 2007, The Geological Society of America, Inc. (GSA). All rights reserved. Copyright not claimed on content prepared wholly by U.S. government employees within scope of their employment. Individual scientists are hereby granted permission, without fees or further requests to GSA, to use a single figure, a single table, and/or a brief paragraph of text in other subsequent works and to make unlimited copies for noncommercial use in classrooms to further education and science. For any other use, contact Copyright Permissions, GSA, P.O. Box 9140, Boulder, CO 80301-9140, USA, fax 303-357-1073, [email protected]. GSA provides this and other forums for the presentation of diverse opinions and positions by scientists worldwide, regardless of their race, citizenship, gender, religion, or political viewpoint. Opinions presented in this publication do not reflect official positions of the Society. This file may not be posted on the Internet. The Geological Society of America Reviews in Engineering Geology, Volume XVIII 2007 Geochronology of clinker and implications for evolution of the Powder River Basin landscape, Wyoming and Montana Edward L.
    [Show full text]
  • An Inventory of the Bird Populations Within the Sarpy
    An inventory of the bird populations within the Sarpy Creek drainage, southeastern Montana by Jeffrey Thomas Herbert A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fish and Wildlife Management Montana State University © Copyright by Jeffrey Thomas Herbert (1977) Abstract: Segments of the bird populations within the Sarpy Creek drainage were censused during the spring and summer of 1975 and 1976. These investigations were undertaken to provide baseline population data with which to measure potential changes resulting from the development of a strip mining operation. The distribution and status of the primary game bird species were determined during the peak of breeding activity from mid-April to mid-May. A pheasant crowing count route yielded an average of 8.7 and 13.7 recorded crows per 2-minute period for the 1975 and 1976 spring estimates, respectively. The enumeration of the maximum number of male grouse attending individual breeding grounds yielded averages of 13.7 and 9.5 sharp-tailed grouse and 14.0 and 18.0 sage grouse per ground per year. The relative abundance, species composition and breeding pair densities of non-game species were determined by censusing a 15-mile road route and four 40-acre breeding pair plots. Both the road route stations and breeding pair plots were classified into gross dominant-subdominant vegetational types. An upland type, characterized as a mixed grassland, timber, deciduous thicket association, had the greatest diversity in numbers of bird species represented and the highest breeding pair densities for the 2-year period.
    [Show full text]
  • Description of Seven Powers-Yonkee Artifact Assemblages and Their Classification in Northwestern Plains Prehistory
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1993 Description of seven Powers-Yonkee artifact assemblages and their classification in northwestern Plains prehistory David M. Ferguson The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Ferguson, David M., "Description of seven Powers-Yonkee artifact assemblages and their classification in northwestern Plains prehistory" (1993). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 2009. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/2009 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. D ^ vip A FÊfî&UiûM Maureen and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY TheMontana University of Permission is granted by the author to reproduce this material in its entirety, provided that this material is used for scholarly purposes and is properly cited in published works and reports. * * Please check “Yes ” or “No ” and provide signature Yes, I grant permission No, I do not grant permission Author’s Signature D ate: Any copying for commercial purposes or financial gain may be undertaken only with the author’s explicit consent. MAL1C0PY.PM4 THE DESCRIPTION OF SEVEN POWERS-YONKEE ARTIFACT ASSEMBLAGES AND THEIR CLASSIFICATION IN NORTHWESTERN PLAINS PREHISTORY By David M. Ferguson Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts University of Montana 1993 Approved by Chair, Board of Examiners •dDean, Graduate ScKool / Date UMI Number: EP36132 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • An Evaluation of Groundwater Conditions in the Vicinity of Colstrip
    AN EVALUATION OF GROUND WATER CONDITIONS IN THE 1 COLSTRIP COAL DEPOSIT, MONTANA Kirk Waren and Angela McDannel2 Abstract. An evaluation of groundwater conditions in the vicinity of coal mines near Colstrip, Montana was conducted in 2001 as part of a cumulative hydrologic impact analysis. This analysis was required due to permitting activities associated with an expansion of the Rosebud Mine. Active coal mining operations at the Rosebud mine have expanded outward as low-cover coal is sought. Much of the remaining, unmined coal nearest to Colstrip and the adjacent coal-fired power plant is relatively high-cover coal, so mining has slowed in the interior area of the coal deposit in favor of lower-cost mining at the edges. Because the interior, high cover coal will eventually be mined according to mine plans, presently inactive pits remain open for future use. As the mine expands, additional information gained through hydrologic monitoring contributes to and increases the understanding of the groundwater system and how it is affected by mining. Overall, groundwater flow directions are similar to pre-mine conditions. Where coal has been mined out, mine pit backfilled spoil maintains the groundwater flow formerly occurring in the coal seam. However, groundwater head distribution has changed significantly in some areas, and some of these head differences may be retained in the post mining groundwater environment. As mining operations have expanded, data suggests recharge to the principle coal seams may be more localized than was previously thought, and groundwater recharge from the Little Wolf Mountains southwest and upgradient of the coal deposit is limited.
    [Show full text]