U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment UT- 080 – 06 – 280 October OIL SHALE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PROJECT WHITE RIVER MINE, UINTAH COUNTY, UTAH U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Vernal Field Office 170 South 500 East Vernal, Utah 84078 Phone: 435-781-4400 Fax: 435-781-4410 United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Vernal Field Office 170 South 500 East Vernal, UT 84078 (435) 781-4400 Fax: (435) 781-4410 IN REPLY REFER TO: UT-080-06-280 September 18, 2006 Dear Reader: Enclosed for your review and comment is the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Oil Shale Research, Development And Demonstration Project at the location of the former White River Shale Oil Company Mine in Uintah County, Utah. The EA was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) directing the preparation of the document. The EA describes the three phases of work that would occur to test the ATP retort process, and its ability to extract oil from mined oil shale. The project is located approximately 30 miles south of Vernal, Utah, within Township 10 South, Range 24 East of Uintah County, Utah. The Proposed Action calls for 3 different phases of work. The first phase would consist mainly of hauling stockpiles of oil shale to a retorting demonstration plant in Canada. The second phase would consist of moving a demonstration retort processing plant to the former White River Mine area, processing stockpiles of oil shale that are on the surface, and eventually re-opening the White River Mine, and the commencement of mining of oil shale. The third phase would involve an up-scaling of the retort demonstration plant, continuation of mining, and the construction of various supporting facilities and utility corridors. The public comment period begins on September 18, 2006, and ends on October 18, 2006. The BLM Vernal Field Office invites you to comment on this document, particularly with respect to the adequacy of the analysis of environmental impacts. This document is also available on-line at http://www.blm.gov/utah/vernal/nepa.html. If you wish to submit comments on this Draft EA, we request that you make them as specific as possible (citing suggested changes, sources, or methodologies), with references to page numbers and chapters of the document. Comments that contain only opinions or preferences will not receive a formal response, but will be considered and included as part of the BLM decision-making process. Comments will be accepted by email, letter, or fax. Receipt and consideration of comments by other means cannot be guaranteed by the BLM. Please refer to EA #UT- C O N T E N T S Page 1.0 PURPOSE & NEED 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Purpose(s) of and Need for the Proposed Action 3 1.4 Project Overview 3 1.4.1 Prior Development – The White River Shale Project 5 1.4.2 Remaining On-Site Facilities 6 1.5 Conformance with BLM Land Use Plan 6 1.6 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, or Other Plans 7 1.7 Identification of Issues 11 1.7.1 Air Quality 12 1.7.2 Wastes (Hazardous and Solid) 13 1.7.3 Water Resources 14 1.7.4 Soils 15 1.7.5 Geology/ Mineral Resources/ Energy Production 15 1.7.6 Flood Plains 15 1.7.7 Wetland/Riparian Zones 16 1.7.8 Threatened/Endangered Wildlife Species 16 1.7.9 Fish and Wildlife Including Special Status Species other than USFWS Candidate or Listed Species 17 1.7.10 Threatened/Endangered Plant Species 18 1.7.11 Vegetation Including Special Status Species other that USFWS Candidate or Listed Species 19 1.7.12 Invasive, Non-native Species 20 1.7.13 Recreation 20 1.7.14 Visual Resources 20 1.7.15 Cultural Resources 20 1.7.16 Paleontological Resources 21 1.7.17 Socio-economics 21 1.7.18 Special Designation Areas 21 1.8 Summary 23 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION 24 2.1 Introduction 24 2.2 Alternative A – Oil Shale Recovery using the ATP System and Western Gas Pipeline Right-of-Way (Proposed Action) 26 2.2.1 The ATP System 26 2.2.2 Phase 1 27 2.2.3 Phase 2 28 2.2.3.1 Mine Reopening/Operation Activities 30 2.2.3.2 Retort Activities 30 2.2.4 Phase 3 33 -i- 2.2.4.1 Construction Activities 33 2.2.4.2 Retort Activities 34 2.2.4.3 Proposed Rights-of-Way (Western Gas Pipeline Route) 36 2.2.5 Applicant-Committed Environmental Control and Management Measures 36 2.3 Alternative B – Shale Oil Recovery using ATP Processor with Alternate Eastern Natural Gas Pipeline Right-of-Way 42 2.4 Alternative C – No Action 43 2.5 Alternatives Considered, but Eliminated from Further Analysis 43 2.5.1 Oil Shale Recovery Using Other Retorts 43 2.5.2 In-Situ Method 44 2.5.3 Oil Shale Retorting using 4-ton/hour ATP Processor without Mine Reopening( Implementing Phases 1 and 2 Only) 45 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 46 3.1 Introduction 46 3.2 General Setting 46 3.2.1 Climate 46 3.2.2 Geology 47 3.2.3 Surface Water Resources 47 3.2.4 Ground Water Resources 48 3.2.5 Livestock Grazing 48 3.3 Resources of Concern Brought Forward for Analysis 48 3.3.1 Air Quality 49 3.3.2 Wastes (Hazardous and Solid) 49 3.3.3 Water Resources 49 3.3.4 Soils 54 3.3.5 Geology/Mineral Resources/Energy Production 56 3.3.6 Floodplains 58 3.3.7 Wetlands/Riparian Zones 59 3.3.8 Threatened/Endangered Wildlife Species 60 3.3.9 Fish and Wildlife Including Special Status Species other than USFWS Candidate or Listed Species 60 3.3.10 Threatened/Endangered Plant Species 68 3.3.11 Vegetation Including Special Status Species other than USFWS Candidate or Listed Species 70 3.3.12 Invasive, Non-native Species 74 3.3.13 Recreation 76 3.3.14 Visual Resources 79 3.3.15 Cultural Resources 80 3.3.16 Paleontological Resources 84 3.3.17 Socio-economics 86 3.3.18 Special Designation Areas 86 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 90 4.1 Introduction 90 4.2 Direct/Indirect Impacts 90 4.2.1 Air Quality 90 -ii- 4.2.2 Wastes (Hazardous and Solid) 105 4.2.3 Water Resources 119 4.2.4 Soils 125 4.2.5 Geology/Mineral Resources/Energy Production 128 4.2.6 Flood Plains 129 4.2.7 Wetlands/Riparian Zones 130 4.2.8 Threatened/Endangered Wildlife Species 133 4.2.9 Fish and Wildlife Including Special Status Species other than FWS Candidate or Listed Endangered or Threatened Species 135 4.2.10 Threatened/Endangered Plant Species 138 4.2.11 Vegetation Including Special Status species other than USFWS Candidate or Listed Species 139 4.2.12 Invasive, Non-native Species 143 4.2.13 Recreation 147 4.2.14 Visual Resources 149 4.2.15 Cultural Resources 153 4.2.16 Paleontology Resources 157 4.2.17 Socio-Economics 159 4.2.18 Special Designation Areas 160 4.3 Cumulative Impacts Analysis 163 4.3.1 Past and Present Actions 163 4.3.2 Reasonably Foreseeable Action Scenario (RFAS) 165 4.3.3 Cumulative Impacts 166 5.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 173 5.1 Introduction 173 5.2 Agency Consultation 173 5.3 List of Preparers 173 5.4 Summary of Public Participation 176 6.0 REFERENCES 177 -iii- C O N T E N T S (continued) Page T A B L E S Table 3-1: Summary of Ground Water Budget for the Birds Nest Aquifer 53 Table 3-2: Soil Types and Properties in the Vicinity of the White River Mine Site and Proposed Corridors 55 Table 3-3: Federally Listed and Proposed (P), Endangered (E), Threatened (T), and Candidate (C) Species and Habitat in Uintah County, Utah Updated January 2006 61 Table 3-4: BLM Sensitive Wildlife Species 62 Table 3-5: Utah Department of Wildlife Resources Managed Species 64 Table 3-6: Federally Listed and Proposed (P), Endangered (E), Threatened (T), and Candidate (C) Plant Species and Habitat in Uintah County, Utah Updated January 2006 69 Table 3-7: BLM Sensitive Plant Species 73 Table 3-8: State and County Noxious Weeds and Invasive Weed Species Potentially Present in the Project Area 75 Table 3-9: VRM Classes Associated with the OSEC Project 81 Table 3-10: Previous Cultural Resource Investigation in the Vicinity of the OSEC Oil Shale Project 82 Table 3-11: Previously Recorded Sites in or near the Proposed OSEC Oil Shale Project 83 Table 3-12: Cultural Resources Located During June 2006 Class III Inventory Within or Near the Proposed Action Utility ROWs North of the White River 84 Table 3-13: Segments Eligible for National Wild and Scenic River Designation 87 Table 3-14: Location of Utility Rights-of-Way Relative to the Proposed White River ACEC 89 Table 4-1: Applicable Ambient Air Quality Standards 91 Table 4-2: PSD Class I and II Emissions Increment Standards 92 Table 4-3: Phase I Estimated Emissions 95 Table 4-4: Phase 2 Estimated Emissions 98 Table 4-5: Phase 2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 99 Table 4-6: Phase 2 Modeling Results 99 Table 4-7: Phase 3 Estimated Emissions 103 Table 4-8: Phase 3 Greenhouse Emissions 104 Table 4-9: Phase 3 Modeling Results 105 Table 4-10: Associated Vegetative Disturbance for the OSEC Utility Rights-of-way Under the Proposed Action 141 Table 4-11: Associated Vegetative Disturbance for the OSEC Utility Rights-of-way Under Alternative B 144 Table 4-12: VRM Classes Associated with the Proposed Pipeline ROW 150 Table 4-13: VRM Classes Associated with the Alternative B Pipeline Route 153 -iv- C O N T E N T S (continued) Page Table 4-14: Cultural resources located during Class III Inventories within or near the Proposed Action utility ROWs north of the White River 154 Table 4-15: Sites previously recorded south of the White River within or near areas affected by the Proposed Action 155 Table 4-16: Cultural resources located during Class III Inventories within or near the Alternative B natural gas pipeline ROW north of the White