Coal Diver Everything you wanted to know about coal, but were afraid to ask.

This is a text-only version of the document "Black Mesa - Permit Revision Application - Ch1-17 - 2004". To see the original version of the document click here.
Peabody Western Coal Company

February 12,2004

Mr. Jerry Gavette Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 1999 Broadway, Suite 3320 Denver, CO 80202-5733
RE: Black Mesa and Kayenta Mine Life-of-Mine Plan Extension

Dear Mr. Gavette: The enclosed submittal contains revision materials for the Black Mesa Mine Permanent Program Permit application and the Kayenta Mine Permanent Program Permit AZ-0001D. This application seeks regulatory authorization to extend mining an additional 20 years to ensure adequate and uninterrupted fuel supplies for both the Mohave and Navajo Generating Stations into the fbture, and to combine the Black Mesa Mine Interim Program Permit area with the Kayenta Mine Permanent Program Permit area such that both mines are covered by a single Permanent Program Permit as originally intended in the Permanent Program Permit filing submitted by Peabody in 1985. Approval of this submittal is needed by October 2005. There are five major elements to this submittal. First, it includes new mine plans extending the life of both mines. Second, the Black Mesa Mine plan reflects an increase in the rate of coal production and an increase in water use for coal transportation to accommodate anticipated increased coal demand at the Mohave Generating Station (MGS) after 2007. Third, it includes a coal washing facility needed at the Black Mesa Mine by approximately 2008 in order to meet the anticipated future coal quality requirements of MGS. Fourth, it includes new environmental baseline information collected in the future coal resource areas to augment the existing environmental baseline studies and ongoing environmental monitoring results. Finally, it includes an analysis of the probable hydrologic consequences on the Navajo aquifer of using a different source of water to supply a significant portion of the mines' operational needs. Each of these elements is discussed in further detail below. Life-of Mine Plans - Black Mesa and Kavents Mine Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC) submitted a Permanent Program Permit Application Package (PAP) in 1985 for the entire Black Mesa Complex. At that time PWCC sought to obtain authorization to mine for a period of time coincident with the coal supply agreements with the owners of MGS and the Navajo Generating Station (expiring in 2005 and 201 1, respectively). Now, as the coal supply agreement renewal dates approach, it is time to prepare both mines to supply coal to these customers when the terms of the coal supply agreements are extended.
Peabody Western Coal Company. P. 0. 650, Navajo Rt. 41 . Kayenta, Arizona 86033. Telephone (928) 677-5130. Fax (928) 677-5083 Bos

c

Jerry Gavette February 12,2004 Page 2 of 2 The existing leases with the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe entitle PWCC to mine 670 million tons of coal. With this submittal, PWCC seeks to permit all of the potentially economical surface-recoverable reserves within the existing lease boundary (approximately 803 million tons, of which about 3 17 million tons have been mined as of January 1, 2003, based on analysis of best available coal exploration data), recognizing that coal mining above and beyond the currently approved maximum tons in the leases (670 million tons) would be subject to tribal authorization. Thus, the mine plans in this submittal assume the Kayenta Mine will continue for at least fifteen years beyond the currently approved life-of-mine, and the Black Mesa Mine will continue for at least an additional 20 years. PWCC requests the Offke of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) consider all the surface-recoverable reserves and all coal resource areas in the leases when conducting its review and approval activities including the appropriate National Environmental Policy Act compliance activities. The Black Mesa Mine plan includes mining the J-23 reserves, so a transportation corridor will be needed to haul the 5-23 coal to the coal preparation area. Two alternative alignments are contained in this application: one completely on Navajo Nation surface, and one completely on Hopi Tribe surface. PWCC plans to utilize only one right-of-way, and ultimately permit and construct only one transportation corridor. Until such time as a final decision is made on which alignment is most cost effective to construct, both alignments must be evaluated in OSMRE's review of the application. PWCC recognizes that no disturbance can be authorized until the proper right-of-entry is demonstrated.

Black Mesa Mine Coal Production
The Black Mesa Mine plan assumes mining continues uninterrupted after 2005. After 2007, the mine plan reflects an increase in the annual rate of production of up to 6.2 million tons of coal, and shipments of up to approximately 5.6 million tons of cleaned coal per year. The increased production rate reflects anticipated increased coal consumption at the MGS that is attributable to the installation of additional emission control systems at the plant that may come on line by 2008. The MGS is expected to be capable of consuming approximately 5.6 million tons per year at fbll burn after the new emission controls are installed. The increased production rates are also attributable to the need to supply the MGS with a washed coal product in order to meet MGS's coal quality requirements after the new emission systems are in place. Coal production and shipments at the Black Mesa Mine in 2006 and 2007 will remain at current rates (approximately 4.6 million tons per year).

Black Mesa Mine Coal Washing; Facility
This application includes a coal washing facility at the Black Mesa Mine, needed in order to meet the fbture coal quality requirements of the MGS. The proposed coal washing facility will be located adjacent to the existing coal preparation facilities at the Black Mesa Mine, and must be h l l y operational by 2008. The capacity of the plant will slightly exceed the maximum

Peabody Western Coal Company P. 0. 650, Navajo Rt. 41 .Kayenta, Arizona 86033. Telephone (928) 677-5130. Fax (928) 677-5083 Box

Jerry Gavette February 12,2004 Page 3 of 3 anticipated coal production rate. The refuse from the plant will be disposed of on-site, in previously mined pits. Approximately 40 percent of the r e f h e is expected to be coarse containing about 7 percent moisture after dewatering using centrifuges or vibrating screens. The remaining 60 percent of the r e f h e is expected to be ultra-fine refuse that will be dewatered using belt presses and mixed with the coarse refuse prior to disposal. The dewatered moisture content of the ultra-fine refuse will be about 40 percent. Thus, PWCC is not proposing any coal refuse disposal ponds (i.e., coal slurry ponds) in this application. A detailed analysis of the probable hydrologic consequences of disposal of the coarse and fine refuse mixture is contained in this application which clearly shows that proper disposal, as designed in this proposal, in the mined out pits will not cause any adverse impacts. Environmental Baseline Information This application contains additional environmental baseline data for the future coal resource areas within the existing leasehold to augment the substantial environmental monitoring and baseline studies information that has been amassed over the past 24 years. This data includes baseline information on vegetation, wildlife, soils, and overburden collected in accordance with plans proposed by PWCC and approved by OSMRE pursuant to letters dated May 7, 2003 (vegetation) and June 25, 2003 (soils, overburden, and wildlife). All of the additional environmental information necessary to permit the potentially surface-recoverable reserve, based on currently available exploration information, is contained in this application. Black Mesa and Kaventa Mine Water Supply The OSMRE approved the 1985 Permit Application Package for the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines as it pertained to the Kayenta Mine and the Navajo Generating Station coal supply only in July 1990 (Permit AZ-OOOlD), but placed the decision as it pertained to the Black Mesa Mine and MGS coal supply on administrative delay. The administrative delay on the Permanent Program Permit decision as it pertains to the Black Mesa Mine and the MGS coal supply now approaches 14 years and is overdue. PWCC's use of the Navajo Aquifer, while authorized in the leases with the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe, remains the central issue resulting in the delay of the Black Mesa Mine portion of the Permanent Program Permit AZ-0001D. The delay continues, irrespective of the incontrovertible technical information to support the conclusion that potential hydrologic consequences of PWCC's past, present, and potential future usage of the Navajo aquifer, even at the increased level needed to meet hture operational requirements, are negligible. Nevertheless, PWCC and the owners of MGS recognize the sensitivities surrounding continued reliance on the Navajo Aquifer to supply all of the mines' water requirements. So the parties are committed to seeking an alternative source of water to supply most of the mines' requirements.

Peabody Western Coal Company. P. 0. 650, Navajo Rt. 41 Knyentm, Arizona 86033 Telephone (928) 677-5130. Fax (928) 677-5083 Box

.

.

Jerry Gavette February 12, 2004 Page 4 of 4 A potentially viable tribal water source has been identified. This source would consist of a new wellfield tapping the Coconino aquifer underlying Navajo Nation reservation lands and other privately held lands owned and controlled by the Hopi Tribe, and a distribution system ultimately supplying the mines with up to 6,000 acre feet of water per annum. The new wellfield would be located about 140 miles south of the Black Mesa leasehold, and is being evaluated for development to serve tribal municipal as well as industrial needs. Funding has been identified to confirm the viability of the water source, and develop information needed to assess the affects of using the source. The existing Navajo aquifer wellfield would continue to be used until the new source becomes available (2008, in this submittal). ARer the new source is available, the Navajo aquifer wellfield would continue to be maintained in a h l l y operational status for emergency use if, for any reason, the new source becomes unavailable. In addition, the Navajo aquifer wellfield will be needed on an ongoing basis to supply a portion of the mine potable needs and possibly a portion of its dust suppression needs as well, especially at Kayenta Mine. Thus, it is anticipated the Navajo aquifer wellfield would continue to operate, although at reduced capacity. New information is provided in revised Chapter 18, Probable Hydrologic Consequences assessing the potential affects of this new pumping regimen on the Navajo aquifer. Two new pumping scenarios are analyzed. The first scenario assumes limited maintenance pumping and a projected emergency use regimen. The second scenario is similar to the first, except an additional 1,000 acre-feet per year is included in the projection to account for all of Kayenta Mines' water for the life of the operation. Enclosed are insertion instructions for updating the PAP, the notarized verification statement, and eleven copies of the revised materials. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely,

~an&er, Mine Engineering and Reclamation Enclosures c:

B. Dunfee J. Wasik C. Scott Williams

Peabody Western Con1 Company P. 0. 650, Navajo Rt. 41 Kayentn, Arizona 86033 . Telephone (928) 677-5130. Fax (928) 677.5083 Box

VERIFICATION
I verify under oath that the information contained in this application for a permit; revision; renewal; or transfer, sales or assignments of permit rights is true and correct to the best of my information and belief.

Signature of Responsible Official Title Supervisor, Environmental Proaram

hl. IJ&
Date February 12, 2004 Gary W. Wendt 2004

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME BY This NOTARY PUBLIC
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES

Dayof

Febrhar* ,

d

4

u
~ ~ 4

A ~ r i \9 , 2

INSERTION INSTRUCTIONS
Life-of Mine (LOM) Mine Plan Permit Revision Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines February 12,2004 Page 1 of 5 Volume
1

Chapter

Description
Replace the existing index pages iv through viii with the revised pages. Replace the existing page 2 with the revised page 2. Replace existing Page 5 with revised page 5. Replace the existing title page through 11 with the revised title page through 13. In Attachment 1, replace the existing text with the revised text. In Attachment 6, replace the existing title page and text pages 1, 2,9, and 10 with the revised pages. Replace the existing title page, index pages i, ii, iii, and text pages 29, 30, and 37 through 43 with the new title page, index pages i, ii, iii, and text pages 29, 30, and 37 through 55. Replace the existing Chapter 5 with new Chapter 5. Replace the existing Chapter 6 with new Chapter 6. Replace the existing title page through 33 with the revised title page through 40. Replace the existing index page iii and text pages 1 through 4 and 79 through 94 with the revised pages. Following existing Attachment 3, insert new Attachments 4, 5 , and 6.

INSERTION INSTRUCTIONS
Life-of Mine (LOM) Mine Plan Permit Revision Black Mesa and Kaventa Mines February 12,2004 P w e 2 of 5 Volume 8 Chapter 10 Description Replace existing index page iv and existing text page 3 with the revised pages. Following existing Attachment 3, Insert new Attachments 4, 5, and 6. Replace existing text pages 28, 29,29a, and 30 with the revised pages. Replace the first, second, and last pages of the existing Index and preface (i) with the revised pages. Insert the new Attachment 25 following the existing Attachment 24. Replace the existing pages 17 through 22 with the revised pages. Replace the existing pages 5 through 8, 13, 14, 17 through 22, and 37 with the revised pages. Replace all existing Index pages with the revised pages. Replace the existing text pages 1,2, 15 through 18, and 20 through 84 with the revised pages. Place the existing page 19 (map insert) between the revised pages 22 and 24. Insert the new Attachments 2 and 3 following the existing Attachment 1. Replace the existing Index and pages 1 through 19 with the revised pages. Replace the entire existing Chapter 20 with the new Chapter 20 document.

INSERTION INSTRUCTIONS
Life-of Mine (LOM) Mine Plan Permit Revision Black Mesa and Kaventa Mines February 12,2004

Volume
11 11

Cha~ter
22 23 25

Description
Replace the existing title page through 47 with the revised title page through 5 1. Replace existing text pages 49 and 50 with the revised pages. Replace the existing text pages 7 through 9 with the revised pages 7 through 10. Insert the new Appendix A-1 after the existing A, Attachment 7. Replace the existing index page with the revised index page (Page B- 1). Insert the new title page (J-28 Mining Area - Deep Cores) and pages 5 17 through 638 after existing page 5 16. Replace the existing Drawing No. 85 100 with the revised drawing. Discard N- 10 Area Geologic Cross Section No. 1 and No. 2 Insert new Drawings J-2, J-4, J-6,543, J-9, J-10, and J-14 "Typical Geological Cross Section" Insert new Drawings J-15, J-23, J-28, N-9, and N-10 "Typical Geological Cross Section"

11A
11A 12 12 13

Appendix A Appendix B Appendix B

13
14 15

INSERTION INSTRUCTIONS
Life-of Mine (LOM) Mine Plan Permit Revision Black Mesa and Kaventa Mines

Page 4 of 5

Volume
18

Chapter

Description
Replace the existing Drawing No. 85210 (4 sheets) with the revised drawings. Remove and discard Drawing No. 85210A. Insert new drawing No. 85305C "Soil Type and Topsoil Salvage Map" for J-2lJ-15, J-4, J-6lJ-14, J-8, J-91J- 10, J-23, J-28, N-9, and N- 10 in new Volume 19a. (Use old Volume 16 Binder) Move Drawing No. 85305B sheets 7 of 15 through 15 of 15 to the front of new Volume 19a. Replace the existing Drawing No. 85324 with the revised drawing. Move Drawing No. 85360 "Silo Sheet" and "Silo South Sheet" to new Volume 20b. (create with old Volume 17 Binder). Discard old Drawing No. 8535 1 (2 sheets). Discard Drawing No. 85360, sheets NW, SW, NE and SE. Discard Drawing No. 85360A. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "5-2 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" afier Drawing No. 85324. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "J-4 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J-2. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "J-6 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J-4. Insert new Drawing No. 85351 "J-8 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J-6. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "J-9 and J-10 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J-6. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "J- 14 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J-9 and J- 10. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "J- 15 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" afier J- 14.

INSERTION INSTRUCTIONS
Life-of Mine (LOM) Mine Plan Permit Revision Black Mesa and Kaventa Mines February 12,2004 Page 5 of 5

Volume
20b

Chapter

Description
Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "J-19 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" in the front of the Volume. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "5-2 1 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J- 19. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "J-23 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J-2 1. Insert new Drawing No. 85351 "J-28 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J-23. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "N-6 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after J-28. Insert new Drawing No. 85351 "N-9 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after N-6. Insert new Drawing No. 8535 1 "N-10 Drill Hole Collar Location Map" after N-9. Insert Drawing No. 85360, sheets NW, SW, NE and SE. Replace the existing Drawing No. 85400 sheets K-6, K-7, K-8, K-9, K- 10, K- 11, L-6, L-7, L-9, L-10, L-1 1, M- 10, M- 11, and N-8 with the revised sheets. Replace the existing Drawing No. 85405, sheet 2 of 2, Drawing No. 85406, Drawing No. 85408, sheet 1 of 6, 2 of 6, 3 of 6, 5 of 6, and 6 of 6 with the revised drawings. Insert new Drawing No. 856 13A following the existing Drawing No. 85613. Replace the existing Drawing No. 85642 (4 sheets) and Drawing No. 85642A (4 sheets).

MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN BLACK MESA AND KAYENTA MINES INDEX

Chapter

Title

Volume

15 (Cont.)

Attachment 11 - Alluvial Well Lithologic Logs Attachment 12 - Alluvial Well Hydrograph Analyses Attachment 13 - Alluvial Cross Sections Using Seismic Refraction Technique Attachment 14 - Alluvial Aquifer Test Data and Results Attachment 15 - Alluvial Aquifer Water Quality Data Attachment 16 Attachment 17
-

Permanent Internal Impoundment Water Quality Water Quality of Springs

-

Attachment 18 - Plots of Single Well Recovery Tests, Navajo Well No. 1 Attachment 19 Attachment 20
-

Navajo Wells - Construction and Completion Details Navajo Wells
-

-

Lithologic Logs

Attachment 21 - Plots of Time Drawdown Tests for Navajo Wells Attachment 22
-

Navajo Wells - Drawdown History

Attachment 23 - Navajo Wells - Water Quality Attachment 24 - USGS Annual Reports - Black Mesa Monitoring Program Attachment 25 - Updated Information Since 1985 Pertinent to the Navajo Aquifer Hydrologic Monitoring Program Protection of the Hydrologic Balance Probable Hydrologic Consequences Hydrologic Reclamation Plan Reclamation Schedule Backfilling and Grading Minesoil Reconstruction Revegetation Plan Bonding

Revised 11/21/03

MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN BLACK MESA AND KAYENTA MINES INDEX

Chapter

Title

Volume

Signs, Markers, Maps, Plans, and Cross Sections Surface Stabilization Plan

11A
28

Appendix A Appendix A-1

Soils Resources of the Black Mesa Lease Area 2003 Soil Survey Report Life of Mine Coal Resource Areas Black Mesa Mining Complex Lithologic, Chemical, and Physical Analyses of Overburden for the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines Solid Waste (Non-Coal) Disposal Plan

Appendix B

Appendix C

Permit Drawings, Plans, and Cross Sections (see Chapter 25, Table 1 or the following three pages)

Appendix D

Final Interpretative Archaeological Report

Appendix E

Water, Waste, and Land (WWL) Study

Estimated Postmining Topographic Map (Drawing No. 85352)

Revised 11/21/03

MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN BLACK MESA AND KAYENTA MINES INDEX OF DRAWINGS, PLANS, AND CROSS SECTIONS Drawing Number Land Use Map Black Mesa Leases, Right-of-Ways, and Permit Area Anasazi Sites with Mining Areas Historic Sites with Mining Areas Anasazi Sites with Compliance Status, Mining Areas, and Excavated Sites J-7 Area J-19 Area J-21 Area N-6 Area N-11 Area J-2 Area J-4 Area
J-6 Area

Title

Volume

Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Typical Geologic Cross Section Mine Plan Map Order 3 and 4 Soil Survey Order 1 and 2 Soil Survey Topsoil Salvage Map Soil Type and Topsoil Salvage Map

J-8 Area J-9 Area J-10 Area J-14 Area J-15 Area J-23 Area 5-28 Area N-9 Area N-10 Area N-12 Area N-99 Area 85210 85300 85305A 85305B 85305C

Revised 11/21/03

MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN BLACK MESA AND KAYENTA MINES INDEX OF DRAWINGS, PLANS, AND CROSS SECTIONS Drawing Number Title Geobotanical Study Map Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Map Mixed Conifer Woodland Habitat Map Great Horned Owl and Red-Tailed Hawk Breeding Sites Pre-Existing Livestock and Wildlife Watering Sources Postmining Livestock and Wildlife Watering Sources Drill Hole Collar Location Map Estimated Postmining Topographic Map (1"=4001) Generic Watershed Jurisdictional Permit and Affected Lands Map Drainage Area and Facilities Map (1" = 400') MSHA Dam Location Map Sediment and Water Control Structures Map (lW=2000') Siltation
&

Volume

Impoundment Structure Data

Impoundments Hazard Map J2-A Dam J-7 Dam J16-A Dam J16-A Dam J16-L Dam J16-L Dam Remedial Plan J16-L Dam As-Built KM-FW Pond N14-D Dam N14-E Dam N14-F Dam N14-G Dam N14-H Dam Typical Road Sections Typical Intermittent or Perennial Stream Ancillary Road Crossing J-19 Haul Road J-19 Deadhead/Haul Road Spur Permanent Roads Map N7-D Sedimentation Structure Grading Plan

vii

Revised 11/21/03

MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN BLACK MESA AND KAYENTA MINES INDEX OF DRAWINGS, PLANS, AND CROSS SECTIONS Drawing Number 85460 and 85460A 85462 85466 85466A 85480 85480 85480 85480 85480 85480 85480 85482A 85484 85486 85488 85490 and 85490A 85494 85495 85600 85610 85611 85613 85613A 85620 85630 Title J2-A Dam, J-3 Airstrip 5-3 Airstrip (As-Built) J-3/N-6 Access Road Design J-3/N-6 Access As-Built Road Plans Black Mesa Mine Facilities (Sheet 1A) Kayenta N7/8 Facilities (Sheet 2A) Central Warehouse and Operations Facilities (Sheet 3A) Reclamation and J-3/N-6 Facilities (Sheets 4A,4B,4C, Kayenta N-14 Facilities (Sheet 5A) Kayenta Mine Facilities (Sheet 6A) Kayenta Transfer 22/23 and Temporary Facilities (Sheet 7A) N-11 Truck Dump/Facilities Site Plan N-11 Haul Road Spurs J-19 R46-R60 Deadhead Road J-19 West: South Primary Road Design Concrete Ford of Yellow Water Canyon Wash Proposed N-11 Extension North Primary Road Design Proposed N-11 Extension South Primary Road Design Historical Environmental Monitoring Sites Wepo Aquifer Water Level Contours 2003 Wepo Aquifer Water Level Contours Overburden and Impact Core Location Map Overburden and Impact Core Location Map (2003 Core Data) Alluvial Aquifer Water Level Contours Regional and Local USGS Hydrological Monitoring Sites Local USGS Hydrological Monitoring Sites Periodic Wet Reaches Map Stream Buffer Zone Map At-Grade Road Crossing/Stream Buffer Zone Map 5-3 Landfill Grading Plan Moenkopi SEDIMOT I1 Subwatershed Boundaries Coal Mine SEDIMOT I1 Subwatershed Boundaries Coal Mine Wash SEDIMOT I1 Postmining Watershed Boundaries 7, 8, & 9
&

Volume

4D)

viii

Revised 11/21/03

CHAPTER 2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE MINING LOCATION AND ACTIVITIES Location

The Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines are located on the Black Mesa in Navajo County, Arizona on lands leased from the Navajo and Hopi Tribes. Northeastern Arizona covering approximately The Black Mesa is a massive highland in acres. Along its northern

2.1 million

boundary, the Mesa rises abruptly in a 1,200 to 2,000-foot high uneven wall then descends gently downward in a plane of rolling hills to the Little Colorado River. elevation at the northern rim of the Mesa is approximately 8,200 feet. The maximum

Near the northern

rim and in some of the canyons there are fairly dense stands of pinyon and juniper trees, a characteristic from which the Mesa has derived its name. rolling country covered primarily by a sagebrush shrubland. Most of the Mesa, however, is The Peabody leasehold covers

64,858 acres on the northern part of the Mesa just south of Kayenta, Arizona (Figure 1) with and additional Grant of Easement Right-of-way for 360.94 acres.

The areas on the Black Mesa leased by Peabody consist of approximately 24,858 acres of land where the surface and mineral interests are held exclusively by the Navajo Tribe (i.e. "N" areas) and approximately 40,000 acres of land in the former Navajo-Hopi Joint Use Surface Lease Area (i.e., "J" areas). The tribes have joint and equal interests in

the minerals, which underlie the former Joint Use Area; however, the surface has been partitioned. That portion of the leasehold, which lies in the former Joint Use Area,

consists of approximately 33,863 acres partitioned to the Navajo Nation and 6,137 acres partitioned to the Hopi Tribe (Figure 2). No surface coal mining is planned in that

portion of the leasehold, which lies within the Hopi Reservation.

Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC) also obtained a Grant of Easement in August 1996 for various facilities at Kayenta and Black Mesa Mines. 77.49 acres were roads, overland included conveyor For Kayenta Mine, two parcels conveyor 69 kv

representing maintenance

for the overland transfer on "B"

conveyor, overland and "C" facilities,

transmission line, seven sedimentation ponds, and access roads to pond areas.

For Black

Mesa Mine, two parcels containing 283.45 acres were included for haul roads (Navajo Route 41), 69 kV transmission line, water and telephone lines, utilities access roads, two sedimentation ponds, rock borrow area, and an access road to Navajo Water Well #4.

Revised 01/25/02

The Kayenta Mine is located on the Navajo lease area and the east portion of the former Joint Use Area (Figure 3). Coal produced at the Kayenta Mine is transported

approximately 83 miles via an electric railroad to the Navajo Generating Station near Page, Arizona (Figure 4). The Navajo Generating Station is operated by the Salt River

Project and consumes seven to eight million tons of coal per year.

The Black Mesa Mine consists of the west side of the former Joint Use Area and a small portion of the exclusive Navajo lease area (Figure 3). Mesa Mine is transported via The coal produced at the Black

slurry pipeline approximately 273 miles to the Mohave The Mohave Generating Station

Generating Station near Bullhead City, Arizona (Figure 4).

is operated by the Southern California Edison Company and consumes up to six million tons of coal annually.

Mining Activities

Coal

on

the Black Mesa

is mined by conventional strip mining methods.

Overburden

material covering the coal is removed primarily by draglines using a furrowing technique. The overburden is removed by digging a furrow or elongated pit to the first coal seam. The overburden is placed alongside the excavation. The coal is removed by shovels or facilities. excavation

front-end loaders and transported by haulage trucks to coal preparation Material between coal seams is removed by draglines, shovels, or other

equipment and placed within or alongside the excavation or pit.

When all the coal is This process

removed, overburden from the next pit is placed in the parallel, open pit.

is continued until all the coal has been removed from the given coal resource area (Figure 5) .

At the preparation facilities, coal is dumped by the haulage trucks into hoppers.

The

coal is then sized and stored or shipped, depending on customer demand or coal quality requirements. There are three coal preparation areas at the Kayenta Mine (Figure 6 ) . up to and one

preparation facility at the Black Mesa Mine sizing, the coal is transported by

At the Kayenta Mine, after from the preparation

conveyor

15 miles

facilities over the northwest face of the Mesa to storage silos located on the Black Mesa and Lake Powell Railroad. Coal is loaded from the silos into unit trains for transport At the Black Mesa Mine, prepared coal is transported
-

to the Navajo Generating Station.

by conveyor a short distance to the Black Mesa Pipeline Company's slurry preparation plant. Station.
2

After processing, the coal is shipped in slurry form to the Mohave Generating

Revised 11/15/03

CHAPTER 3

LEGAL, FINANCIAL, AND COMPLIANCE INFORMATION

Revised 11/21/03

CHAPTER 3 INDEX Page Applicant/Operator Information Applicant and Operator Surface and Mineral Owners-Leasehold Property Owners-Contiguous Property Mine Safety and Health Administration Numbers Right of Entry Information Liability Insurance Permit Term and Area Certification Permit History Information Required Pursuant to 30CFR750.12(d)(2) Employment, Population, Revenues, and Goods Scenic and Aesthetic Resources Cultural and Historic Resources Significant, Threatened, and Endangered Wildlife and Vegetation Species Air Quality Bond Riders Proof of Publication Business Authorization 1 1 1 1
2 2
4
4

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3.

Black Mesa Leases Existing Permit Boundaries and Leases Permit, Lease, and Coal Resource Area Boundaries LIST OF TABLES
Page

Table

1.

Permit History

13

Revised 11/21/03

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS (CONT.)

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 Identification of Interests and Compliance Information Ownership and Control Compliance Information Resident Agent Identification AML Fee Payment Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Attachment 2. Attachment 3. Peabody Western Coal Company Directors and Officers Organizational Chart for the PEC Family of Companies AVS Certification Document for the PEC Family of Companies Current, Previous, and Pending Coal Mining Permits Compliance Information Description of Leased Lands Description of Conveyor and Coal Loadout Facility Right-of-way and Easement and Assignment from PCC to PWCC Attachment 3A. Description of Conveyor Right-of-way and Easement Grant Issued During August 1996 Attachment 3b. Description of Road, Utility, Pond, and Rock Borrow Area Facilities Rightof-Way and Easement Grant Issued During August 1996 Attachment 4. Description of Powerline Right-of-way and Assignment from PCC to PWCC

Attachment 4a. Revocable Use Permit for Environmental Monitoring Stations Attachment 5. Attachment 6. Attachment 7. Attachment 8. Attachment 9. Certificate of Liability Insurance Description of Life-of-Mine Permit Area Certification Photographs Lease Assignments

Attachment 10. Bond Riders Attachment 11. Proof of Publications Attachment 12. Business Authorization Certificate

Revised 11/21/03

CHAPTER 3 LEGAL, FINANCIAL, AND COMPLIANCE INFORMATION

Applicant/Operator Information

See Attachments 1 and 12 for identification of interests and compliance information pursuant to 30 CFR 778.11, 778.12, and 778.14.

Applicant and Operator Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.11(b)

C. Scott Williams, Manager Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines Peabody Western Coal Company P. 0 . Box 650, Navajo Route 41 Kayenta, Arizona 86033 (928) 677-3201

Surface and Mineral Owners - Leasehold Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.13(a)

The names and addresses of the owners of the surface and mineral property to be mined are: The Navajo Tribe P.O. Box 308 Window Rock, Arizona 86515 (Surface and Minerals)

The Hopi Tribe P.O. Box 123 Kykotsmovi, Arizona 86039 (Minerals)

Property Owners

-

Contiguous Property Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.13(b)

The names and addresses of the owners of property contiguous to the proposed permit area are: The Navajo Nation P.O. Box 308 Window Rock, Arizona 86515 The Hopi Tribe P.O. Box 123 Kykotsmovi, Arizona 86039

Revised 11/21/03

PWCC does not hold any current interests on options nor does PWCC hold any pending bids for lands contiguous to the existing permit area pursuant to 30 CFR 778.13(c).

Mine Safety and Health Administration Numbers Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.13(d) Black Mesa Mine Kayenta Mine 5-7 Dam J-2A Dam Kayenta Fresh Water Pond N-14D Dam N-14E Dam N-14F Dam N-14G Dam N-14H Dam J-16A Dam J-16L Dam J7- Jr Dam Right of Entry Information Pursuant to 30 CRF 778.15

Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC) operates the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines on lands leased from the Navajo and Hopi Tribes. Three leases have been signed (two with the Navajo and one

with the Hopi) which provide for mining activities on three separate but contiguous tracts of land.

The original lessee was Sentry Royalty Company, a Nevada Corporation (hereinafter "Sentry"). Sentry was a wholly owned subsidiary of Peabody Coal Company, an Illinois Corporation. Peabody Coal Company, an Illinois Corporation, was a predecessor of Peabody Coal Company, a Delaware Corporation. Sentry assigned the leases to Peabody Coal Company, an Illinois Peabody Coal

Corporation, February 5, 1968, prior to merging with the Illinois Corporation.

Company, an Illinois Corporation, assigned the leases to Peabody Coal Company, a Delaware Corporation, February 8, 1968, prior to re-incorporation into the Delaware Corporation. is successor in interest to Peabody (see Attachment 9). PWCC

The transfers and assignments were

made with the consent and approval of the Navajo and Hopi Tribes and the Secretary of Interior.

Revised 11/21/03

S e n t r y o b t a i n e d t h e f i r s t c o a l mining l e a s e ,

F e b r u a r y 1, 1 9 6 4 , f o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 4 , 8 5 8 a c r e s The 1964 l e a s e a r e a i s w i t h i n t h e The Navajo T r i b e

o f N a v a j o R e s e r v a t i o n l a n d ( L e a s e Number 14-20-0603-8580).

a r e a g r a n t e d t o t h e N a v a j o T r i b e u n d e r t h e E x e c u t i v e O r d e r o f May 1 7 , 1 8 8 4 . h a s 1 0 0 p e r c e n t s u r f a c e and m i n e r a l i n t e r e s t i n t h i s a r e a . On J u n e 6 ,

1 9 6 6 , S e n t r y o b t a i n e d a c o a l m i n i n g l e a s e f o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y 40,000 a c r e s o f l a n d

i n t h e J o i n t M i n e r a l Use Area from t h e Navajo T r i b e ( L e a s e Number 14-20-0603-9910).

Because o f

the

joint

mineral

i n t e r e s t s of

t h e two t r i b e s

i n t h e J o i n t M i n e r a l Use Area,

Sentry obtained a separate lease, Number 1 4 - 2 0 - 0 4 5 0 - 5 7 4 3 ) . Leases Surface are contiguous on

J u n e 6, 1 9 6 6 , f o r t h e same a r e a f r o m t h e Hopi T r i b e ( L e a s e

The l e a s e a r e a f o r t h e 1964 l e a s e and t h e J o i n t M i n e r a l Use A r e a (Figure 6,
1).

Copies of

the

l e a s e s were provided t o t h e O f f i c e of

Mining

January

1981 a s

Appendices

11,

12

and

13,

Volume

5,

Mining

and

R e c l a m a t i o n P l a n f o r t h e B l a c k Mesa and Kayenta Mines.

The l e a s e s p r o v i d e t h a t P C may p r o s p e c t , WC products, has including o t h e r minerals, t o construct

mine a n d s t r i p l e a s e d l a n d s f o r c o a l and k i n d r e d a s may b e f o u n d . Peabody a l s o make

e x c e p t f o r o i l and g a s , pipelines, plants,

the right

buildings,

t a n k s and o t h e r s t r u c t u r e s ; roads, spur tracks,

excavations,

openings,

stockpiles,

dumps,

ditches, drains,

transmission

l i n e s a n d o t h e r i m p r o v e m e n t s ; and t o p l a c e m a c h i n e r y and o t h e r e q u i p m e n t and f i x t u r e s and d o all other things upon leased lands that may b e necessary in the efficient operation of

mining.

P C may o c c u p y t h a t p o r t i o n o f t h e l e a s e d l a n d s a s i s n e c e s s a r y t o c a r r y on m i n i n g WC i n c l u d i n g t h e r i g h t o f i n g r e s s and e g r e s s and may d e v e l o p and u t i l i z e w a t e r f o r A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e l a n d o n t h e B l a c k Mesa l e a s e d t o P C may b e WC

operations

t h e mining o p e r a t i o n s . found i n A t t a c h m e n t 2 .

On December 1 0 , 1 9 6 9 , t h e S e c r e t a r y o f I n t e r i o r w i t h t h e c o n s e n t o f t h e Navajo T r i b e g r a n t e d t h e Navajo P r o j e c t p a r t i c i p a n t s a right-of-way e a s e m e n t f o r t h e o v e r l a n d c o n v e y o r and c o a l On December 1 9 , 1972 t h e N a v a j o T r i b a l and

l o a d i n g s i t e l o c a t e d o u t s i d e t h e c o a l mining l e a s e s .

C o u n s e l A d v i s o r y Committee p a s s e d a r e s o l u t i o n a p p r o v i n g t h e g r a n t i n g o f t h e r i g h t - o f - w a y e a s e m e n t t o Peabody Coal Company. loadout f a c i l i t y right-of-way

A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e l a n d s w i t h i n t h e c o n v e y o r and c o a l P C is successor i n interest t o WC

may b e found i n A t t a c h m e n t 3 .

Peabody C o a l Company ( s e e A t t a c h m e n t 3 ) .

On

J u n e 24,

1994 P C s u b m i t t e d WC

a Mine S u p p o r t F a c i l i t i e s Right-of-way

Application

t o the

Bureau o f I n d i a n A f f a i r s and Navajo N a t i o n f o r f o u r p a r c e l s o f Navajo T r i b a l l a n d s c o n t i g u o u s t o two e x i s t i n g c o a l - m i n i n g l e a s e s l o c a t e d o n t h e B l a c k Mesa, Navajo County, A r i z o n a . The

3

Revised 11/21/03

proposed right-of-way roads, support easement

areas

provide

access

for

utilities, and

haul

roads,

maintenance

e x i s t i n g and a d d i t i o n a l the for Black these Mesa and

sedimentation c o n t r o l ponds, Kayenta Mines. The

a r o c k borrow a r e a which application and and grant of of

right-of-way Navajo

two p a r c e l s w e r e

approved b y t h e

Nation

Bureau

Indian

A f f a i r s on A u g u s t 1 9 a n d 28,

1996, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s e approved r i g h t - o f -

e n t r y d o c u m e n t s , a s r e q u i r e d b y 30 CFR 7 7 8 . 1 5 ( a ) , i s p r e s e n t e d i n A t t a c h m e n t s 3 a a n d 3 b .

On S e p t e m b e r 7 ,

1984 t h e Bureau o f I n d i a n A f f a i r s g r a n t e d Peabody a r i g h t - o f - w a y

f o r a 69 KV The

e l e c t r i c a l t r a n s m i s s i o n l i n e b e t w e e n T r a c k s 1 and 2 o f t h e J o i n t M i n e r a l A r e a l e a s e s . location of Peabody C o a l t h e right-of-way Company

i s shown i n A t t a c h m e n t
4). The

4.

P C is successor i n i n t e r e s t t o WC use permit for all environmental

( s e e Attachment

revocable

monitoring s i t e s is p r e s e n t e d i n Attachment 4a.

L i a b i l i t y I n s u r a n c e P u r s u a n t t o 30 CRF 7 7 8 . 1 8 A c e r t i f i c a t e o f l i a b i l i t y i n s u r a n c e may b e f o u n d a s A t t a c h m e n t 5

P e r m i t Term a n d A r e a

The B l a c k Mesa and K a y e n t a Mines a r e s u r f a c e c o a l m i n e s o p e r a t e d p u r s u a n t t o P e r m i t s AZ-0001 and AZ-0001D ( F i g u r e 2 a n d Drawings 85110 and 8 5 3 6 0 ) i s s u e d b y t h e O f f i c e o f S u r f a c e M i n i n g , P e r m i t AZ-0002A. P e r m i t AZ-0001 w a s i s s u e d o n J a n u a r y 29,

and r e c l a m a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s o f

1 9 8 2 , a n d P e r m i t AZ-0002A was i s s u e d on December 2 1 , 1 9 8 4 . K a y e n t a Mine was i s s u e d o n J u l y 6, renewed twice; first on July 6, 1990. 1995

The p e r m a n e n t p r o g r a m p e r m i t f o r a n d was

The p e r m a n e n t p r o g r a m p e r m i t i s AZ-0001D and s u b s e q u e n t l y on July 6, 2000.

Information The p r o p o s e d

p e r t a i n i n g t o p r o d u c t i o n and d i s t u r b e d l a n d s may b e f o u n d i n C h a p t e r s 5 a n d 2 1 . life-of-mine

p e r m i t a r e a i s shown i n F i g u r e 3 a n d i n more d e t a i l o n Drawings 85210 and 85360.

A m e t e s and b o u n d s d e s c r i p t i o n f o r t h e p r o p o s e d p e r m i t a r e a may b e f o u n d i n A t t a c h m e n t 6 .

T h i s a p p l i c a t i o n s e e k s r e g u l a t o r y a u t h o r i z a t i o n t o extend mining an a d d i t i o n a l 20 y e a r s t o e n s u r e a d e q u a t e and u n i n t e r r u p t e d f u e l s u p p l i e s f o r b o t h t h e Mohave a n d N a v a j o G e n e r a t i n g

S t a t i o n s i n t o t h e f u t u r e , a n d t o combine t h e B l a c k Mesa Mine I n t e r i m Program P e r m i t a r e a w i t h t h e Kayenta Mine Permanent Program P e r m i t a r e a s u c h t h a t b o t h m i n e s a r e c o v e r e d b y a s i n g l e Permanent Program P e r m i t a s o r i g i n a l l y i n t e n d e d i n t h e 1 9 8 5 P e r m a n e n t Program P e r m i t f i l i n g .

Revised 11/21/03

Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC) submitted a Permanent Program Permit Application Package (PAP) in 1985 for the entire Black Mesa Complex. At that time PWCC sought to obtain

authorization to mine for a period of time coincident with the coal supply agreements with the owners of MGS and the Navajo Generating Station (2005 and 2011, respectively). Now, as

the coal supply agreement renewal dates approach, it is time to prepare both mines to supply coal to these customers when the terms of the coal supply agreements are extended.

The existing leases with the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe entitle PWCC to mine 670 million tons of coal. With this submittal, PWCC seeks to permit all of the potentially

economical surface-recoverable reserves within the existing lease boundary (approximately 803 million tons, of which about 317 million tons have been mined as of January 1, 2003, based on analysis of best available coal exploration data), recognizing that coal mining above and beyond the currently approved maximum tons in the leases (670 million tons) would be subject to tribal authorization. Thus, the mine plans in this submittal assume that the Kayenta Mine will continue for at least fifteen years beyond the currently approved life-of-mine, and that the Black Mesa Mine will continue for at least an additional 20 years. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement PWCC requests the

(OSMRE) consider all the surface-

recoverable reserves and all coal resource areas in the leases when conducting its review and approval activities including the appropriate National Environmental Policy Act compliance activities.

The Black Mesa Mine plan includes mininq the J-23 reserves, so a transportation corridor will be needed to haul the 5-23 coal to the coal preparation area. contained in this application: on Hopi Tribe surface. Two alternative alignments are

one completely on Navajo Nation surface, and one completely

PWCC plans to acquire only one right-of-way, and ultimately permit Until such time as a final decision is made on which alignment review of

and build only one haul road.

is most cost effective to construct, both alignments must be evaluated in OSMRE's the application.

PWCC recognizes that no disturbance can be authorized until the proper

right-of-entry is demonstrated.

Revised 11/21/03

Certification

Certification of information contained in this document as required by 30 CFR 777.11(c) may be found in Attachment 7. A copy of the fully executed OSMRE Application for Permit Transfer

form is also included in Attachment 7.

Permit History

A history of mining permits issued to Peabody and its successor in interest for the Black
Mesa operations may be found in Table 1.

Information Required Pursuant to 30 CFR 750.12(d)(2)

Employment, Population, Revenues and Goods. operation which began producing coal in 1970.

The Black Mesa mining complex is an existing The coal mined at the complex is dedicated to

meeting the fuel supply requirements of the Mohave and Navajo Electric Generating Stations. The mining plan contained in this document does not represent any change in production levels, employment or coal processing and handling facilities. effects of the mining operation on economic, social, Any significant cumulative government, land use,

community,

transportation and cultural conditions should have already manifested

themselves, as the

mining operations have remained relatively unchanged since the mid to late 1970's. Peabody has not experienced and does not expect to experience any significant problems regarding acquisition of goods and services to support the mining and reclamation operations. Major

changes in the goods and services needed to support these activities are not anticipated.

Revised 11/21/03

Scenic and Aesthetic Resources.

The site of the Black Mesa mining complex covers remote, The surface is

rugged highlands ranging in elevation from approximately 6,200 to 7,200 feet.

highly eroded and partially covered by sagebrush shrublands and pinyon-juniper woodlands.

The vegetation is spotty and irregular. seasonally from light green to brown. dark green. slopes.

Colors range widely.

Grasses change in color

The shrublands are blue-green, and the woodlands are

The woodlands extend from higher elevations in bands along ridge tops and

A seasonal progression reflected by the flowering aspect of scattered individuals of annual and perennial plants occurs in the woodlands. During the spring, the aspect is dominated by In summer, mat penstemon, globe mallow The apsect in

red-flowered penstemons and yellow-flowered mustards.

and sky rocket color these woodlands with their blue, orange and red flowers. the fall is dominated by many yellow-flowered composites.

The shrublands also experience

significant yellow coloring when snakeweed and rabbitbrush blossom.

Bare soil and rocks lie interspersed throughout the mining site.

Soil colors range from

light tan to dark brown with significant occurrences of redish tones due to porcellanite or clinker shale.

The area contains few structures: buildings.

scattered hogans

(dwellings), corrals and other out-

Other manmade structures include fences and unimproved roads.

The vistas and features are typical of western, high desert locations.

The mining complex is

nestled below the rim of Black Mesa in a structural bowl, and cannot be seen even from a few miles away in most directions. Toward the north, east, and southeast, scenic vistas are Toward the west and southwest, scenic country. From the actual Mesa However, at The mining

limited to the uplands that form the Mesa escarpment. vistas include the San Francisco Peaks and

Hopi Mesa

escarpment, several scenic mountain ranges, plateaus and valleys can be seen. these points, the topography precludes visual identification of the mine site.

complex is not located on a major transportation route so that it goes unnoticed to highway travelers except for the overland conveyor and rail load-out facility that blend in well with the base of the Mesa.

Revised 11/21/03

The mining activities are spread out over the approximately 65,000-acre leasehold because of the nature of the coal reserves. Except from a few isolated vantage points, it is impossible Due to the

to see or determine the extent of the entire operation from a single location.

remote location, there is little evidence of commercial development except in the immediate vicinity of pits or preparation facilities. Even though mine equipment, support facilities,

coal processing facilities, overland conveyors, a rail load-out facility, spoil piles, and haul roads have replaced native vegetation, it is possible to drive for 20 minutes at a time, from one mining area to another, with little evidence of land disturbing activities due to the dispersed nature of the operation and the irregular terrain. high noise areas. There are no concentrated,

Only the sound of an occasional blast travels more than a mile or two.

The lines and forms of the mined land and spoil piles resemble the bluffs and breaks of surrounding un-mined land. The color and textures of the unearthed overburden and pits blend The

into the natural colors of the rocks and soils but d o contrast with vegetation.

buildings and facilities also contrast with the surrounding rangeland but due to the unconcentrated construction pattern are like the scattered dwellings and outbuildings native to the area.

The recently created postmining landscape blends nicely with the existing terrain with regard to slope but the grasslands contrast with the shrublands and woodlands that are displaced. Initially, these grasslands are less diverse than the native vegetation; however, the gradual establishment of shrubs and native grasses used in the reclamation process and even trees will, in time, reduce the contrast with un-mined lands.

In summary, the aesthetic impacts of the mining complex are minor during mining and will not be significant after reclamation. The postmining landscape will have gentler topography, After several

fewer rock outcrops and sharp breaks, and a different vegetal character.

decades, however, the landscape and vegetation will blend in well with the surrounding unmined lands (see photographs in Attachment 8). The resulting mosaic of subtly contrasting

form and color, caused in part by the irregular shape of the original coalfields, will achieve a diverse and aesthetically pleasing visual aspect.

Cultural and Historic Resources.

Information pertaining to cultural and historical sites and

compliance with Federal laws aimed at protecting these resources may be found in Chapter 13.

Revised 11/21/03

Significant, Threatened,

and

Endangered

Wildlife

and

Vegetation

Species.

Information

regarding the location and condition of important habitats of selected indicator species, bald and golden eagles, threatened and endangered wildlife species, and critical habitats may be found in Chapters 9 and 10.

Air Quality.

A discussion of air quality has been included in this document as Chapter 12.

Bond Riders

General-purpose reclamation performance bond riders that name PWCC as principal are contained in Attachment 10. Included are Surety Company Bond Numbers 259737, 348404, 4144114, 6197012, Detailed reclamation liability cost estimates are

9264222, 9264224, 9264225, and 9264241. presented in Chapter 24.

Proof of Publication

Proof of publication of notification of the filing of applications to transfer mining permits from Peabody Coal Company to PWCC is contained in Attachment 11. Also included are

affidavits of publication for the 1995 and 2000 permit renewal applications.

Business Authorization

Certification by the State of Arizona authorizing PWCC to conduct business in Arizona is contained in Attachment 12.

Revised 11/21/03

Navajo Surface and Minerals
- 1882Exeq~tiveOrder ~ i n e I

- - - - - - m

I - 1' -

Navajo Surface q ~ o i n Minerals t

i

!

BLACKMESALEASES PEABODY WESTERN COAL COMPANY

TABLE 1 Permit History Pre-SMCRA Mining and Reclamation Plans (U.S. Geological Survey)
Mining Area(s) J- 3 5-27 J-1, N-6, N-5 N-1 N-7 N-2, N-10 5-13, 5-14 5-5, J-6, J-11, 5-12 5-7 Submittal Date 02/16/70 04/01/70 06/20/72 01/16/73 10/10/73 10/16/73 10/18/73 01/22/74 05/12/75 Approval Date 03/25/70 04/21/70 07/13/72 01/03/74 07/16/74 07/16/74 07/16/74 07/16/74 07/21/75

Post-SMCRA Permit Activities

Action SMCRA Adopted Interim Program Mining and Reclamation Plan to USGS N-7/8 Mining Plan Modification (USGS) Leg 25, Overland Conveyor, Kayenta Mine Approved (OSM) Mining and Reclamation Plan to OSM Phase I Overland Conveyor and Preparation Facilities, Kayenta Mine Approved (OSM) Interim Operating Plan (OSM) Permit AZ-0001 (OSM) Phase I1 Overland Conveyor and Preparation Facilities, Kayenta Mine Approved (OSM) Permit AZ-0002 (OSM) Permanent Program Permit AZ-0002A (OSM) Permanent Program Mining and Reclamation Plan to OSM Permanent Program Permit AZ-0001C (OSMI Permanent Program Permit AZ-0001D (OSM) Renewals

Date 08/77 12/77 09/79 09/80 01/81 01/81

Revised 11/21/03

ATTACHMENT 1 IDENTIFICATION OF INTERESTS AND COMPLIANCE INFORMATION

Revised 11/21/03

ATTACHMENT 1 Identification of Interests and Compliance Information

Ownership and Control Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC) is owned by Peabody Coal Company (PCC), which in turn is owned by Interior Holdings Corporation (IHC). Peabody Holding Company, Inc. (PHCI) owns IHC. PHCI is owned by Peabody Energy Corporation (PEC). Ownership and control information for the applicant and operator, PWCC, pursuant to 30 CFR 778.11(c) and (e) is given in attached Exhibit A. PEC, a Delaware corporation, owns directly and indirectly 46 coal related companies in the United States. The organizational chart for these companies is presented in Exhibit B.

Information on PEC and its related operating companies required by 30 CFR 778.9(a) is routinely provided to the Office of Surface Mining, Applicator Violator System (AVS) office by Mr. Ronald L. Cross, an employee of PHCI as described on the certificate in Exhibit C. Compliance Information Current, previous, and pending mining permits obtained by PWCC and its principals within the five-year period preceding January 7, 2004 pursuant to 30 CFR 778.12(a) and (b) are listed in Exhibit D. Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.12(c), PWCC has not owned or controlled any other surface coal mining operations within the five-year period preceding January 7, 2004. Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.14(c), Exhibit E contains a list of Notices of Violations received by PWCC in connection with any surface coal mining and reclamation operations for the period January 7, 2001 to January 7, 2004. PWCC does not have any outstanding Notices of Violations for which the abatement period has not yet expired. Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.14(a) and (b), PWCC has not had a State or Federal mining permit

revoked nor forfeited a performance bond or similar security deposited in lieu of bond within the five-year period preceding January 7, 2004.

Revised 11/21/03

Resident Agent Identification Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.11(b) 12)

C.T. Corporation P.O. Box 25089 Phoenix, AZ 85002

(602) 277-4792 Employer ID No. 51-0006522

AML Fee Payment Pursuant to 30 CFR 778.ll(a) (2) and (b) (4)

The person responsible for submitting the Coal Reclamation Fee Report and for remitting the reclamation fee payment to OSM is Brent Stottlemyre, Treasurer, Peabody Western Coal Company, P. 0 . Box 650, Kayenta, Arizona, 86033, and Employer ID No. is 86-0766626.
(

928) 677-3201.

The federal taxpayer identification

Revised 11/21/03

EXHIBIT A

PEABODY WESTERN COAL COMPANY, DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS

Revised 11/21/03

Peabody Western Coal Company P. 0. Box 650 Kayenta AZ 86033 Phone: 520-677-3201
AVS ID 152211 152482 152210 100500 149652 149652 108384 147403 135754 105148 084730 152209 100500 100500 146053 102012 102012 146914 120340 140428 140956 120340 132846 140956 146053 107936 142217 105148 143962 141927 062330 062330 132378 127951 127951 132378 127950

Fed EIN: 86-0766626 Avs ID: 134706
Title VlCE PRESIDENT TREASURER ASSISTANT TREASURER ASSISTANT SECRETARY PRESIDENT ' DIRECTOR VlCE PRESIDENT VlCE PRESIDENT ASSISTANT TREASURER SECRETARY OWNER ASSISTANT SECRETARY ASSISTANT SECRETARY VlCE PRESIDENT VlCE PRESIDENT VlCE PRESIDENT ASSISTANT SECRETARY ASSISTANT TREASURER ASSISTANT SECRETARY VlCE PRESIDENT PRESIDENT TREASURER VlCE PRESIDENT DIRECTOR DIRECTOR DIRECTOR ASSISTANT TREASURER ASSISTANT SECRETARY ASSISTANT TREASURER ASSISTANT TREASURER PRESIDENT DIRECTOR DIRECTOR ASSISTANT SECRETARY TREASURER VlCE PRESIDENT SECRETARY

Officer Reilly, Robert L. Stottlemyre, L. Brent Hawkins, Walter L., Jr. Klinger, Jeffery L. Wasik, John L. Wasik, John L. Schaab, Steven F. Klingl, Joseph C. Maher, Jeffrey A. Sullivan, Edward L. Peabody Coal Company Bean, Joseph W. Klinger, Jeffery L. Klinger, Jeffery L. Walcott, Roger 6. Jr. Sevem, James C. Sevem, James C. Donohoe, J. E. Bethel, Terry L. Whitt, Terry E. Wagner, Douglas A. Bethel, Terry L. Broshears, William E. Wagner, Douglas A. Walcott, Roger B. Jr. Whiting, Richard M. Almond, Bobbie S. Sullivan, Edward L. Lewis, Matthew T. Sirpless, Sheryl L. Carson, W. Howard Carson, W. Howard Melvin, Gary L. Tilly, Charles W. Tilly, Charles W. Melvin, Gary L. Crawford. G. Irene

Begin Date 08/28/2002 08/28/2002 01/25/2002 08/27/2001 07110/2000 0711012000 03/20/2000 03130/1999 0811011998 0612411998 01/04/1994 0311412003 07/28/2000 07/28/2000 07/28/2000 07/28/2000 03/27/2000 0411411999 0811011998 0811011998 0811011998 0811011998 0811011998 07/30/1998 07/30/1998 0713011998 05/05/1998 0612611997 01/20/1997 0611411996 01IO4/1994 01I0411994 0110411994 01/04/1994 01/O4/1994 0110411994 01104/1994

End Date

0612712003 0911112000 09111/2000 0911112000 0812712001 08/27/2001 07/31/1999 0812812002 0212211999 0711012000 08/28/2002 07/31/1999 07110/2000 03/21/2001 0613012003 07/31/1998 06/24/1998 07/31/1998 01/20/1997 07/3111998 07/37 11998 07/31/1998 07/31/1998 07/3111998 07/3111998 06/24/1998

EXHIBIT B

ORGZ&NIZATION?iL CHART FOR THE PEC FAMILY OF COMPANIES

Revised 11/21/03

EXHIBIT C

AVS CERTIFICATION DOCUMENT FOR THE PEC FAMILY OF COMPANIES

Revised 11/21/03

CertGficate of the Assistant Secretary of Peabody Energy Corporation

I, Jeffery L, Klinger, Assistant Secretary of Peabody Energy Corporation, (formerly known as P&L Coal Holdings Corporation) do hereby certify the falIowing:

Ronald C. Cmss, .an employee of Peabody Holding Company, Inc., is authorized to provide information on Peabody-Energy Corporation and its related operating companies to the Office uf SurfaceMinlng, Applicant Violator System (AVS) office. This information consists o changes and updates to the AVS f Ownership and Control database system which lists company officersand directors, end their beglnnlng and ending dates of service.
This authority pertains to, the companies listed on the attached organization chart and this chart may change from time to time as companies are added and deleted.
Mr. Cross has access to Corporate Minute Books of the listed companies from which the necessary Information can be obtained. Access to such Information provides Mr. Cross with current information on the status of officers and directors of the listed companies.

Ks - r t hKllngfr

si tant Secretary Peabody Energy Corporation

Subscribed and sworn to befare me this 12thday o April, 2002. f

A

EXHIBIT D

CURRENT, PREVIOUS, AND PENDING
COAL MINING PERMITS

Revised 11/21/03

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State: Mine Name: Address: Arizona BLACK MESA P 0 BOX 650 KAYENTA, AZ, 86033 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ern~lover #: ID

Page: 1 Date: 02/03/2004
02-01195 03/27/1973 13-2606920

Permit Number
AZ-0001 AZ-0001

Issue Date
01/1995 10/2000

Expire Date
10/2000 10/2005

Issued BY
OM S OSM

Issued To
PCC PWCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State: Mine Name: Address:

Arizona KAYENTA P 0 BOX 650 KAYENTA, AZ, 86033

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

02-01195 03/27/1973 13-2606920

Permit Number
AZ-0001D AZ-0001D

Issue Date
07/1995 07/2000

Expire Date
07/2000 07/2005

Issued BY
OM S OM S

Issued To
PWCC PWCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Colorado HAYDEN GULCH LOADOUT 36600 RT COUNTY RD 27 HAYDEN, CO, 81639

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

05-03138 86-0719481

Permit Number
C-92-081 C-92-081

Issue Date
05/1998 05/2003

Expire Date
05/2003 05/2008

Issued BY
CD G OM CD G OM

Issued To
HGTI HGTI

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Colorado SENECA ll 36600 RT COUNTY RD 27 HAYDEN, CO, 81639

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ern~lover #: ID

05-00304 11/30/1978 84-1273892

Permit Number
C-80-005 C-80-005

Issue Date
02/1997 02/2002

Expire Date
02/2002 02/2007

Issued BY
CD G OM CD G OM

Issued To
SCC SCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PCC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Colorado SENECA II-W 36600 RT COUNTY RD HAYDEN, CO, 81639

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

05-00304 11/30/1978 8 4 1273892

Permit Number
C-82-057 C-82-057

Issue Date
12/1995 12/2000

Expire Date
12/2000 12/2005

Issued BY
CD G OM CD G OM

Issued To
SCC SCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State: Colorado Mine Name: YOAST MINE Address: P.O. BOX DRAWER D
HAYDEN, CO, 81639 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: EmDlover ID #:

Page: 2 Date: 0110712004

Permit Number
(2-94-082 C-94-082

Issue Date
08/1995 08/2000

Expire Date
08/2000 08/2005

Issued BY
CODMG CODMG

Issued To
SCC SCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PCC PHC

State: Illinois Mine Name: BALDWIN Address: RR 2, PO BOX 150
MARISSA, IL, 62257

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

11-01008
13-2606920

Permit Number
62/RENEWAL #2

Issue Date
05/1995

Expire Date
05/2000

Issued BY
ILDMM

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:

Mine Name: Address: Permit Number

Illinois EAGLE #2 UIG PO BOX 527 SHAWNEETOWN, IL, 62984

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

1 1-00598

13-2606920

Issue Date
08/1995

Expire Date
08/2000

Issued BY
ILDMM

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

34/RENEWAL #2

State:

Mine Name: Address: Permit Number

Illinois MARISSA RR 1, BOX 135D MARISSA, IL, 62257

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

11-02441

13-2606920

Issue Date
05/1995

Expire Date
05/2000

Issued BY
ILDMM

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

48/RENEWAL #2

State: Illinois Mine Name: MINE #10 Address: RT 104, PO BOX 158
PAWNEE, IL, 62558

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date:

11-00585
13-2606920

Em~lover #: ID Expire Date
02/1999

Permit Number
7/RENEWAL #2

Issue Date
02/1994

Issued BY
IL DMM

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC SOLD

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedlExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: Illinois RANDOLPH PREP RT 1, PO BOX 151 MARISSA, IL, 62257 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

Page: 3 Date: 01/07/2004
11-01999 13-2606920

Permit Number
218/RENEWAL #1 63 RENEWAL #3

Issue Date
01/1994 07/1998

Expire Date
01/1999 07/2003

Issued BY
ILDMM ILDMM

Issued To
PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Illinois RIVER KING #6 RR 2, PO BOX 18 MARISSA, IL, 62257

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

11-00617 11/30/1978 13-2606920

Permit Number
59/RENEWAL #2

Issue Date
06/1995

Expire Date
06/2000

Issued BY
ILDMM

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Illinois ST. LIBORY RR 1, PO BOX 135D MARISSA, IL, 62257

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

11-02441 13-2606920

Permit Number 61/RENEWAL # 2

Issue Date
03/1995

Expire Date
03/2000

Issued BY
ILDMM

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Illinois TSM CENTRAL FACILITIES RR 2, PO BOX 85 MARISSA, IL, 62257

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

11-02656 13-2606920

Permit Number
87/RENEWAL #2

Issue Date
06/1994

Expire Date
06/1999

Issued BY
ILDMM

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Illinois WILL SCARLET RR 1 STONEFORT, IL, 62987

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

11-000631 13-2606920

Permit Number
114/RENEWAL $ 2

Issue Date
05/1994

Expire Date
05/1999

Issued BY
ILDMM

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State: Mine Name: Address: Indiana HAWTHORN RR 2 CARLISLE, IN, 47838 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

Page: 4 Date: 0110712004

-

Permit Number
S-0001--9 S-00266 S-00268 5-00332 S-0032 9

Issue Date
05/1994 09/1994 08/1996 01/1998 07/1998

Expire Date
05/1999 09/1999 08/2001 01/2003 07/2003

Issued BY
INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR

Issued To
PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC

'

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Indiana LYNNVILLE PO BOX 7 LYNNVILLE, IN, 47619

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

12-00337 0311511973 13-2606920

Permit Number

Issue Date

Expire Date
02/1999 02/1999 02/1999 06/2000 06/2000 01/2001 08/2002 09/2002 10/1999 02/1999 03/2003 06/2003 07/2003 10/2003 03/2004 10/2004 06/2005 01/2006

lssued BY
INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR I N DNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR INDNR

lssued To
PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control'
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC

S-00319

01/2001

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Indiana OAKLAND CITY COUNTY ROAD 550 SOUTH OAKLAND CITY, IN,

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

12-02058 0711811989 13-2606920

Permit Number
S-00228

Issue Date
03/1995

Expire Date
03/2000

Issued BY
INDNR

Issued To
PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Indiana SQUAW CREEK I PO BOX I I BOONVILLE, IN, 47601

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:
-

12-00336 0311511973 13-2606920

Permit Number
S-00008 S-00008-6

Issue Date
03/1994 1?/1997

Expire Date
03/1999 03/1999

Issued BY
INDNR INDNR

Issued To
SQCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
4 0 % PHC 4 0 % PHC 6 0 % ALCOA 6 0 % ALCOA

SQCC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: Kentucky ALSTON PO BOX 148 GRAHAM, KY, 42344 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ernplover ID #:

Page: 5 Date: 01 I0712004

15-09963 11/3011978 13-2606920

Permit Number
892-0016/RENEWAL 892-8001/RENEWAL 892-8001/RENEWAL

Issue Date
04/1994 08/1994 09/1999

Expire Date
04/1999 08/1999 08/2004

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC 100% PHC MSHA ID#: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #: NA 61-1250622

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky BIG RUN MINE 19060 HIGHWAY I078 SOUTH HENDERSON, KY, 42420

Permit Number
892-5003 892-5003/RENEWAL

Issue Date
05/1996 05/2001

Expire Date
05/2001 05/2006

Issued BY
KY DSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
GEM1 GEM1

Applicant Ownership and Control
PHC PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky CAMP # I PO BOX 328 MORGANFIELD, KY, 42437

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ernplover ID #:

15-02709 0311511973 13-2606920

Permit Number
KY-021/RENEWAL 913-5010 913-50011/RENEWA 913-5011/RENEWAL 913-5010/RENEWAL State: Mine Name: Address:

Issue Date
07/1995 01/1996 04/1999 06/2000 01/2001

Expire Date
07/2000 01/2001 07/ 2000 07/2005 01/2006

Issued BY
OSM KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC

Kentucky CAMP # I 1 PO BOX 120 MORGANFIELD, KY, 42437

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ernalover ID #:

15-08357 11/30/1978 13-2606920

Permit Number
KY-021/RENEWAL 913-5011/RENEWAL 913-5011/MJR#37 913-5011/RENEWAL 913-5011/MJR #38

Issue Date
07/1995 04/1999 05/1999 07/2000 01/2001

Expire Date
07/2000 07/2000 07/2000 07/2005 07/2005

Issued B Y
OSM KY DSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State: Mine Name: Address: Kentucky CENTER PREP PLANT PO BOX I48 GRAHAM, KY, 42344 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

Page: 6 Date: 01/07/2004
15-06833 11/30/1978 13-2606920

Permit Number
892-5000/RENEWAL 892-5000/RENEWAL
State: Mine Name: Address:

Issue Date
08/1994 07/1999

Expire Date
08/1999 08/2004

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC
MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #: 15-17587 05/19/1995 13-2606920
-

Kentucky FREEDOM MINE 19050 HIGHWAY I078 SOUTH HENDERSON, KY, 42420

Permit Number
851-0016 851-0016/RENEWAL

Issue Date
12/1994 08/1999

Expire Date
08/1999 08/2004

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KY DSMRE

Issued To
PCCL PCCL

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC
MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID 15-02065 08/011 977 1 13-2606920

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky GIBRALTAR PO BOX I 4 8 GRAHAM, KY, 42344

Permit Number

lssue Date
08/1994 08/1995 08/1998 03/1999 08/1999 08/2000 09/2001

Expire Date

lssued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

lssued To
PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC PCC P PC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky GRAHAM #3 U/G PO BOX 148 GRAHAM, KY, 42344

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

15-13283 12/29/1981 13-2606920

Permit Number
889-5002/RENEWAL 889-0004/MJR #1 889-5002/MJR #1

Issue Date
08/1994 01/1999 07/1999

Expire Date
08/1999 03/2001 08/1999

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KY DSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC 100% PHC
MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #: 15-16231 O5/l 9Il995 13-2606920

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky GRAND EAGLE PREPARATION 19060 HIGHWAY I078 SOUTH HENDERSON, KY, 42420

Permit Number
851-0014 851-0014/RENEWAL

Issue Date
05/1997 05/2002

Expire Date
05/2002 05/2007

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCCL PCCL

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: Kentucky HIGHLAND MINE PO BOX 567 MORGANFIELD, KY, 42437 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

Page: 7 Date: 01/07/2004

15-02709 0311511973 43-1869675

Permit Number
913-5011/RENEWAL 913-5012 913-8001

Issue Date
06/2000 03/2001 10/2001

Expire Date
06/2005 03/2006 10/2006

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC HMC

Applicant Ownership and Control
PHC PHC PHC

HMC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky KEN SURFACE PO BOX 37 ROCKPORT, KY, 42369

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

15-02077 11/30/1978 13-2606920

Permit Number
892-8000/RENEWAL 892-0055/RENEWAL 892-8000/RENEWAL 892-0055/MJR #7

Issue Date
09/1994 04/1996 07/1999 07/2000

Expire Date
08/1999 04/2001 08/2004 04/2001

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100%
PHC PHC PHC PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky MARTWICK UIG PO BOX 656 CENTRAL CITY, KY, 42330

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

15-14074 02/27/1984 13-2606920

Permit Number
889-5003/RENEWAL 889-5005/RENEWAL 889-5003/RENEWAL

Issue Date
08/1994 12/1994 05/1999

Expire Date
06/1999 12/1999 06/2004

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky MOORMAN PO BOX 148 GRAHAM, KY, 42344

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

15-10736 1113011978 13-2606920

Permit Number
889-0010/RENEWAL 889-0089

Issue Date
02/1994 12/1994

Expire Date
01/1999 12/1999

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v e ID #: r 15-13637 0811811982 13-2606920

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky PARKWAY UG PO BOX I48 GRAHAM, KY, 42444

Permit Number
889-5008/RENEWAL 889-5008/RENEWAL

Issue Date
08/1994 06/1999

Expire Date
06/1999 06/2004

Issued BY
KY DSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State: Mine Name: Address: Kentucky PATRIOT MINE 19060 HIGHWAY 1078 SOUTH HENDERSON, KY, 42420 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v e ID #: r

Page: 8 Date: 01 I0712004

15-16231 05/19/1995 13-2606920

Permit Number

lssue Date

Expire Date

lssued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

lssued To
PCCL PCCL PCCL PCCL PCCL PCCL PCCL PCCL

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky RIVER QUEEN SURFACE PO BOX 148 GRAHAM, KY, 42344

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emdover ID #:

15-03987 0311511973 13-2606920

Permit Number
889-8000/RENEWAL 889-0029/RENEWAL 889-8000/RENEWAL

Issue Date
09/1994 12/1994 07/1999

Expire Date
09/1999 12/1999 08/2004

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC 100% PHC

State: Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky RIVERVIEW (MIDWAY) PO BOX 148 GRAHAM, KY, 42444
- -

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r
- -

15-02076 O3ll5Il 973 13-2606920

-

Permit Number
492-0038/RENEWAL 492-0038/RENEWAL

Issue Date
08/1994 06/1999

Expire Date
07/1999 07/2004

Issued B Y
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Kentucky STAR NORTH UIG PO BOX 148 GRAHAM, KY, 42344

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

15-03161 1113011978 13-2606920
--

Permit Number
889-5001/MJR # 5 889-5002/RENEWAL

Issue Date
02/1994 08/1994

Expire Date
05/2000 08/1999

Issued B Y
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: Kentucky WALTON CREEK UIG PO BOX 148 GRAHAM, KY, 42344
-

Page: 9 Date: 01/O7/2OO4
MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

-

-

-

-

--

Permit Number
892-5001/RENEWAL 892-5001/RENEWAL

Issue Date
08/1994 06/1999

Expire Date
05/1999 05/2004

Issued BY
KYDSMRE KYDSMRE

Issued To
PCC PCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

State:
Mine Name: Address;

Montana BIG SKY PO BOX 97 COLSTRIP, MT, 59323

2400108 0312711973 13-2606920

Permit Number
83004CR RENEWAL 880048 83004CR State: Mine Name: Address:

Issue Date
07/1995 11/1998 11/1999

Expire Date
11/1999 11/2003 11/2004

Issued BY
MDEQ MDEQ MDEQ

Issued To
BSCC BSCC BSCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PCC 100% PCC 100% PCC MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ernplover ID #:

Pennsylvania DELMONT P. 0. BOX 1233 CHARLESTON, WV, PA, 25312

1211PA 20120-03 25-1125516

Permit Number
500015

Issue Date
04/1995

Expire Date
04/2000

Issued

BY
PADEP

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Employer ID #:

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia BIG MOUNTAIN #1 SURFACE PO BOX 104 PRENTER, WV, 25163

46-02512 0212311973 55-0737187

Permit Number
S-6013-89 0-28-82 H-8 S-5030-95 H-6 S-6013-89

Issue Date
12/1994 07/1995 07/1995 06/1996 08/1998 12/1999

Expire Date
12/1999 06/2002 04/2003 06/2001 08/2003 12/2004

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDE P WVDE P WVDE P WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
PICC PICC PICC PICC PICC PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia BIG MOUNTAIN # I 6 PO BOX I 0 4 PRENTER, WV, 25163

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

46-07908 0711811990 55-0737187
-

Permit Number
U-5053-91 U-5053-91

Issue Date
07/1995 02/1999

Expire Date
02/1999 02/2004

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDEP

Issued To
PICC PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia BIG MOUNTAIN PREP PO BOX 104 PRENTER, WV, 25163 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

Page: 10 Date: 01/07/2004

Permit Number
0-14-83

Issue Date
01/1998

Expire Date
01/2003

Issued BY
WVDEP

Issued To
PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State: Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia BIG MOUNTAIN REFUSE PO BOX 104 PRENTER, WV, 25163

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

1211WV40020-1 01/22/1976 55-0737187

Permit Number
0-69-83

Issue Date
05/1998

Expire Date
05/2003

Issued BY
WDEP

Issued To
PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia BLACK ROSE PO BOX 57 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-06489 02/2611982 25-1474206

Permit Number
D-99-82

Issue Date
08/1997

Expire Date
08/2002

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia BUFFALO CREEK I P BARRETT, WV, 25013
-

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:
-

46-07047 12/24/1985 25-1 125516

-

Permit Number
U-5013-86 U-5013-86

Issue Date
06/1996 06/2001

Expire Date
06/2001 06/2006

Issued BY
WDE P WVDEP

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CAMPBELL CREEK 12 500 LEE STEET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-08460 12112/1994 25-1 12-5516
-

-

Permit Number
U-4011-94 U-4011-94

Issue Date
09/1994 09/1999

Expire Date
09/1999 09/2004

Issued BY
WD P VE WDEP

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia CAMPBELL CREEK 13 500 LEE STREET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Employer ID #:

Page: 11 Date: 01/07/2004

Permit Number
U-4017-90 U-4017-90

Issue Date
09/1995 09/2000

Expire Date
09/2000 09/2005

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CAMPBELL CREEK 2P BARRETT, WV, 25013

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Employer ID #:

46-06291 1212311982 25-1125516

Permit Number
U-4020-90 UO-617

Issue Date
06/1996 09/1997

Expire Date
06/2001 09/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CHELYAN DOCK PO BOX 57 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emdover ID #:

46-06956 06/27/1985 25-1474206

Permit Number
0-49-85 0-4 9-85

Issue Date
10/1995 10/2000

Expire Date
10/2000 10/2005

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDEP

Issued To
MVCC MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CHELYAN PREP. PLANT P. 0 . BOX 57 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-04718 08/01/1977 25-1474206

Permit Number
P-646

Issue Date
07/1997

Expire Date
07/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%
PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CHELYAN REFUSE P. 0. BOX 57 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Employer ID #:

1211WV4024I -01 04/28/1995 25-147-4206

Permit Number
0-3006-95

Issue Date
09/1997

Expire Date
09/2002

Issued Bv
WVDE P

Issued To
MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address:

Page: 12 Date: 01/07/2004
MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r 46-06272 12/16/1980 55-0604613

West Virginia COLONY BAY
BARRETT, WV, 25013

Permit Number
S-12-84 S-53-85 U-71-85 S-5009-89 U-5018-86 S-5022-94 H-224 H-534 S-7-81 S-15-81 87-80 U-71-85

Issue Date
02/1994 06/1995 10/1995 11/1995 02/1996 11/1996 07/1997 09/1997 09/1997 09/1997 09/1997 10/2000

Expire Date
02/1999 06/2000 10/2000 11/2000 02/2001 11/2001 07/2002 09/2002 09/2002 09/2002 09/2002 10/2005

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE WDE P WD P VE WD P VE WVDEP WVDEP WDE P WD P VE WD P VE WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
CBCC EACC CBCC CBCC EACC CBCC CBCC EACC CBCC CBCC EACC CBCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia COOK MOUNTAIN SURFACE 500 LEE STREET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

PENDING 55-073-2291

Permit Number
0-5002-95 S-5015-94

Issue Date
04/1997 04/1997

Expire Date
04/2002 04/2002

Issued BY
WDEP WDE P

Issued To
CMCC CMCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CUT 21 PO BOX 100 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-02408 0412011976 25-1474206

Permit Number
268-76 218-75 H-104 H-389

Issue Date
04/1994 09/1995 07/1998 10/1998

Expire Date
04/1999 09/2000 07/2003 10/2003

Issued BY
WVDEP WDE P WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
MVCC MVCC MVCC MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% PHC PHC PHC PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CUT 22 PO BOX 100 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-06511 O8IZl I1982 25-1474206

Permit Number
S-30-82 H-66

Issue Date
02/1997 05/1998

Expire Date
01/2000 05/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
MVCC MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia CUT 24 PO BOX 100 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

Page: 13 Date: 0110712004
46-02407 03/21/1973 25-1474206

Permit Number
S-103-80 H-245

Issue Date
07/1997 05/1998

Expire Date
07/2002 05/2003

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
MVCC MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CUT 26 PO BOX 100 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-06447 I l l 1811981 25-1474206

Permit Number
0-21-82 0-21-82

Issue Date
05/1997 05/2002

Expire Date
05/2002 05/2007

Issued BY
WVDEP WVDE P

Issued To
MVCC MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CUT 28 PO BOX 100 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-06622 01/18/1983 25-1474206

Permit Number
S-31-83 197-77

Issue Date
04/1998 08/1998

Expire Date
01/1999 01/1999

Issued BY
WDEP WVDE P

Issued To
MVCC MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia CUT 30 PO BOX 100 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25305

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-02407 03/21/1973 25-1474206

Permit Number
5-6015-86 S-6015-86

Issue Date
09/1997 09/2002

Expire Date
09/2002 09/2007

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
MVCC MVCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia EAGLE 2P BARRETT, WV, 25013

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-06618 01/05/1983 25-1125516

Permit Number
D-84-82

Issue Date
07/1997

Expire Date
07/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia EAGLE 4 500 LEE STREET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

Page: 14 Date: 01/07/2004
46-08509 07/1011995 25-112-5516

Permit Number
U-4 003-94 U-4003-94

Issue Date
05/1994 05/1999

Expire Date
05/1999 05/2004

Issued BY
WVDEP WD P VE

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia FEDERAL #2 RT 1 BOX 144 FAIRVIEW, WV, 26570

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

46-01456 0811611971 25-1125516
----

Permit Number
U-19-83

Issue Date
02/1998

Expire Date
02/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia FEDERAL #2 PREP PLANT RT 1 BOX 144 FAIRVIEW, WV, 26570

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emdover ID #:

46-01456 0811611971 25-1 125516

Permit Number
0-1010-86 0-124-83

Issue Date
05/1996 09/1998

Expire Date
05/2001 09/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia FEDERAL #2 REFUSE AREA RT 1 BOX 144 FAIRVIEW, WV, 26570

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

1211WV30066-01 03/27/1986 25-1125516

Permit Number
0-23-83

Issue Date
02/1998

Expire Date
02/2003

Issued BY
WVDEP

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia HARRIS # I RT 85 BALD KNOB, WV, 25010

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-01271 02/22/1973 25-1125516

Permit Number
U-20-83

Issue Date
02/1998

Expire Date
02/2003

Issued B Y
WD P VE

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia HARRIS #2 RT 85 BALB KNOB, WV, 25010 JS A ID #: VH l MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

Page: 15
Date: 01/07/2004
46-01270 12/22/1973 25-1 125516

Permit Number
U-14 9-82 U-149-82

Issue Date
12/1997 12/2002

Expire Date
12/2002 12/2007

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDEP

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia HARRIS PREP PLANT RT 85 BALD KNOB, WV, 25010

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ernplover ID #:

46-031 35 02/22/1973 25-1 125516
-

Permit Number
0-72-82

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State: Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia HARRIS REFUSE AREA RT 85 BALD KNOB, WV, 25010

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ernalover ID #:

1211WV40411-01 11/06/1975 25-1 125516

Permit Number
0-13-83

Issue Date
01/1998

Expire Date
01/2003

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%
PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia HERNSHAW 12/13 500 LEE STREET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ern~lover #: ID

46-07479 0311811988 25-1 12-5516
--

Permit Number
U-5035-93 U-5069-86 U-5035-93

Issue Date
01/1995 10/1996 01/2000

Expire Date
01/2000 10/2001 01/2005

Issued BY
WVDEP WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
EACC EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia HERNSHAW 14P BARRETT, WV, 25013
--

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ern~lover #: ID
-

46-07203 1O/Ol/l986 25-1I25516

-

Permit Number
U-73-85

Issue Date
11/1995

Expire Date
11/2000

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address:

Page: 16 Date: 0 /O7/2OO4 1
MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emdover ID #:

West Virginia HERNSHAW 1P
BARRETT, WV, 25013

Permit Number
UO-515 UO-515

Issue Date
10/1997 10/2002

Expire Date
10/2002 10/2007

Issued BY
WVDEP WVDE P

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

State: Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia HOPKINS FORK SURFACE
500 LEE STREET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301

MSHA ID #k MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

PENDING
55-0737187
--

Permit Number
S-5024-96

Issue Date
02/1997

Expire Date
02/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia JASPER WORKMAN BRANCH STOCKPILE
BARRETT, WV, 25013

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

46-06893 02/25/1985 25-1 125516

Permit Number
0-8-82 0-8-82

Issue Date
01/1998 01/2003

Expire Date
01/2003 01/2008

Issued B Y
WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

state:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia KEYSTONE #4

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #: 25013
-

46-01498 0212211973 25-1I25516

BARRETT, WV, Permit Number
0-1-83 0-2-83 U-24-83

Issue Date
01/1998 01/1998 02/1998

Expire Date
12/1999 12/1999 12/1999

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
EACC EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia KEYSTONE #5
BARRETT, WV, 25013

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

46-02067 02/22/1973 25-1207512

Permit Number
U-152-82

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WDEP

Issued To
AMC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%
PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia KEYSTONE #5 PREP PLANT BARRETT, WV, 25013 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

Page: 17 Date: 01 I0712004
46-05677 11115Il977 25-1207512

Permit Number
0-135-83

Issue Date
10/1998

Expire Date
10/2003

Issued BY
WVDEP

Issued To
AMC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%
PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia KEYSTONE #5 REFUSE AREA BARRETT, WV, 25013

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emalover ID #:

1211WV40059-01 08/04/1976 25-1207512
--

Permit Number
0-73-82

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
AMC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%
PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia KOPPERSTON # I GENERAL DELIVERY KOPPERSTON, WV, 24854

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

46-01537 02/22/1973 25-1 I25516

Permit Number
0-74-82

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%
PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia KOPPERSTON PREP PLANT GENERAL DELIVERY KOPPERSTON, WV, 24854

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ern~lover #: ID

46-03157 02/22/1973 25-1 125516

Permit Number
0-81-82

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%
PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia KOPPERSTON REFUSE GENERAL DELIVERY KOPPERSTON, WV, 24854

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID
-

1211WV40049-01 12/02/1981 25-1 125516

Permit Number
0-1 9-83

Issue Date
01/1998

Expire Date
01/2003

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100%
PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia LEWISTON MINE 50 SCHOOL HOUSE ROAD SETH, WV, 25181

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emalover ID #:
-

46-08855 1011212000 55-0737187
-

Permit Number
U-5010-00

Issue Date
06/2000

Expire Date
06/2005

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State: -

Page: 18
Date: 01/07/2004

Mine Name: Address: Permit Number
U-144-82

West Virginia LIGHTFOOT #I PO BOX 29 WHARTON, WV, 25208

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ern~lover #: ID

46-04332 09/03/1974 25-112551 6

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:

Mine Name: Address: Permit Number
U-150-82

West Virginia LIGHTFOOT #2 PO BOX 29 WHARTON, WV, 25208

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emalover ID #:

46-04955 1 111 9/l975 25-1125516

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

state:
Mine Name: Address: Permit Number
U- 5 070 - 86 U- 5 070 - 86

West Virginia PERRY & HYLTON DE'LYN MINE
BARRETT, WV, 2501 3

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Em~lover #: ID

46-071 62 25-1125516

Issue Date
09/1996 09/2001

Expire Date
09/2001 09/2006

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDEP

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:

Mine Name: Address: Permit Number
U- 5 009 - 98 U - 50 08- 98

West Virginia POWELTON P.O. BOX 29 WHARTON, WV, 25208

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ernplover ID #:

46-071 62 25-1125516

Issue Date
05/1999 05/1999

Expire Date
05/2004 05/2004

Issued BY
WVDE P WVDE P

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia RIVERS EDGE P.O. BOX 258 CHARLESTON, WV, 25329

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ern~lover #: ID

46-08890 04/06/2001 43-1898371

Permit Number
U - 50 27- 00

Issue Date
04/2001

Expire Date
04/2006

Issued BY
WVDE P

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia ROBIN HOOD 1WINIFREDE B TWILIGHT, WV, 25204 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emalover ID #:

Page: 19 Date: 01/07/2004
NONE 55-0737187

Permit Number
U-5048-87 U-5048-87

Issue Date
12/1997 12/2002

Expire Date
12/2002 12/2007

Issued BY
WDEP WVDEP

Issued To
PICC PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia ROBIN HOOD NO. 8 PREP TWILIGHT, WV, 25204

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emalover ID #:

4603137 03/21/1973 55-0737187

Permit Number
0-7 6-82

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia ROBIN HOOD NO. 8 REFUSE TWILIGHT, WV, 25204

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emalover ID #:

1211WV40043-1 011 511976 1 55-0737187

Permit Number
0-76-82

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia ROBINHOOD NO. 9 TWILIGHT, WV, 25204

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v e ID #: r

46-02143 03/21I1973 13-260-6920

Permit Number
U-9-83 U-6010-88

Issue Date
01/1998 05/1998

Expire Date
01/2003 05/2003

Issued BY
WDE P WD P VE

Issued To
PICC PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State: Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia ROCKLICK PREP. & REFUSE AREA 500 LEE STREET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emalover ID #:

46-06448 11I1811981 25-1125516

Permit Number
S-5020-86 0-5006-86 0-5091-86 S-5020-86

Issue Date
02/1996 04/1996 12/1996 02/2001

Expire Date
02/2001 04/2001 12/2001 02/2006

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
EACC EACC EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% PHC PHC PHC PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia TYGART RIVER MINE RT 4 FAIRMONT, WV, 26554 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

Page: 20 Date: 01/O7/2OO4

- -

Permit Number
0-1001-87 R-747 EM-125 R-746 0-1001-87 EM-125

Issue Date
04/1997 08/1997 08/1997 08/1997 04/2002 08/2002

Expire Date
04/2002 08/2002 08/2002 08/2002 04/2007 08/2007

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE WDE P WD P VE WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
MC C MC C MCC MCC MC C MC C

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WELLS PREP PLANT PO BOX 29 WHARTON, WV, 25208

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

46-05295 09/26/1976 25-1 125516

Permit Number
0-165-83

Issue Date
11/1998

Expire Date
11/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WELLS REFUSE PO BOX 20 WHARTON, WV, 25208

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

1211WV40467-02 07/21/1977 25-1 125516

Permit Number
0-4-83

Issue Date
01/1998

Expire Date
01/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WHARTON #2 PO BOX 29 WHARTON, WV, 25208

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

46-01809 08/28/1972 25-1 125516

Permit Number
U-89-83

Issue Date
05/1998

Expire Date
05/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WHARTON #4 PO BOX 29 WHARTON, WV, 25208

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r
--

46-01272 0311911973 25-1 125516

Permit Number
U-143-82

Issue Date
12/1997

Expire Date
12/2002

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued

To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia WHARTON PREPIREFUSE BARRETT, WV, 25013 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emwlover ID #:

Page: 2 1 Date: 0 I0712004 1
46-03136 04/30/1975 25-1125516

Permit Number
0-20-83 0-6-83

Issue Date
01/1998 01/1998

Expire Date
01/2003 01/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WHITE BRANCH DEEP MINE P.O. BOX 1233 CHARLESTON, WV, 25324

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: EmDlover ID #:

46-08827 03/23/2000 55-0737187
-

Permit Number
U-5037-97 U-5002-00

Issue Date
03/1998 05/2000

Expire
Date
03/2003 05/2005

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
PICC PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State: Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WHITE OAK PREP BOX 100 CABIN CREEK, WV, 25035
- -- -

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emwlover ID #:
-

46-03175 08/01/1977 25-1474206

Permit Number
H-379 0-16-83 H-15 D-587 H-424 H-370 0-16-83

Issue Date
07/1997 01/199~ 05/1998 05/1998 05/1998 05/1998 01/2003

Expire Date
07/2002 01/2003 05/2003 05/2003 05/2003 05/2003 01/2008

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE WVDEP WD P VE WVDEP WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
MvCC MvCC MVCC MVCC MvCC MC VC MC VC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WILLIAMS MOUNTAIN SURFACE P.0.1233 CHARLESTON, WV, 25301

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v e ID #: r

46-08548 03/01/1996 55-0737187

Permit Number
S-5029-95

Issue Date
03/1996

Expire Date
03/2001

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
PICC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name; Address:

West Virginia WlNlFREDE I 3 500 LEE STREET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emwlover ID #:

46-08407 O5/l 8/l 994 25-1 12-5516

Permit Number
U-5006-93 U-5006-93

Issue Date
03/1994 03/1999

Expire Date
03/1999 03/2004

Issued BY
WVDEP WD P VE

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address: West Virginia WINIFREDE 13A 500 LEE STREET CHARLESTON, WV, 25301 MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emolover ID #:

Page: 22
Date: 01/07/2004

Permit Number
U-5004-97

Issue Date
05/1997

Expire Date
05/2002

Issued BY
WVDEP

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WINIFREDE 14 & 15 P. 0. BOX 1233 CHARLESTON, WV, 25324

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r

46-08688 0111411998 25-1 125516

Permit Number
U-5007-93 U-5018-96 U-5007-93

Issue Date
03/1994 09/1997 03/1999

Expire Date
03/1999 09/2002 03/2004

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
EACC EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WINIFREDE 2P BARRETT, WV, 25013

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emolover ID #:

46-06171 0612611980 25-1 125516

Permit Number
H-453

Issue Date
01/1998

Expire Date
01/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE

Issued To
EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State: Mine Name: Address:

West Virginia WINIFREDE 5P BARRETT, WV, 25013

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Ern~lover #: ID

46-06391 O9Il 811981 25-1 125516

Permit Number
0-62-82 H-607

Issue Date
11/1997 01/1998

Expire Date
11/2002 01/2003

Issued BY
WD P VE WD P VE

Issued To
EACC EACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC 1 0 0 % PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Wyoming CABALLO MINE CALLER BOX 3041 GILLETTE, WY, 82717

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

48-01034

Permit Number
433-T4

Issue Date
07/1998

Expire Date
07/2003

Issued BY
WY DEQ

Issued To
CCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1 0 0 % PHC

Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
IssuedIExpired Mining Permits
State:
Mine Name: Address:

Page: 23 Date: 01/07/2004
MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: E m ~ l o v eID #: r 48-01353 04/01/1998 48-01353

Wyoming N ANTELOPEIROCHELLE COMPLEX CALLER BOX 3034 GILLETTE, WY, 82717

Permit Number
569-T5

Issue Date
12/1999

Expire Date
12/2004

Issued BY
WY DEQ

Issued To
PRCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Wyoming NORTH ANTELOPE CALLER BOX 3032 GILLETTE, WY, 62717

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

48-01375 43-1 134599

Permit Number
532-T5

Issue Date
03/1997

Expire Date
12/1999

Issued BY
WYDEQ

Issued To
NACC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Wyoming RAWHIDE MlNE CALLER BOX 3042 GILLETTE, WY, 82717

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Employer ID #:

48-00993

Permit Number
240-T3 240-T4

Issue Date
11/1994 11/1999

Expire Date
11/1999 11/2004

Issued BY
WY DEQ WY DEQ

Issued To
CCC PRCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
100% PHC 100% PHC

State:
Mine Name: Address:

Wyoming ROCHELLE MlNE CALLER BOX 3035 GILLETTE, WY, 82717

MSHA ID #: MSHA ID Date: Emplover ID #:

48-01353 43-1295508

Permit Number
569-T4

Issue Date
08/1994

Expire Date
12/1999

Issued BY
WY DEO

Issued To
RCC

Applicant Ownership and Control
1006 PHC

EXHIBIT E

COMPLIANCE INFORMATION

Revised 11/21/03

COMPLIANCE INFORMATION

Pursuant to Section 510(c) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 and the applicable regulations thereunder, including 30 CFR 778.14, the attached is a listing of each violation notice received by PWCC in connection with any surface coal mining and reclamation operation for the period January 7, 2001 to January 7, 2004. PWCC does not have any PWCC

outstanding Notices of Violations for which the abatement period has not yet expired.

has not had a State or Federal mining permit revoked or forfeited a performance bond or similar security deposited in lieu of bond within the five-year period preceding January 7, 2004. For each violation notice reported, the list includes the following information, as

applicable:

1. The

company, mine,

permit, MSHA

ID, and

State

for each

violation issued; the

violation number, the date of issuance, and authority, department, or agency;
2.

identity of the issuing regulatory

A brief description of the particular violation alleged in the notice;

3. The date, location, and type of any administrative or judicial proceeding initiated

concerning the violation, including, but not limited to, proceedings initiated by the applicant to obtain administrative or judicial review of the violations;
4.

The penalty assessment and the current status of the proceedings and of the violation notice;

5. The actions, if any, taken by the applicant to abate or correct the violation;
6. If the abatement period for a violation in a Notice of Violation has not expired,

certification that the violation is being abated or corrected to the satisfaction of the agency with jurisdiction over the violation.

It should be noted that the attached represents a complete listing of the above-described violations and their status as reflected by the file of the Office of the General Counsel of Peabody Holding Company, Inc., 701 Market Street, St. Louis, Missouri as of January 7, 2004. PWCC reserves the right to supplement this listing to reflect any information received by the Office of the General Counsel after said date.

Revised 01/07/04

Peabody Energy Corporation: Notice of Violation List
For NOV's Issued Between
01-003 Company: Mine: Permit: County: NOV: Issuer: Cause: Status: As of: Action: Penalty: 01-004 -

01/31/2001

and

04/23/2003

Page: 1 Date: 01/O7/2OO4

Peabody Western Coal Company KAYENTA Az-0001 D NAVAJO 01-020-355-001 U.S. Office of Surface Mining

MSHA ID: State: Issued:

02-01 195 Arizona 01/31/2001

FAILURE TO CONDUCT BLASTING OPERATIONS IN A MANNER AS TO COMPLY WITH REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS; TERMINATED: 1/31/01; 0211612001 NONE; NONE ASSESSED PER NOPA ISSUED 2/16/01;

Company: Mine: Permit: County: NOV: Issuer: Cause: Status: As of: Action: Penalty:

Peabody Western Coal Company KAYENTA AZ-0001 D NAVAJO 01-020-352-001 U.S. Office of Surface Mining

MSHA ID: State: Issued:

02-01195 Arizona 0211512001

FAILURE TO MAINTAIN SEDIMENT CONTROL FOR A DISTURBED AREA; TERMINATED: 2/19/01; 05/2112001 REPAIRED AND MAINTAINED THE SILT FENCE. INSTALLED TEMPORARY MEASURES UNTIL WEATHER ALLOWED A MORE PERMANENT STRUCTURE; CONFERENCE HELD 04/24/01; ASSESSED $660.00 PER CONCLUSION OF CONFERENCE ISSUED 5/21/01 AND PENALTY VACATED;

01-001

Company: Mine: Permit: County: NOV: Issuer: Cause:

Peabody Western Coal Company KAYENTA AZ-0001 D NAVAJO 01-020-190-001 U.S. Office of Surface Mining

MSHA ID: State: Issued:

02-01195 Arizona 03/08/2001

Status: As of: Action: Penalty:

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVED PERMIT. FAILURE TO RESTORE SLOPES TO 3 HORIZONTAL TO 1 VERTICAL ON AN AREA DISTURBED BY OPERATIONS (BLASTING); TERMINATED: 3/21/01; 04/09/2001 ELIMINATED THE DISTURBED FEATURE AND CONSTRUCTED SLOPES NO GREATER THAN 3 TO 1 AS DESCRIBED IN APPROVED PERMIT; NONE ASSESSED PER NOPA ISSUED 4/09/01;

Peabody Energy Corporation: Notice of Violation List For NOV's Issued Between 01/31/20oi and 04/23/2003
01-006

Page: 2

Date: 01/07/2004

Company: Mine: Permit: County: NOV: Issuer: Cause: Status: As of: Action:

Peabody Western Coal Company KAYENTA AZ-0001 D NAVAJO 01-020-352-002 U.S. Office of Surface Mining

MSHA ID: State: Issued:

02-01 195 Arizona 04/27/2001

Penalty:

DISTURBANCE OUTSIDE THE PERMITTED AREA, MINING WITHOUT A PERMIT; TERMINATED: 4/27/01; 02/0112002 RECLAIMED THE UNPERMITTED DISTURBANCE AND CEASED ANY FURTHER ACTIVITY ON THE AREA NOT INCLUDED IN THE PERMIT. CEASED OPERATIONS OF THE COAL CONVEYOR UNTIL THE AREA WAS RECLAIMED; CONFERENCE HELD 01/14/2002; ASSESSED; $440.00 PER CONCLUSION OF CONFERENCE ISSUED 02/01/02 AND PENALTY VACATED; Peabody Western Coal Company KAYENTA AZ-0001 D NAVAJ0 01-020-162-001 U.S. Office of Surface Mining

01-029

Company: Mine: Permit: County: NOV: Issuer: Cause:

MSHA ID: State: Issued:

02-01195 Arizona 08/22/2001

Status: As of: Action:

Penalty:

FAILURE TO CONDUCT ALL SURFACE COAL MINING OPERATIONS ON LANDS THAT ARE AUTHORIZED FOR TERM OF PERMIT, AS DESCRIBED IN APPROVED APPLICATION AND SUBJECT TO PERFORMANCE BOND IN EFFECT; TERMINATED 8/30/01; 0111112002 COMPANY PROMPTLY SUBMITTED A REVISION APPLICATION TO OSM ADDRESSING ALL THE CHANGES TO THE OVERBURDEN REMOVAL LIMIT OF THE MINING & RECLAMATION PLAN. REVISIONS WERE APPROVED; CONFERENCE HELD 12/17/01; ASSESSED $660.00 PER CONCLUSION OF CONFERENCE ISSUED 0111 1/02 AND PENALTY VACATED; Peabody Western Coal Company
KAYENTA

02-008

Company: Mine: Permit: County: NOV: Issuer: Cause: Status: As of: Action: Penalty:

AZ-0001D NAVAJO 02-020-352-001 U.S. Office of Surface Mining

MSHA ID: State: Issued:

02-01 195 Arizona 02/28/2002

FAILURE TO FOLLOW APPROVED PLAN BY NOT CONSTRUCTING ANCILLARY ROAD DITCH IN ACCORDANCE WlTH THE APPROVED DESIGN; TERMINATED: 03/07/02; 03/07/2003 RECONSTRUCTED THE DITCH AND ROAD TO COMPLY WITH THE APPROVED PLAN; CONFERENCE HELD 06/27/02; ASSESSED $484.00 PER CONCLUSION OF CONFERENCE ISSUED 07/29/02 AND PENALTY VACATED; HEARING HELD 01/14/03; DECISION EXPECTED BY SEPTEMBER, 2003;

Peabody Energy Corporation: Notice of Violation List For NOV's Issued Between 01/31/20oi and 04/23/2003
03-001

Page:
Date: 01/07/2004

Company: Mine: Permit: County: NOV: Issuer: Cause: Status: As of: Action: Penalty:

Peabody Western Coal Company KAYENTA AZ-0001 D NAVAJO 03-020-190-01 U.S. Office of Surface Mining

MSHA ID: State: Issued:

02-01 195 Arizona 03/07/2003

FAILURE TO MAINTAIN SUPPORT FACILITIES AS PER PERMIT TERMS AND CONDITIONS; TERMINATED: 03/27/03; 0511912003 A) NOTIFIED ALBUQUERQUE FIELD OFFICE INDICATING CORRECTIVE ACTION; B) IMPLEMENTED CONTROL MEASURES APPROVED FOR LOCATION; NONE, ASSESSED PER NOPA ISSUED 05/19/03;

03-023

Company: Mine: Permit: County:
NOV: Issuer:

Peabody Western Coal Company KAYENTA AZ-0001D NAVAJO 03-020-352-001 U.S. Office of Surface Mining

MSHA ID: State: Issued:

02-01 195 Arizona 04/23/2003

Cause: status: As of: Action: Penalty:

FAILURE TO SHOW WEIGHT OF EXPLOSIVES AND SEISMOGRAPH INSTRUMENT IN THE BLASTING RECORDS; TERMINATED: 04/24/03; 0511912003 RECORDS CORRECTED AND PROVIDED COPIES TO ALBUQUERQUE FIELD OFFICE; NONE, ASSESSED PER NOPA ISSUED 05/19/03;

ATTACHMENT 6

Description of Life-of-Mine

Permit Area

Revised 11/21/03

Revised 11 121 I03

Permit Area Description

This description consists of five parcels that comprise the life-of-mine permit area for the Black Mesa mining complex. The parcels are: (1) a portion of the Navajo Mining Lease Area

and Tracts No. 1 and 2 of the Joint Mineral Ownership Lease Areas; (2) a conveyor right-ofway and a portion of a rail loading site; (3) a coal haulage road, utility, pond, maintenance road, and monitoring access road facilities right-of-way; (4) a powerline right-of-way; and (5) a transportation corridor from the coal preparation area to the 5-23 coal resource area. The total permit area for Parcels 1 thru 4 contains 62,929.74 acres, more or less. Parcel 5

will be either 126.6 or 89.6 acres, more or less, depending upon the corridor alignment selected. Drawing No. 85110, Leases, Right-of Way, and Permit Area Map, shows the permit

area described herein.

Parcel No. 1:

Mining Leasehold Description

A portion of the life-of-mine permit area includes the Navajo Mining Lease 14-20-0603-8580, and Tracts Nos. 1 and 2 of Navajo and Hopi Joint Mineral Ownership Mining Leases 14-20-06039910 and 14-20-0450-5743, respectively, in their entirety, as described in Attachment 2, except a portion of the Navajo Lease as described below. acres, more or less. Parcel No. 1 contains 62,474.2

Beginning at a point 11,680.0 feet North and 43,033.5 feet East of U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Triangulation Station "Coal Mine 1951" (a brass disk set in a concrete monument); Thence, North 90° 0'0" East a distance of 1,206.5 feet to a point; T,hence, North 0° 0'0" East a distance of 5,280.0 feet to a point; Thence, North 90° 0'0" East a distance of 10,550.0 feet to a point; Thence, South 0° 0'0" East a distance of 7,920.0 feet to a point; Thence, North 90° 0'0" West a distance of 5,280.0 feet to a point; Thence, South 0° 0'0" West a distance of 2,640.0 feet to a point; Thence, South 90° 0'0" West a distance of 6,476.5 feet to the Point of Beginning. excluded portion contains 2,383.8 acres, more or less. Said

Parcel No. 2:

Overland Conveyor Right-of-way and Rail Loading Site Description

This parcel contains the overland conveyor right-of-way and a portion of the coal loadout facility area described in Attachments 3 and 3a. The total nonoverlapping area contained

within the overland conveyor right-of-way and the area designated as the rail loading site is 163.57 acres, more or less. The rail-loading site is more particularly described as follows: 2 Revised 11/21/03

Part B:

Water Well Monitoring Road Right-of-way Description

Following is a description of a parcel of land located on the Navajo Reservation and is also a portion of protracted Section 9, Township 35 North, Range 18 East, Gila and Salt River Meridian, Navajo County, Arizona which is more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: From the point described in the eighth course of that certain legal description of Tract No. 1 of the Peabody Western Coal Company lease, recorded in Docket 259, Page 406, Navajo County Records, said point being defined by Peabody Western Coal Company as Lease Corner $8, as labeled hereon. 95'9' El along said Tract No. 1 lease boundary recorded in said Docket 258, Page Thence S 8 ' 9 3 ' 406, a distance of 1,559.08 feet to the True Point of Beginning of this description, monumented with a brass cap in concrete (BC): Thence N 3Z000'23" E, a distance of 98.12 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Northeasterly and Northerly a distance of 148.68 feet along a curve to the left, having a radius of 268.66 feet and a central angle of 31'42'29"; Thence N 00°17'54" E, a distance of 173.19 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Northerly, ~ o i t h e a s t e r l ~ Easterly a distance of 272.06 feet along a curve to the and right, having a radius of 154.55 feet and a central angle of 100°51'49"; Thence S 78° 50'17" E, a distance of 92.91 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Easterly a distance of 96.51 feet along a curve to the left, having a radius of 405.74 feet and a central angle of 1 ' 7 4 ' ; 33'4' Thence N 87031r58" E, a distance of 49.65 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Easterly and Northeasterly a distance of 363.55 feet along a curve to the left, having a radius of 457.75 feet and a central angle of 45°30'16"; Thence N 42° 01141" E, a distance of 56.13 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Northeasterly and Northerly a distance of 148.13 feet along a curve to the left, having a radius of 221.49 feet and a central angle of 38O19'04"; Thence N 03°42'37" E, a distance of 285.71 feet to a point of cusp on a curve concave to the East, having a radius of 800.00 feet and a central angle of 1° 14'29" and being subtended by a chord which bears S 20°44'05" E 17.33 feet; Thence Southerly along said curve a distance of 17.33 feet; Thence S 21° 21'19" E, a distance of 200.94 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Southerly a distance of 75.81 feet along a curve to the right, having a radius of 600.00 feet and a central angle of 7O14'21" Thence S 03°42'37" W, a distance of 17:40 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Southerly and Southwesterly a distance of 228.38 feet along a curve to the right, having a radius of 341.49 feet and a central angle of 38°19'04"; Thence S 42°01'41" W, a distance of 56.13 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Southwesterly and Westerly a distance of 458.85 feet along a curve to the right, having a radius of 577.75 feet and a central angle of 45"30r17"; Thence S 8'15' 73'8' W, a distance of 49.65 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Westerly a distance of 125.06 feet along a curve to the right, having a radius of 525.74 feet and a central angle of 13'37'44"; Thence N 78°50'17" W, a distance of 92.91 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Westerly, Southwesterly and Southerly a distance of 60.81 feet along a curve to the left, having a radius of 34.55 feet and a central angle of 100°51'49"; Thence S 00° 17'54" W, a distance of 173.19 feet to the beginning of a curve; Thence Southerly and Southwesterly a distance of 215.09 feet along a curve to the right, having a radius of 388.66 feet and a central angle of 31'42'29"; Thence S 32°00'23" W, a distance of 23.13 feet to the above described Peabody lease line; Thence N 89O59'39" W, along said lease line, a distance of 141.50 feet to the True Point of Beginning of this description. The above described parcel contains 4.5379 acres of land, more or less. 9 Revised 09/25/96

Parcel No. 4:

Powerline Right-of-way Description

This parcel is described in Attachment 4 and contains 8.52 acres, more or less.

Parcel No. 5:

Coal Preparation Area to 5-23 Coal Resource Area R-0-W Description

Option 1:

Proposed J-23 Permit Boundary Right-of-way S1A

Beginning at a point 46,057.9 feet South and 45,009.0 feet East of U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Triangulation Station "Coal Mine 1951" (a brass disk set in a concrete monument); Thence, South 68° 12'19" West a distance of 782.5 feet to a point; Thence, North 90° 00'00" West a distance of 474.2 feet to a point; Thence, South 58O55'16" West a distance of 738.2 feet to a point; Thence, South 81° 59'08" West a distance of 666.7 feet to a point; Thence, North 62'07'57" West a distance of 636.3 feet to a point;

Thence, South 75O04'24" West a distance of 1,515.5 feet to a point; Thence, South 77'28'31" West a distance of 3,905.9 feet to a point;

Thence, North 0° 00'00" East a distance of 664.1 feet to a point; Thence, South R0° 34'42" East a distance of 270.0 feet to a pojnt; Thence, North 75'58'53" East a distance of 4,911.4 feet to a point;

Thence, South 84O48'26" East a distance of 1,335.1 feet to a point; Thence, North 65° 37'26" East a distance of 2,165.0 feet to a point; Thence, South 0° 00'00" West a distance of 877.8 feet to the Point of Beginning. excluded portion contains 126.6 acres, more or less. Said

Option 2:

Proposed 5-23 Permit Boundary Right-of-way N1

Beginning at a point 39,574.4 feet South and 36,676.0 feet East of U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Triangulation Station "Coal Mine 1951" (a brass disk set in a concrete monument);

Thence, North 59"20r15" West a distance of 6,198.6 feet to a point; Thence, South 0° 00'00" West a distance of 713.0 feet to a point; Thence, South 59° 02'31" East a distance of 6,217.8 feet to a point; Thence, North 0° 00'00" East a distance of 750.3 feet to the Point of Beginning. excluded portion contains 89.6 acres, more or less. Said

Revised 11/21/03

CHAPTER 4

GEOLOGY

CHAPTER 4

INDEX

Page

Introduction Structure Geomorphology Stratigraphy of the Leasehold Introduction Pre-Permian Rocks Permian Rocks Triassic Formations Upper Triassic-Lower Jurassic Formation Middle and Upper Jurassic Upper Jurassic Tertiary Formation Stratigraphy of the Coal-Bearing Rocks Introduction Toreva Formation Wepo Formation Yale Point Sandstone Formation Formation of Coal During the Cretaceous Period Geology of the Subareas Introduction J-19, J-21, 5-23 Subareas 5-7 Area J-1/N-6 Area J-16 Area N-14 Area N-10 Area N-11 Area 5-2 Coal Reserve Area 5-4 Coal Reserve Area J-6 Coal Reserve Area J-8 Coal Reserve Area J-9 Coal Reserve Area J-10 Coal Reserve Area Revised 11/21/03

1
1

3
4

4 5 5 5
9

11

12 14 15 15 15 18 19
21
29

29 29
32
33

33
34

35 35 37
37

38 39 39
40

INDEX (CONT

.)

5-14 Coal Reserve Area J-15 Coal Reserve Area 5-28 Coal Reserve Area
N-9 Coal Reserve Area

N-10 Coal Reserve Area N-12 Coal Reserve Area
N-99 Coal Reserve Area

Exploration Drilling and Sampling Practices Exploration Staging Areas Exploration Access Exploration Drill Sites Drilling and Related Activities Drillhole Sealing, Abandonment, and Reclamation of Drilling Disturbance Literature Cited

LIST OF FIGURES
Page

Figure 1.

Generalized Tectonic Map of the Black Mesa Basin

Figure 2

Generalized Geologic Map Navajo Country Arizona-Utah

Figure 3. Figure 4.

Nomenclature Generalized Geologic Cross Section Map of the Black Mesa Basin

Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure 6a. Figure 7.

Lithologic Correlation Chart Stratigraphic Section of the Wepo Formation Seam Codes for Arizona Regional Diagrammatic Reconstruction of the Major Depositional Environments

Figure 8.

Reconstruction of an Interdeltaic-Strandplain Depositional Setting

INDEX (CONT. )
Page

Figure 9. Figure 10.

Environments of Deposition and Processes Relationship of Crevasse Splay to Other Channel Margin Environments

24

Figure 11.

Plan View of Idealized Deltaic Depositional Framework

Figure 12.

Cross Sections of Idealized Deltaic Depositional Framework

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 4-1

Exploration Notice of Intent Applications (5-21, J-23)

Attachment 4-2

Exploration Notice of Intent Applications (N-6/N-11, N-9, N-10)

iii

Revised 11/21/03

addition to ground water migration through the coal seam may result in the accumulation of sulfur, uranium, selenium, cadmium and other trace elements.

Conditions for widespread peat accumulation were optimal during the regressive phases of the Western Interior epicontinental seaway. Basin subsidence was in equilibrium with

sediment loading, and sedimentation rates generally declined along the western margin of the seaway. The coastal wetlands left behind the regressing sea became the site of The ultimate demise of the peat forming basins was the the eventual advancement of the

extensive peat accumulation.

terminal regression of the Cretaceous seaway, and freshwater fluvial processes.

Geology of the Subareas Introduction. Subsurface exploration of the Black Mesa leasehold by Peabody Western Coal Beginning in 1977, a series

Company began in the early 1960's and mining began in 1970.

of core holes were drilled and overburden samples were taken in each of the areas projected to be mined. In addition to the overburden and parting analyses, coal samples The "Drill Hole Collar Location

were also taken from the same core hole and analyzed.

Map", Drawing No. 85351, is located in Volume 20 and the typical geologic cross sections are located in Volumes 13 and 14.

In 1978, a comprehensive exploration program was initiated to accurately define coal reserve parameters throughout the leasehold. At this time, a consistent correlation model has been established for all coal horizons encountered. It must be pointed out that the

color designations pertain to coal horizons which may contain one or more coal benches and sub-benches. For the purpose of this report, a coal horizon is defined as a sequence of

one or more coal beds which may be time-related as well as having a common environment of deposition.

J-19, J-21, J-23 Subareas.

Due to the lateral continuity of the coal horizons and the

interrelated stratigraphic and structural fabric of these subareas, J-19/20 and 5-21 will be considered as one coal reserve "area".

Located in the southeast portion of the leasehold, this area is delineated on the south and east by Dinnebito Wash, on the north by Reed Valley, and on the west by coal exposures which have burned along the outcrop, forming bright red sequences of resistant shale and sandstone "clinker" material. Local occurrences of burnt coal and clinker material are

29

Revised

11/21/03

also found

within the interior of the area.

These

occurrences

are

limited

in

their

vertical and lateral extent but do serve to hinder the minability of a given coal horizon as well as alter the natural stratigraphic sequence which, in turn, may affect the topography due to the more resistant nature of the clinker material. In general, the area

is characterized by rolling topography slightly dissected along its margins by minor tributaries of the above-mentioned washes.

At the northern and western margins of the area, a series of roughly parallel trending anticlines and synclines have developed. These folds are oriented in a northwestThe remaining portions of the area Anticlines and

southeast direction, and exhibit limited axial length.

exhibit less structural deformation, with only minor folding developed.

synclines in the central portion are oriented in an east-west direction, while the folds in the southern portion exhibit a northeast-southwest orientation. Most folds throughout Though the

the area are inconspicuous in the field and seldom have dips which exceed 3O.

folds exhibit relatively minor dips, they do, however, influence local surface and ground water flows. A number of apparent, high angle faults with displacements ranging from a few feet to
30 to

40

feet

have

been

identified while

small north-south

linearities,

interpreted as faults have been photo-mapped west of the area.

Except for a small remnant

of resistant Yale Point Sandstone in the northeastern corner of the area, the Wepo Formation is the only exposed sequence. Within the Peabody Western Coal Company

leasehold, the Wepo Formation consists of continental and near-shore sediments which includes seven recognizable and correlatable coal horizons. one or more coal benches or sub-benches. thickness, quality and lateral extent. Each horizon may consist of

Within the area, these coal horizons vary in

The minability of each horizon is dependent upon

the topographic relief and the thickness and quality of the coal, which in turn is largely dependent on the geologic structure, susceptibility to erosion of the overlying strata, and environment of deposition of each coal horizon.

All seven coal horizons occur in the area; however, locally they may not all be present in minable thickness, occur at minable depths, or some horizons may be totally absent due to erosion or nondeposition. In descending order, the coal horizons are designated as: (1)

violet; (2) green; (3) blue; (4) red; (5) yellow; (6) brown; and ( 7 ) orange.

The violet

is the uppermost coal horizon and, due to its stratigraphic position, it is the first horizon to be removed by erosional forces. For this reason, the violet is present in a The violet is overlain by a series

limited portion of the northeast corner of the area.

of continental sediments including paludal and overbank shales and siltstone as well as by

Revised 12/20/96

J-2 Coal Reserve Area.

The 5-2 reserve area is delineated on the west by the outcropping

of coal seams along Wild Ram Wash, and on the north, east and south by the economical recovery limits and outcropping of one or more of the minable seams. Dips in the area are The area is

generally less than 2 degrees to the east with a strike orientation of N59E.

characterized by gently rolling hills usually capped by the more resistant red shale and sandstone associated with the burning of coal seams of the red horizon, and to a limited extent, the uppermost coals of the yellow horizon.

From their outcrop to a depth of up to 140 feet, the first recoverable coals occur within the yellow coal horizon. These two seams, averaging 2.5 and 4 feet in thickness are

frequently burnt near their outcrop, limiting their aerial extent while lending the distinctive red color to the strata above the seams. east, Gradually increasing from west to

a complex sequence of continental shale, mudstone and thin sandstone lenses The most laterally

separates the yellow horizon coals from those of the underlying brown.

consistent coals of the J-2 reserve occur within the brown horizon; ranging in thickness from 2.5 feet at its outcrop, to over 13 feet towards the northern margin of the area,

Due to the influx of clay to silt size overbank sediments into the paludal environment,
the single brown seam diverges into two benches of 2.5 and 6 feet within the central portion of the reserve; separated by less than 2 feet of carbonaceous shale. The orange

horizon consists of three recoverable coal seams ranging in average thickness from 2.5 to

5.5 feet.

The presence of a sandstone channel, migrating vertically up section, displaces

coal seams of the orange horizon in the north; while increasing the non-coal interval separating the brown from the orange coals to the south by as much as 65 feet.

J-4 Coal Reserve Area.

The 5-4 coal reserve area is truncated by outcrops of the

recoverable coal seams to the west, east, and north, and by the economical recovery limits to the south. The area is one of gently rolling topography incised by a major tributary

of Moenkopi Wash on the east; with the development of small hills capped by resistant "clinker" material in the south. The general strike within the area is NZ7W, with dips Coal seams reaching recoverable thickness and The coals of the

rarely exceeding 2 degree to the west.

lateral extent occur in the yellow, brown, and orange coal horizons.

violet, green, and blue horizons have been removed by erosion, while the coal seams of the red horizon have burnt in place and are responsible for the limited development of scoria lithology. From its outcrop to an average depth of 58 feet, the single minable coal seam

within the yellow horizon varies from 2 to 8 feet thick. Separated by a 20 to 25 foot thick sequence of interbedded continental shale, mudstone and sandstone, the two

Revised 11/21/03

recoverable coal seams of the brown zone each average less than 4 feet thick throughout the reserve. An intercalated layer of shale to carbonaceous shale, generally less than 2 As evidenced by the

feet thick, separates the two coal benches of the brown horizon.

lateral and vertical continuity of the coal seams and interrelated lithologic units, the J-4 area is characterized by its relatively stable environment of deposition. Two coal

seams of the orange horizon, averaging 2 . 5 and 8 feet in thickness are separated from the overlying brown coals by a relatively thin series of overbank clays, silts and sand with a slight increase in thickness from west to east. The development of a large distributary

channel sandstone in the southwest portion of the reserve has displaced, and in a limited area completely removed three coal seams of the lower orange horizon, none of which occur at economically recoverable depths.

J-6 Coal Reserve Area.

Coal outcrops, including areas of burnt coal, restrict the Topography of the

economically recoverable coal seams on all sides of the J-6 area.

reserve is that of gently rolling hills capped with the distinctive red clinker material commonly associated with the in-place burning of coal beds. Contrary to the general overall structural fabric of the southern portion of the Peabody leasehold, most likely due to localized events, the apparent strike of the strata is N89E with dips less than 2 degrees to the east. Coals of the upper Wepo Formation; the violet, green, and blue

horizons have been removed by erosion, while the lower red horizon coal seams have burnt in-place along the eastern margin of the reserve. From their outcrop to the east, to a

maximum of approximately 110 feet of overburden the first recoverable coals, averaging 6.5 and 3.5 feet thick, occur within the yellow coal horizon. The upper coal bed of the

yellow is often described in sub-surface investigations as being "smutty" or "baked"; most likely caused by the oxidation of the seam due to the depth of weathering and the intense heat generated at one time, from the combustion of overlying coals. Averaging less than

10 feet in thickness throughout much of the eastern portion of the reserve, a simple series of shale, mudstone, and discontinuous non-minable coal underlie the yellow coal horizon. Towards the center of the area, this sequence becomes much more complex, with At its margins, this

the development of a channel sandstone in excess of 50 feet thick.

channel sand increases the yellow to brown interval up to 44 feet; at the channels greatest stage of development the coals of the brown horizon have been completely removed or are absent due to non-deposition. Where present, the brown coal horizon consists of

one minable seam, ranging in thickness from 2 . 5 feet at its outcrop in the west, to in excess of 10 feet towards the eastern margin of the reserve. This same trend of

increasing seam thickness towards the east continues with the single coal seam present

Revised 11/21/03

within the orange horizon.

Laterally the most extensive coal bed of the J-6 reserve area, A relatively

this seam ranges in thickness from 5 to 16 feet, averaging over 9 feet.

consistent thickness of shale, mudstone and sandstone separates the orange coal horizon from that of the overlying brown. Averaging approximately 50 feet thick, the slight

variation in the intervals thickness across the reserve appears to be dependent upon the percentage of sandstone present, with the increase usually at the expense of the overlying brown coal seam.

J-8 Coal Reserve Area.

The J-8 coal reserve, situated in the southwest corner of

Peabody's leasehold, is truncated on the west, north, and east by the outcropping and/or the burning of the upper recoverable coal seams, and on the south by the lease boundary. The topography is characterized by gently rolling terrain with limited drainage

development.

The major structural feature, the Oljeto Syncline occurs just east of the

reserve and has had apparently little influence; with the overall strike of the strata oriented N52W, with dips less than two degrees to the west.

Coals of economical thickness, lateral continuity and depth occur within the red, yellow and brown coal horizons. The lowermost coals of the Wepo Formation, designated as the

orange horizon, are present within the reserve, but do not attain minable thickness or depth; while the upper coal horizons have been eroded, or have burnt in-place and are responsible for the limited exposure of scoria material. From its outcrop to a maximum

depth of cover in excess of 60 feet, the single recoverable coal seam within the red horizon averages 3.5 feet in thickness and occurs in the southern two-thirds of the reserve. The most laterally consistent seams, ranging in thickness from 1.5 feet up to 9 Stratigraphically 5 to 68 feet below the

feet are present within the yellow coal horizon.

red, the two recoverable seams of the yellow converge, attaining a maximum thickness of approximately 14 feet in the central portion of the reserve. This decreasing interburden

trend from north to south continues with the merging of the yellow seam with the single recoverable coal of the brown horizon, with a combined thickness ranging from 7 to 19 feet. The variability of the thickness of non-coal lithology between the yellow and brown horizon appears to be dependent upon the influx of clay to sllt-sized sediments into the paludal environment at time of deposition; while the large variation in interburden thickness separating the red and yellow horizons is largely due to the percentage of sand size material, and the sediments inherent differences in compaction rates.

J-9 Coal Reserve Area.

Located in the southwest portion of the leasehold, the J-9 coal

reserve area is delineated on the north, east and west by Yucca Flat Wash and its 39 Revised 11/21/03

tributaries, and on the south by the Peabody Lease Boundary. rolling topography, incised by minor tributaries of

The area is characterized by the above-mentioned wash.

Structurally, the coal bearing strata dips gently to the west, typically less than 2 degrees, with a strike of N14W. Minor changes in dip due to localized structure or To date, sub-surface

differential compaction of the finer-grained sediments often occur. investigation within the area has not revealed any faulting.

Faults with a vertical

displacement of less than 20 feet may be present but are not readably discernable with the current sub-surface data density.

Economically recoverable coal in the J-9 reserve occurs within three coal horizons; in descending order these are the red, yellow, and brown. The coal seam nomenclature used in

this area is representative of those correlations used throughout the lease, with the exception of the J-7 reserve. Typical of the southern portion of the Peabody lease, the

upper coals of the Wepo Formation; the violet, green and blue horizons have been removed by erosion. In isolated areas coal seams of the red horizon have burnt in-place and account for the presence of heat-altered mudstone and sandstone. horizon's Extending from the

outcrop to a maximum overburden depth of approximately 65 feet, the first

recoverable coal seams, averaging 4 to 7 feet thick, occur within the red horizon. Gradually increasing from south to north, a sequence of strata consisting predominately of distributary channel sandstone, channel fill siltstone, overbank shale and mudstone and thin coals separate the red horizon from the underlying yellow. The yellow and brown

horizons exhibit extensive variability in coal thickness as well as the intervening noncoal strata between horizons. Ranging in thickness from 2 to 10 feet, up to four

individual benches of yellow and brown horizon coals converge and diverge throughout the reserve. The yellow and brown coal seams merge within the western portion of the reserve,

attaining a thickness of up to 23 feet; with the non-coal parting interval between these horizons gradually increasing towards the east. The predominant non-coal rock strata

consist of paludal, overbank, fluvial and near marine shale, siltstone and fine-grained sandstone. Coals of the lowermost orange horizon, while laterally continuous throughout the reserve, fail to attain economical thickness or depth of cover.

J-10 Coal Reserve Area.

Separated from the J-7 and J-9 coal reserve areas by Yucca Flat

Wash and it's tributaries, the J-10 reserve exhibits lateral continuity of coal horizons, and is considered an extension of the above mentioned reserve areas. The coal seam

nomenclature for the J-10 reserve is consistent with that used for the J-9 reserve, while the J-7 area has maintained the original coal horizon designation first employed by

Revised 11/21/03

Peabody.

The geomorphology of the reserve is that of gently rolling hills, incised by The apparent strike of N21W, with dips of less than 2

tributaries of Yucca Flat Wash.

degrees to the west is consistent with the general structural fabric of the southern portion of the leasehold, with minor variations attributed to localized features and/or differential compaction.

Erosion has removed the upper coal horizons; the violet, green and blue, from much of the southern extent of the Peabody leasehold. Within the J-10 reserve the red, yellow and In

brown coal horizons contain coals of minable thickness, depth and lateral extent.

isolated areas, coals of the red and yellow horizon have burnt in-place, limiting the seams lateral extent and recoverability, as well as establishing zones of scoria

development.

Overburden ranging from 7 to 50 feet in thickness and consisting primarily

of shale and mudstone with sandstone lenses overlie the first recoverable coal seams of the red horizon, averaging 2.5 and 3.5 feet thick respectively. Underlying these seams is a sequence of mudstone, sandstone, and non-minable coals of continental to marginal marine deposition, ranging in thickness from 4 to 80 feet; increasing from west to east across the reserve. The yellow horizon consists of two recoverable coal seams ranging in The presence of a distributary

thickness from less than a foot, to a maximum of 7 feet.

channel sandstone in the northern portion of the reserve has by the process of erosion, or non-deposition, limited the extent of the upper yellow coal seam. The brown horizon is

comprised of a single recoverable coal seam ranging in thickness from 1 to 14 feet. This variation in thickness, increasing from east to west, is inversely proportional to the thickness of non-coal sediments separating the yellow and brown coals. This relationship,

based upon the environments of deposition and the subsequent differential compaction ratio of sediments, is common throughout the coal bearing strata within the Peabody lease. As

much as 58 feet of shale, mudstone and intercalated sandstone lenses separate the brown horizon from three non-economical coal seams within the orange horizon.

J-14 Coal Reserve Area.

The 5-14 coal reserve area is truncated on the northwest and

northeast by Peabody's leasehold boundary, on the north-central by the previously mined J3 area, and on the west, south and southeast by the economically recoverable coal limits,

and/or outcropping of the recoverable coal seams.

In general, the northern portion of the

reserve area is flat lying, grading into a more gently rolling terrain to the south with the development of steep sided hills, capped by the more resistant red scoria lithology created by the in-place burning of the yellow and brown horizon coals. The occurrence of

scoria within the blue and red coal horizons in the northern margins has limited the

41

Revised 11/21/03

success of obtaining sub-surface geological data; however the development of the typical scoria capped butte topography is not evident. The apparent strike of the coal bearing

strata is N52E, with dips less than two degrees to the east.

Economically recoverable coal seams, present in descending order include the red, yellow, brown, and orange coal horizons. Due to their stratigraphic position, the coals of the

red and yellow horizons have been exposed to greater erosion, and therefore exhibit limited lateral continuity. An average of 65 feet of shale, sandstone and scoria overlie Averaging 2.5 to 4 feet thick

the first recoverable coal seams within the red horizon.

these coals are separated from the underlying yellow horizon by a relatively consistent sequence, averaging 35 feet thick, of mudstone and intercalated fine-grained sandstone. The yellow horizon, represented by a single seam ranging from 7 to 16 feet in the northwest portion of the reserve, diverges towards the east into two minable benches, averaging 6 feet and 4 feet respectively. The non-coal interval separating the yellow

from the underlying brown horizon is a consistent 5 to 10 feet of predominately mudstone with minor occurrence of fine-grained sandstone. Of notable exception is a single sub-

surface data point, located at the eastern margin of the reserve, indicating the presence of a channel sandstone in excess of 40 feet, displacing the upper coal seam of the brown horizon. Continuing with the depositional trend of a more static paludal environment to the northwest, the brown horizon consists of a single minable seam, averaging 9 feet in thickness, diverging to the east into two benches ranging in thickness from 1 to 6 feet. Erosion, or less likely, non-deposition has resulted in the absence of the upper brown coal seam in the southern portion of the reserve area. The variation, from 36 to 77 feet,

of the non-coal interval between the orange and the overlying brown horizon appears to be dependent upon the percentage of sandstone present in the continental to marginal marine sediments. One coal seam of the orange horizon is considered recoverable, averaging 7.5

feet thick. Shale, mudstone, siltstone, sandstone and thin coal seams complete the stratigraphic section in this area.

J-15 Coal Reserve Area.

The J-15 area is delineated on the west and north by the

leasehold boundary, and on the east and south by outcroppings and/or burnt sequences of the yellow and brown coal horizons. The general topography is that of rolling hills The apparent strike of the area is However, small localized folds,

moderately incised by tributaries of Coal Mine Wash.

N75E with dips generally less than 2 degrees to the east.

and differential compaction of the fine grain sediments may alter the apparent strike and dip of individual lithologic units. Due to their stratigraphic position within the coal

Revised 11/21/03

bearing sequence, the coals of the violet, green and blue horizons have been removed by erosion, with isolated areas of scoria present due to the in-situ burning of coals located in the red and yellow zones. yellow and brown horizons. Coal seams of economical interest occur within the red,

Coal beds of the orange horizon are present in the area, From its outcrop to a

however these tend to be relatively thin, deep, and discontinuous.

maximum depth of approximately 80 feet, the overburden material above the red coal horizon consists of interbedded shale, siltstone and sandstone, with isolated areas of scoria development. Two recoverable coal seams of the red horizon, averaging 3 and 5.5 feet

thick are separated from the underlying yellow by a sequence of predominantly fine-grained sandstone, with minor shale and non-minable coal strata, with a total interval thickness ranging from 40 to 100 feet. The coal seams of the yellow and brown horizons as well as

the intervening rock sequences exhibit lateral continuity throughout the J-15 reserve area. Two recoverable coal seams of the yellow horizon range in thickness from 1.5 to 6.5

feet; while up to four individual benches of the brown horizon, averaging between 2.5 and
7 feet thick coalesce towards the northeast to form one seam of approximately 12.5 feet

thick.

A thin sequence of overbank to paludal shale and carbonaceous shale, averaging

less than 6 feet thick, separates the yellow from the underlying brown coal horizon.

The

lateral continuity of the yellow and brown horizons within the J-15 reserve can be attributed to a time of stability within the swamp environment, with relatively

uninterrupted accumulation of fresh water vegetation and only minor influxes of fine sediments.

J-28 Coal Reserve Area.

Located in the northeast corner of the leasehold, the 5-28 coal

reserve is delineated by economical recovery limits based upon the ratio of coal to noncoal waste as well as other mining constraints. The reserve is characterized by

moderately to steeply rolling hills incised by tributaries of Moenkopi and Reed Valley Wash. East of the reserve and extending in to the interior, steep sided hills capped with

scoria derived from the in-place burning of the blue, red and yellow horizon coal dominate the terrain. With apparently little or no influence from localized structure or

differential compaction of sediments, the overall strike and dip, N29W and 2 degrees west, is consistent throughout the reserve.

Coal seams of the upper Wepo Formation, designated by Peabody as the violet and green horizons, are absent from the 5-28 reserve; most likely removed by the forces of erosion. Underlying the green, the burnt coals of the blue and red horizons, and their associated red scoria lithology, occur to the south and east, but are not present within the reserve

Revised 11/21/03

area proper.

Up to three coal benches of the yellow horizon are present within the

southern portion of the reserve, however these seams were developed in an environment of deposition unfavorable to the accumulation of organic material and are thin and

discontinuous.

In isolated areas, the lateral extent of the yellow horizon coals are Approximately 25 feet of predominantly

further limited by the process of in-situ burning.

clay to silt-sized sediments separate the thin coals of the yellow horizon from the first economically recoverable coal seams, ranging in thickness from 1 to 8 feet, present within the brown horizon. Limited to the southern portion of the reserve, these seams are

separated from the underlying orange horizon by a highly variable thickness of continental to marginal marine sediments consisting of shale, mudstone and channel sandstone. Up to

four minable seams are present within the orange coal horizon. Averaging from 3 to 6 feet in thickness, the coals of the orange and their associated non-coal intervals exhibit extensive lateral and vertical variability. The upper two coal seams, separated by as

much as 50 feet of mudstone and channel sandstone in the western portion or the reserve, converge to the east and attain a maximum thickness of 16 feet. Interbedded shale,

siltstone, sandstone and thin coals complete the lower sequence of the coal bearing Wepo Formation.

N-9 Coal Reserve Area.

This most northern coal reserve area within Peabody Western's

lease is bounded on all sides by Yellow Water Canyon Wash and it's tributary, Yazzie Wash. In general, the structural fabric of individual coal reserve areas becomes more complex towards the northern escarpment of Black Mesa. oriented in a northeast direction. degrees to the east. Folds within the N-9 area are typically

The general strike and dip of the strata is N76E, 1.5

The minable coal horizons within the N-9 area in descending order include the red, yellow, brown and the uppermost coal seam of the orange sequence. The coals of the violet, green

and blue coal horizons have been removed by erosion and/or the in-situ burning of the coal. The lower coals of the orange horizon are highly variable both in lateral extent and in thickness and are not economically recoverable. From the red horizon's outcrop to

as much as 100 feet; interbedded sandstone, shale, thin coal, and scoria overlie the first recoverable coal seams in the N-9 reserve. The red horizon consists of up to five

individual benches, ranging in thickness from less than one foot to a maximum of 7 feet. The two lowermost seams converge in the southern portion of the reserve and attain an average thickness of over 6 feet.
A

sequence of predominately mudstone, shale and

sandstone of continental to marginal marine deposition separates the yellow coal horizon

Revised 11/21/03

from the overlying red.

This coal horizon is comprised of two individual seams each Underlying the yellow horizon is a sequence of

averaging approximately 3 feet thick.

strata, up to 50 feet thick, dominated by the presence of sandstone interbedded with shale and minor beds of coal. The most laterally consistent horizon, the brown, consists of an

upper seam averaging 7.5 feet thick, with a thinner and somewhat discontinuous lower seam ranging in thickness from 1 to 6 feet. This same lateral consistency is exhibited in the non-coal interval separating the brown and orange horizons, maintaining an average

thickness of 16 feet of shale and sandstone.

The lowermost coal horizon, the orange,

consists of one seam of recoverable thickness, ranging from 2.5 to 7 feet, with a slight thinning trend towards the northern extent of the reserve. This trend corresponds with

the gradual increase of brown to orange interburden in the same direction; indicating that at time of deposition, this portion of the reserve area was subjected to an influx of clay to silt-sized sediments. The most consistent lithologic unit within the N-9 coal reserve

area, as well as throughout most of the Peabody lease, is a blanket sandstone believed to be deposited in a shallow embayment; bringing to a close the paludal environment

responsible for the deposition of the orange coal horizon.

N-10 Coal Reserve Area.

The N-10 coal reserve area is bounded on the west and south by

lands reclaimed due to mining activities, on the east by a tributary of Coal Mine Wash, and on the north by Yellow Water Canyon Wash. has burned extensively. Along the margins of these washes, the coal

The resultant "clinker" material, and remnants of the Yale Point

Sandstone lend a distinctive break, marked by resistant cliffs, to the generally rolling topography of the area.

Because of the area's location, near the northern escarpment of Black Mesa, the structural fabric, resulting from the gentle uplift and tensional release, is considerably more complex. The western margin of the area is dominated by a set of parallel trending These folds are oriented in a north south direction,

anticlines and synclines.

exhibiting limited axial length, plunging towards the south. These folds are inconspicuous in the field, with the overall strike and dip of the coal bearing strata being N16W and 2 degrees to the west. Faults, while not numerous, are present from the These faults

northern section of the area, northwards toward the Black Mesa escarpment.

are oriented in a northwest - southeast trend with the down-thrown blocks positioned to the northeast.

Mining in the southern and western portions of the N-10 area began in 1979 and was

45

Revised 11/21/03

discontinued in 1981 with a total coal production of approximately 500,000 tons.

The

recoverable coal horizons, in descending order are the red, yellow, brown and orange. Although the upper coal horizons are present in this area, they have either burned in place, or are too thin and laterally variable to be of economical quantity and quality. A

sequence of continental to marginal marine shale, mudstone and sandstone up to 130 feet thick overlie the two recoverable coal seams of the red horizon. Averaging 4.5 and 3.0

feet in thickness, the coals of the red horizon are separated from the two minable coal seams of the yellow horizon by a relatively consistent interval of sediments averaging about 40 feet thick. thick. The coals of the minable yellow horizons average 4.0 and 2.0 feet

Within the N-10 reserve area the coals of the brown horizon have converged into a The orange horizon is

single minable seam ranging in thickness from 5 to 14 feet.

comprised of up to three coal seams of recoverable thickness, ranging from a minimum of 2 feet to a maximum of 10 feet. The innerburden material between the yellow, brown and

orange horizons consists of intercalated continental shales, siltstones, sandstones and coal, formed in interdeltaic to alluvial environments, with minor marine sequences

containing the diagnostic liguloid brachiopod fossil.

N-12 Coal Reserve Area.

Stratigraphically and structurally similar, the N-12 coal reserve

area is considered an extension of the N99 reserve to the southeast and the N-11 reserve to the east. The N-12, N-99, and N-11 reserve areas are all one contiguous coal reserve.

The N-12 coal reserve area is bounded on the west, south, and east by lands reclaimed due to mining activities, and on the north by Coal Mine Wash. As typically found throughout

the Peabody leasehold, the upper coal horizons present in any given area have burned at their outcrop, forming the distinctive red scoria lithology responsible for much of the topographic highs. Within the N-12 reserve, the coals of the red and yellow horizons have

burnt in-place, forming surface deposits of scoria material; however, the absence of large-scale erosion has limited the presence of the exaggerated highs prevalent in the N99 reserve area. The estimated strike and dip of the coal bearing strata is N12W, 2

degrees to the west.

The recoverable coal seams are confined to the red, brown and orange horizons.

Although

present throughout much of the reserve, the coals of the yellow horizon are thin and discontinuous, averaging less than 2 feet thick. Restricted to the southern portion of

the reserve, under an average overburden of 50 feet of predominately mudstone, shale and scoria, a single marginally economical coal is present within the red horizon, averaging less than 2.5 feet thick. A series of interbedded shale, thin coal and sandstone lenses

averaging 80 feet thick separate the red horizon from the single recoverable coal seam of
46

Revised 11/21/03

the brown horizon.

This interburden sequence maintains a relatively consistent thickness This trend in lateral

due to the absence of distributary channel sandstone development.

consistency continues with the brown coal seam maintaining an average thickness of 11 feet throughout much of the N-12 reserve.
-

A highly variable thickness of shale, mudstone and

sandstone, of probable continental to marginal marine deposition, separates the orange coal horizon from the overlying brown. Ranging in thickness from 19 to 63 feet, with a

thickening trend to the south, this variability is most likely due to the development of a distributary channel prior to the deposition of the brown coal seam. horizon, the orange, The lower most coal
3.5 feet

consist of three minable seams averaging 3, 8, and

respectfully, with the two uppermost seams converging to the south, reaching a maximum thickness of approximately 12 feet.

N-99 Coal Reserve Area.

The N-99 coal reserve is bisected, into roughly equal areas, by overland coal conveyor. If the Kayenta Mine coal 2011, PWCC will

the present alignment of Peabody's

supply agreement with the Navajo Generating Station extends beyond

relocate the overland coal conveyor and adjacent facilities and mine the N-99 coal reserve as one mining block. The northern reserve is bounded on the east and west by the geologic

extensions of the N-11 and N-14 coal reserve areas and their associated reclaimed lands, and on the north by the current leasehold boundary. The southern reserve area is

delineated on the east and south by the development of extensive scoria lithology, resulting in topographic highs with deeply incised drainages, and by the J-1/N-6 reclaimed lands to the west. to the west. The overall strike of the area is N26W, with dips leis than 2 degrees

The uppermost coal horizons of the Wepo Formation, due to non-deposition or most likely erosion, are absent from the N-99 coal reserve. heat-altered lithology present throughout the Much of the distinctive "clinker" or area owes its origin to the in-situ

combustion of the uppermost coals of the red horizon.

One coal seam of the red horizon,

attaining a maximum thickness approaching 5 feet, is considered recoverable where depth of cover has prevented combustion or oxidation.

A complex sequence of continental and

marginal marine sediments ranging in thickness from 15 to 110 feet separate the red horizon coal from the underlying yellow. This interval increases from west to east and is Within the northern portion of

largely a function of the percentage of sandstone present. the N-99 reserve, sub-surface investigations have

identified a distinct geophysical The

signature interpreted to be a blanket sandstone of marginal marine deposition.

occurrence of this lithology within the coal sequence has been utilized in identifying the three minable seams, each 2.5 to 3.5 feet thick, of the yellow horizon.
47

A laterally and
Revised 11/21/03

vertically consistent series of strata, predominately shale and mudstone with lenses of sandstone, separate the brown horizon coals from the overlying yellow. The two coal seams

of the brown, averaging 5.5 and 4 feet thick respectively, merge towards the boundaries with the N-11 and N-12 reserve areas, attaining an average thickness of approximately 10 feet. Within the northern portion of the N-99 coal reserve area, the non-coal interval

between the brown and the underlying orange coal horizon is a fairly consistent sequence;
18 to 20 feet thick, composed of shale, mudstone and intercalated sandstone.

Trending to

the south this interval increases to as much as 65 feet, most likely due to the process of differential compaction of sediments and the presence of a distributary channel sandstone. The introduction of fine sediments into the paludal environment during deposition has caused the coals of the orange horizon to converge and diverge over relatively short distances. From two to four seams of recoverable thickness may be present in any given

area of the reserve. The two uppermost coals of the orange, averaging 4 and 8 feet thick respectfully, converge near the southern margin of the reserve, attaining an average thickness in excess of 13 feet. To the north, an influx of fine sediments of probable

overbank origin is responsible for the development of an in-seam parting, splitting the second orange horizon coal seam into two distinct benches, ranging in thickness from 1.5 to over 6 feet. Present throughout much of the N-99 reserve area, the lowest recoverable

coal seam within the orange horizon varies in thickness from less than 2 feet up to a maximum
6 feet.

A

series of mudstone, shale, sandstone and

thin coal seams, of

continental to marginal marine deposition completes the lowermost sequence of the coal bearing Wepo Formation.

Exploration Drilling and Sampling Practices

PWCC periodically conducts exploration drilling and sampling to characterize geologic and hydrologic conditions and to delineate and characterize coal, overburden, and interburden materials in both active and proposed mining areas. the primary means of determining the depth, Exploration drilling and sampling are thickness, physical and chemical

characteristics, and degree of saturation of the geologic materials to be disturbed or otherwise affected by mining. Although each exploration program may involve a different

area and slightly different objectives, all exploration programs will generally involve the same activities including:

Establishment of

exploration

staging

areas

(for temporary storage of

drilling equipment and supplies)

Revised 11/21/03

Construction of temporary exploration roads

Drilling, sampling, and geophysical surveying of completed drillholes

Subsequent reclamation of all exploration disturbance outside of the fiveyear affected lands area

The following describe these components of exploration drilling and sampling programs as a basis for understanding the equipment and activities involved and the practices used to assure the integrity of the resulting sampling information. Exploration applications for

J-21 and J-23 are presented in Attachment 4-1 and applications for N-6/N-11, N-9, and N-10 are presented in Attachment 4 - 2 .

Exploration Staging Areas.

Given that exploration activities may occur at the same time

and in proximity to ongoing surface mining operations, a reasonable effort will be made to utilize existing mining disturbance areas or facilities areas.

If necessary, separate

staging areas will be developed for temporary storage of drilling equipment and supplies. The drilling contractor(s) may also have a temporary office trailer, fuel tank, and other temporary ancillary facilities in the staging area(s). Existing equipment parking areas

or other existing disturbance areas may be used as staging areas or new staging areas may be constructed adjacent to existing roads.

If new staging areas are developed, surface disturbance will be minimized to the extent possible and they will be located adjacent to existing roads and well away from natural drainages. Staging area development will involve removal of available soil material and

placement in windrows on the perimeter of the area, establishment of temporary drainage features (berms or ditches) to effectively control site drainage, and placement of Contractors

surfacing material (granular spoils, scoria, or gravel) where appropriate. will be responsible for full compliance with

all applicable regulatory requirements

including fuel storage and containment requirements, waste collection and handling, and surface drainage and sediment control. On completion of drilling activities, staging

areas will be reclaimed if outside of the five-year affected lands area.

Exploration Access.

To the extent possible, exploration sites will be located adjacent to If existing access is not available and ground conditions are

existing roads or trails.

favorable, exploration equipment may move across undisturbed terrain to access exploration
49

Revised 11/21/03

sites.

In the case of access across undisturbed terrain, equipment movements and other In most cases where access does not Where road

related traffic will be kept to an absolute minimum. exist, it will be

necessary to establish temporary exploration roads.

construction is necessary, roads will be constructed to the minimum practical width and will be aligned to minimize total length and limit erosion to the extent possible.

Temporary exploration roads will be constructed ten to fifteen feet wide using a tracked dozer or rubber-tired loader. shrubs, removing and Road construction will involve clearing any trees or large available soil material to the side of the road,

windrowing

establishing appropriate temporary drainage (ditches, berms, and minor drainage control structures), and grading to provide a smooth stable operating surface. On completion of

drilling activities, temporary exploration roads will be reclaimed if outside of the fiveyear affected lands area.

Exploration Drill Sites.

Most drilling can be conducted with minimal site preparation, Where

since the drill can be set-up and leveled using self-contained hydraulic jacks.

site preparation is necessary due to the topography or the need to utilize drilling fluids, a pad having maximum dimensions of approximately 75 feet in width and 100 feet in length will be established. Pad preparation will involve the use of a tracked dozer,

backhoe, or rubber-tired loader to recover and windrow available soil material on the pad perimeter and establish a level drill site. If feasible, based on hole depth and drilling

conditions, portable tubs will be utilized to mix and contain necessary drilling fluids.

If greater pit capacity is required than would be feasible using portable tubs, mud pits
for the containment of drilling fluids and cuttings will be excavated within the pad area. Maximum disturbance area for each drill site is expected to be approximately 0.17 acres. On completion of drilling activities, all mud pits will be backfilled and drill sites outside of the five-year affected lands area will be reclaimed.

Drilling and Related Activities.

In general, PWCC1s exploration drilling activities fall At borehole and crophole

into three categories; boreholes, cropholes, and coreholes.

locations the drill rig is set up on the drill site, leveled with hydraulic jacks mounted on the truck, and a single boring (typically 4.5 to 5 inch diameter) is drilled to

intercept the lowest potentially mineable coal seam or an individual seam at the crop locations. At corehole locations, the drill rig is set up on the drill site, leveled with

hydraulic jacks, and a "pilot" or borehole is drilled to intercept the lowest potentially mineable coal seam (or pre-determined horizon) to determine its depth at that location.
\5 0

Revised 11/21/03

Once the target depth is determined, a second drillhole is off-set five to ten feet from the pilot hole and is drilled to just above the coal seam or horizon of interest. The

coal seam or horizon of interest is then core-drilled using a diamond core bit and splittube core barrel assembly.

Drilling activities will utilize one or more truck-mounted rotary drills capable of achieving depths up to 500 feet. In order to minimize the potential for sample

contamination, drillholes will be drilled using air, air/foam, or water as the circulation medium. If the use of drilling muds is necessary to maintain circulation and drillhole Each drill will be

integrity, polymer muds free of metallic compounds will be used.

supported by a water truck (minimum capacity of 1,000 gallons) and at least one pickup truck. All drilling and related operations will be conducted by an experienced driller in

such a way as to minimize potential environmental impacts and will be supervised by a qualified geologist, hydrologist, soil scientist, environmental coordinator, or engineer.

During drilling operations, water levels and flows in the drillholes will be closely monitored in order to characterize hydrologic conditions. Samples of surficial materials

and sub-surface rock and coal materials may be collected and logged during drilling for subsequent analysis. Samples may be either chip or cutting samples or core samples.

Chip or cutting samples are obtained during normal rotary drilling operations using specially designed buckets with extended handles. The buckets are often placed at the

collar of the drillhole where the air or air/foam circulation medium carries cuttings to the surface from the drill bit. When sampling using this method, samples are obtained at

regular intervals corresponding to progressive drilling advance, bagged, and labeled for physical and/or chemical analysis.

Core sampling is used to recover relatively intact samples of coal, overburden, or interburden materials. core barrel assembly. Core samples are obtained using a diamond core bit and split-tube Generally, core sampling proceeds in ten-foot intervals and the

core samples are separated every two-feet, bagged in plastic core sleeves, labeled, and boxed. An exploration geologist, hydrologist, soil scientist, or environmental

coordinator examines the core, logs and characterizes the cored materials by litho-type based on appearance (color, grain size, bedding, mineralogy, hardness) and field tests, and then selects and ships representative core samples to the analytical laboratory for physical and/or chemical analysis. Selection of core samples for analysis is generally

based on PWCC's requirements for characterization of coal and overburden/interburden

51

Revised 11/21/03

materials, with core samples being segregated by litho-type as previously determined.

Downhole geophysical surveys may be conducted on all or selected drillholes following drillhole completion using a truck-mounted logging system. Geophysical surveys will

result in a suite of logs including, but not limited to natural gamma, high-resolution density, and resistance that can be used in conjunction with driller's logs, lithologic

descriptions, and sampling information to accurately characterize geologic, hydrologic, coal, and overburden occurrence and characteristics.

During drilling, PWCC will control dust from drilling and related activities, divert and control both natural runoff from disturbed areas and fluid loss from drilling, and will clean-up any trash or debris. If air is utilized as the circulation medium, dust from Drill cuttings and

drilling will be controlled by a flexible shroud at the drill collar.

drilling fluids will be effectively controlled and contained by portable tubs, mud pits, or berms within the drill pad area.

Drillhole Sealing, Abandonment, and Reclamation of Drilling Disturbance.

On completion of

drilling, sampling, and logging for each exploration drillhole, PWCC will proceed with either temporary plugging or permanent sealing unless it is advantageous to complete the drillhole as a monitoring well. Completion of any drillhole as a monitoring well will

involve the well completion procedures outlined in Chapter 16, Hydrologic Monitoring Program and well completion information will be provided to OSM following completion of the drilling program. Because they will be mined through within a relatively short time-

frame, drillholes within the five-year mining area will be temporarily plugged rather than permanently sealed. Temporary plugging will involve placement of drill cuttings to within

one foot of ground level and filling the remainder of the drillhole with cement to the ground surface to prevent surface or other materials and surface water runoff from entering the drillhole. permanently sealed. Drillholes outside of the five-year mining area will be

Permanent sealing will involve backfilling the drillhole with drill

cuttings to within five feet of ground level and filling the remainder of the drillhole with cement to the ground surface. Drillhole locations are marked by a metal tag with the

PWCC drillhole number which is attached to a wooden surveyors stake set in the concrete surface plug. The time interval between completion of drilling operations and completion

of temporary plugging or permanent sealing is normally approximately three to five days.

Revised 11/21/03

Areas disturbed by exploration activities including temporary staging areas, temporary exploration roads, and drill sites will be stabilized or reclaimed following completion of drilling activities. Exploration disturbance areas within the five-year affected lands

area will be stabilized to minimize erosion during the interim period before these areas are mined through. Stabilization measures will include removal of all trash and debris

from the drill site for disposal, spreading any excess cuttings over the site, and backfilling of any excavations, including mud pits. Where mud pits are necessary, they

will be fenced as needed, allowed to dry, and later backfilled with drill cuttings and/or previously excavated material.

Exploration disturbance areas outside the five-year affected lands area will be reclaimed. All trash and debris will be removed from drill sites for disposal; excess cuttings will be spread over the site; excavations, including mud pits, will be backfilled; disturbance areas will be regraded; drainage will be reestablished; soil material will be replaced; and vegetation will be reestablished. Where the creation of a drill pad results in a

bench which exceeds four feet in height, the bench will be reduced to a maximum slope of 3h:lv. Where construction of temporary exploration roads results in minor cuts and fills,

a track-hoe or similar equipment will be used to pull fill material back onto the road bench and grade the road surface to blend with the surrounding terrain.

Available soil material will be replaced on disturbed areas if soils existed prior to the disturbance and were recovered during construction. depth of approximately four inches or more. The surface will be scarified to a

Water bars or berms will be constructed to

control drainage on and from the reclaimed areas and to aid in surface water retention. The disturbed areas will be seeded using broadcast seeding techniques using the Special Stabilization Mix described in Chapter 23, Revegetation Plan.

Generally,

reclamation will

be

coordinated for all

areas

disturbed

by

exploration

activities within a calendar year.

Reclamation and revegetation will be contemporaneous

with drilling as much as possible with exceptions due to extreme weather (snow, rain, mud) conditions and activities will be completed within six months following initiation

consistent with seasonal reclamation planting considerations as outlined in Chapter 23, Revegetation Plan.

Exploration

applications

for

J-21

and

5-23

are

presented

in

Attachment

4-1

and

applications for N-6/N-11, N-9, and N-10 are presented in Attachment 4-2.

Revised 11/21/03

Literature Cited Craig, L.C., et al. "Stratigraphy of the Morrison and Related Formations of the Colorado U.S. Geological Bulletin, 1009-E, pp. 125-168. 1955.

Plateau Region".

Collins, B.A. Coal. -

"Coal Deposits of the Eastern Piceance Basin".

Geology of Rock Mountain 1976.

Colorado Geological Survey, Resource Series 1, pp. 29-43.

Dollhope, D.J.

Overburden Reclamation at Coal Surface Mines in the Northern Great Plains. 1983.

Coal Development Collected Papers, Volume 1, pp. 589-626.

Franczyk,

K.J.

Stratigraphic Revision

and

Depositional Environments of

the

Upper

Cretaceous Toreva Formation in the Northern Black Mesa Area, Navajo and Apache Counties, Arizona. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1685.

Harshbarger, J.K.,

Repenning, C.A.,

and J.G. Irwin.

"Stratigraphy of the Uppermost

Triassic and Jurassic Rocks of the Navajo County." Annual Field Conference, pp. 98-114. 1958.

New Mexico Geological Society, Ninth

Herring,

J.R.

"Geochemistry of

Clinker, Naturally

Burning

Coal

and

Mine

Fires."

Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium on the Geology of Rocky Mountain Coal Resource Series 10, pp. 41-44. 1980.

-

1980,

Kauffman, E.G.

"Major Factors Influencing the Distribution of Cretaceous Coal in the Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium on the Geology of 1980.

Western Interior United States." Rocky Mountain Coal.

Resource Series 10, pp. 1-3.

Kiersch, G.A., et al. "Mineral Resources Navajo-Hopi Indian Reservations", Arizona-Utah, Metalliferous Minerals and Mineral Fuels, Volume 1, University of Arizona Press. 1956.

McKee, E.D.

"Stratigraphy and History of the Moenkopi Formation of Triassic Age." 1954.

Geological Society of American Memoir 61.

Page, H.G. and Repenning, C.A.

"Late Cretaceous Stratigraphy of Black Mesa, Navajo and New Mexico Geological Society, Ninth Annual Field

Hopi Indian Reservations, Arizona." Conference, pp. 115-122. 1958.

Revised 11/21/03

Repenning, C.A.

and

Irwin, J.H.

"Bidahochi Formation of Arizona and New Mexico." 1954.

American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, Volume 38, pp. 1821-1826.

Repenning, C.A. and Page, H.C. Hopi Indian Reservations." Volume 40, No. 2, pp. 225-294.

"Late Cretaceous Stratigraphy of Black Mesa, Navajo and American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 1956.

Vaninetti, J.

"Coal Exploration Concepts and Practices in the Western United States." 1978.

Second International Coal Exploration Symposium, pp. 1-53.

Weimer, R.J.

"Stratigraphy and Tectonics of Western Coals."

Geology of Rocky Mountain 1976.

Coal, Colorado Geological Survey, Resource Series 1, pp. 9-27.

Revised 11/21/03

CHAPTER 5 COAL RECOVERY AND PROTECTION PLAN

CHAPTER 5 INDEX
Engineering Methods Mining Methods and Equipment Coal Leases Coal Supply Agreements Historical Coal Production Future Coal Production Black Mesa Mine Kayenta Mine Coal Resource Protection Literature Cited

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure I1 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Typical Pit Cross Sections Bucyrus-Erie 2570W Marion 8750 Marion 8200 Bucyrus-Erie 1260 Marion 7800 Deleted Bucyrus-Erie 295B Deleted Typical Pit Cross Section Showing Initial Box Pit and Subsequent Pits Spoil-Side Overburden Stripping Spoil-Side Overburden Stripping Deleted Deleted Deleted Deleted Deleted

Revised 11121/03

LIST OF FIGURES (CONT.)

Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 2 1

Black Mesa Leases Reserves of the Black Mesa Leases Production Summary Dragline Sequencing

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 1 1 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15 Table 16 Table 17 Table 18 Table 19 Table 20

Major Equipment List for Kayenta Mine Major Equipment List for Black Mesa Mine Participants in the Mohave and Navajo Generating Stations Production Summary Production Summary - Black Mesa Mine Production Summary - 5-7 Production Summary - N-6 Production Summary - J-2,J-4,J-6,J-8,J-9,J-lO,J-l4,J-l5,J-23 Production Summary - N-9 and N-10 Production Summary - Kayenta Mine Production Summary - J-16 Production Summary - J- 19 Production Summary - J-21 Production Summary - 5-28 Production Summary - N-11 Production Sun~mary N-14 Production Sun~nlary N-99 Summary of Coal Quality, Strike, and Dip Coal Production by Seam Coal Recovery Statistics

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A

J-19/ 5-21 Burial Sites (2): By-Pass Coal Areas
11

Revised 11 21/03 1

CHAPTER 5
COAL RECOVERY AND PROTECTION PLAN Engineering Methods
Throughout the mine planning process, fiom exploration to coal production, proper engineering control and methodologies are employed. Various engineering disciplines such as geological, chemical, civil, mining, mechanical, and electrical engineering are involved in developing and scheduling the tasks necessary to acquire, interpret, analyze, and utilize various coal resource and mining engineering data and develop an economically and physically feasible mine plan. Topographic mapping is essential for mine plan development. United States Geological Survey products are often used. However, where greater detail or updated maps are required, a technically competent mapping service is used to produce the needed products in accordance with national mapping standards. Engineering surveys provide control for map development. Quality assurance drilling to refine coal location, quantity, and quality information is also supported by engineering surveys. Geologists and mining engineers interpret, analyze, and correlate the physical and chemical properties of the coal and overburden to define econonlically recoverable reserves. Accepted standard laboratory and field procedures are employed. The computer is heavily relied upon as a mine-planning tool. The basic mine plan development process involves entering drill hole information into a data base, correlating coal seams, creating a surface topography data base, modeling the coal reserve, and validating the model. Stratagraphic, lithologic, and quality data are obtained and stored for each drill hole. This drill hole data base enables the geologist and mine planner to identify and correlate the various seams. This process is particularly complex for the Black Mesa coal field because of the large number of seams and the tendency of seams to split and rejoin. A graphic display of the drill holes in cross section is one of several useful tools to assist in this process. The collection of drill holes with seam codes properly assigned to the coal intervals forms the basis for generating a mathematical model of each coal resource area. In the early computer modeling years, Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC) used a Control Data Corporation gridded seam model called SEAM SYSTEM (SEAMSYS). Today software developed in-house to create the model called (SLIC) is used. Once the model is created, its accuracy is verified. Once calibrated, the model produces volumetric and coal seam quality data from composited and interpolated surface topography and drill hole data. The model also outputs the mining sequence when infoimation such as direction of mining, equipment characteristics, and target production values are supplied. 1 Revised 05/17/02

Aerial photogrammetric techniques, Global Positioning Survey (GPS) equipment and computer software are used to develop production statistics such as overburden and parting removed, coal produced, coal in pits, and coal in stockpiles. Surveyed ground control panels provide ground truthing capabilities. Production and volume reports are computer generated using the digital data from the various surveying sources.

Mining Methods and Eauipment
The Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines practice a conventional form of strip mining called area mining wherein the overburden above the coal is removed in parallel strips across the coal field until the area is mined. Draglines excavate the overburden by creating wide trenches or cuts and piling the spoil along the side of the cut. When mining in a coalfield begins, the first cut is called a box cut and the dirt and rock material fiom the cut is called box cut spoil. This spoil differs fiom other spoil in that it is placed outside and adjacent to the cut being mined onto lands that have not been mined. The other spoil, internal spoil, results from cuts created after the initial box cut and is placed directly into the adjacent, previously mined cut (Figure 1). Draglines are the primary excavators for overburden material. They will also remove partings as parting

thickness and field conditions indicate. Equipment such as trucks and shovels or loaders and scrapers may also be used to assist with overburden or parting removal. When trucks and shovels or scrapers are utilized, excavated material remains in the cut or pit area. A bulldozer is continually assigned to each dragline to perform bench leveling, access road preparation, trailing cable relocation and miscellaneous duties. The major equipment utilized at each n i n e is shown in Tables 1 and 2. Specific information for draglines and shovels may be found in Figures 2, 3,4, 5, G and 8.

Revised 02114/00

ORIGINAL QROUND

KEYWAY

OVERBURDEN

-N E X T P I T TO BE MINED

SUBSEQUENT PlTS

ACTIVE PIT SPOIL ORIGINAL GROUND

OVERBURDEN

--Note: Not to Scale FIGURE 1 TYPICAL PIT CROSS SECTIONS MINED PITS

BUCYRUS .E R I E

2570 W

2 5 7 0 WALKING DRAGLINE SPECIFICATIONS WEIGHTS:

NET WEIGHT* DOMESTIC APPROX (WITH BUCKET + 8 0 ' BASE) LBS 10.430. 0 0 0 WORKING WEIGHT APPROX (WITH BUCKET) LBS 11.180.000 BALLAST UEIGHT (FURNISHED BY PURCHASER) LBS 750. 0 0 0 ADD 90.000 LBS FOR BLOCKING ON CARS WHEN ESTIMATING DOMESTIC FREIGHT

. . ..
.

.

......... ........................... .........................

.

ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT: HOIST MOTORS (BLOW) EIGHT 5 0 0 HP DRAG MOTORS (BLOWN) S I X 5 0 0 HP SUING MOTORS (BLOW) FOUR 62511250 HP WALKING MOTORS (BLOWN) FOUR 500/1000 HP ALL ABOVE HOTORS RATED AT 75O CONTINUOUS AND AT 2301460V MT SET DRIVES: FOUR 2.500 HP SYNCHRONOUS MOTORS

WORKING DIMENSIONS CLEARANCE RADIUS. FT I N OPERATING RADIUS F T BOOM FOOT RADIUS FT..IN CLEARANCE HEIGHT. FT..IN BOOM FOOT HEIGHT FT .IN DUMPING CLEARANCE. F T I N BOOM POINT HEIGHT FT DIGGING DEPTH, FT POIKT SHEAVE PITCH DIAMETER BUCKET S I Z E BOOM LENGTH FT BOOM ANGLE MAX SUSPENDED LOAD (TONS)

.................. ................... .................. ................

.

.

I N .................. ...................................... .................................. ....................................... ........................

.

. .. ......................... . ............................. ......................... ......................... . ... ......................... ........................ . ............................ .................................
.

80-0 329 30-0 14-0 16-0
72

204 160 144 9 0 C.Y 366' 225
35

.

.

BASE:

OUTSIDE DIAMETER FT .IN BEARING AREA SQ FT CIRCLE RAIL DIAHETER FT .IN UALKING MOUNTING:

. . . . .................... . ........................ . ................

80-0 5026 54-0

SHOE WIDTH AND LENGTH. F T COMBINED BEARING AREA SQ FT OVERALL WIDTH OVER SHOES FT.-IN LENGTH OF STEP APPROX FT..IN WALKING SPEED APPROX MPH

.................... ............ . . .............. ............ .. .. ..................

14x72 2016 110-6 8-6 0.15

FIGURE 2 BUCYRUS-ERIE 2 5 7 0 W

Revised 7/01/97

M A R I O N 8750

8 7 5 0 WALKING DRAGLINE SPECIFICATIONS YEIWS DOHESTIC SHIPPING YEIGHT ( I N C BUCKET) LBS UORKING WEIGHTS LBS B A L W T (FURNISHED BY PURCHASER) LBS ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT

.

....... . ............................. . ............

9.200.000 9.800.000 600.000

HOIST MOTORS. EIGHT. 1000 HP EACH @ 4 6 0 V. DRAG MOTORS S I X 1 0 0 0 HP EACH @ 4 6 0 V SWING MOTORS. FOUR 1 0 0 0 HP EACH @ 4 6 0 V.. PROPEL MOTORS FOUR. 6 0 0 HP EACH @ 4 6 0 V.. AC D R I V l NG MOTORS. TOTAL HP ROTATING FRAHE

. .. .

TOTAL HP .... . . TOTAL HP..... TOTAL HP .... TOTAL HP .... ............................

8. 0 0 0 6.000 4.000 2. 4 0 0 10. 2 5 0

DIMENSIONS BOW! LENGTH A B O W ANGLE APPROX B WHPIfiG RADIWa... C DUMPING HEIGHT D DEPTH HAXlUlM ALLCrdAELE LOAD LBS B U C m SIZE BASE

. -

...................................... . ........................... ............................... ........................................ .................. ..................................

.

.WIDTH @ REAR EN0 ................................... 80'-0' .LENGTH...........................................109'-0' L .CLEARANCE RADIUS .REAR EN0 ........................ 77'-0'' H .CLEARANCE UNDER FRAHE .............................. 1 5 ' - 1 0 "
J K
N P

- GROUND TO BOW FOOTBOOM FOOT....................... CENTER ROTATION TO . ................................

24'-0' 21'-4"

1

WALKING TRACTION F G H

E

.OUTSIDE

DIAMETER .N W I N A L BEARING AREA EFFECTIVE, SQ R A I L CIRCLE IW D I A

. .

. FT............. .......................

...................

.WIDTH OF SHOE..................................... 13l.6 .LENGTH OF SHOE .................................... 65'-0' .WIDTH OVER BOTH SHOES .............................. 101'-0' BEARING AREA OF BOTH SHOES SQ . FT ................. 1.750 LENGTH OF STEP .APPROX ...................... .... 7'.0 rn WALKING SPEED .APPROX ..IPH ........................ 0.14

.

.

; .

FIGURE 3 MAR~ON 8750

Revised 7/01/97

h n Length Bwn Point Sheme, Pitch D i m Bmn Angle. Pgpox Durping Rdius hnpirg tki* Depth Load. lbs Maxim All&le

................................ 331'-0' .......... 12b. ...................... ...-34.......................... 2gs1-(r. .......................... 1 2 6 ' 9 ................................... 360. aX) ............. 160'.4r
. . .

Width @ Rear End Length Clearme Rdius . Rear End C l e z a r e Uldg Frare Center Rotation to Bwn Foot m d to Bwn Foot u

..........................................6 7 ' 4 .................................................... 9l1* ............................... 11'4" ..................................... 68'4" ..............................21'6.......................................15'4"

Outside D i e Noninal Besing Area Effective. sq ft b i q Presswe. psi Rail Circle Mean Diamter

................. 68'4' . ........... ...................... 363 15.9 ................46'6"

Hoist Pbtors. Far. 1300 hp each @ 475 V Total hp 5200 Ck-ag F t . For. 13M)tip e& @ 475 V Total hp bm 5200 Swing Fbtcrs. Standard. Fotr. 800 hp eazh @ 475 V Total hp 3MO Rapel )ibtors. Two. 1045 hp each @ 475 V Total hp 2043 AC Ilriving bt0t-s. Total tp 7WO

.. ........... ........... . . .......... .................................
.
.....,.... 6.600.

.............................. 13'6" .............................68'4" Width Over Both Shoes...................... 98'4" B e a i q Ae of Both Shoes. sq. ft ......... 1690 ra L m of Step -+ .................... 6'4"
Width of Shoe

Lergth of Shoe

t b m t i c Shipping Wei*. (inc W e t ) . lbs W g i n lbs Ballast (Fmished by Puchaser). lbs

kist.

................................... 7.750. a30 ................. 1.150. 000

000

FIGURE 4 MARION 8200

Revised 7/01/97

BUCYRUS

.E R I E

1260 W

1260 WALKING DRAGLINE UEIWTS: SPECIFICATIONS NET YEIGHT*. WnESTIC APPROX (WITH BUCKET + 50' BASE) LBS 2.805. 000 MRKING MIGHT. APPROX . (WITH BUCKET) LBS 3.265.000 BALLAST MIGHT (FURNISHED BY PURCHASER) LBS 460. 000 ADD 200.000 LBS . FOR 55' TUB ADD 12.500 LBS FOR BLOCKING ON CARS WHEN ESTIMATING DOMESTIC FREIGHT

.

.

.

........... ............................. ........................... .

.
50-0
. 55 . 0 2.375 34-0

S I N G WTDRS (BLOYN) FOUR 175/350 HP TWO 150/300 HP W K I N G IOTORS (UNBLOYN) ALL ABOVE MITORS RATED AT 75O CONTINUOUS AND AT 230/4601 ffi SET DRIVES: MIE 1750 HP SYNCHRONOUS MOTOR ONE 700 HP INDUCTION MOTOR KALKING WUNTING: W E . UIDTH AID LENGTH. FT COnslNED BEARING AREA SQ FT OVERALL UIOTH OVER SHOES FT LENGTH OF STEP APPROX FT.-IN ULKING SPEED APPROX . MPH

WIST MTORS (BLOYN)............... DRAG EaTORS (BLOVN)

ELECTRICAL EQUIPMT:

................ ............... ...........

TUO 500/1ooo HP TWO 500/1000 HP

BASE : OUTSIDE DIAMETER. F.I. T.N BEARING AREA SQ FT CIRCLE RAIL DIAMETER. FT .N I

. . ...................... 1, 965

.................

..............

.
WORKING DIMENSIONS: A CLEARANCE RADIUS FT .N I B OPERATING RADIUS FT C B O W FOOT RADIUS F.I T.N 0 CLEARANCE HEIGHT F.I T.N E BOOM FOOT HEIGHT. F .N T I F DUMPING CLEARANCE. FT .N I G BOOM POINT HEIGHT Fl H DIGGING DEPTH. FT ! J POINT SHEAVE PITCH DIAMETER IN BUCKET SIZE BOOM LENGTH. FT BOOM ANGLE MAX . SUSPENDED LOAD (TONS)

..

.............. 9x54 10x56 . ..... 972 1.120 ............ . . .............. 70 7-4 77 ........... 0.17

.

........................ ............................. .............

. .................... ............... .. ............... . . ............... ............... . .............. . .................. .. ................... . ........ ............................

FIGURE 5 BUCYRUS-ERIE 1260

Revised 7/01/97

MARION 7 8 0 0

7800 WALKING DRAGLINE SPECIFICATIONS EIGHTS: WHESTIC SHIP. YT LESS BAL. APPROX.. 2,400,000 LBS. LESS BAL. APPROX.. EXPORT SHIP. YT. 2.525.000 LBS. BALLAST ( FURNISHED BY PURCHASER) 275,000 LBS. UORKING WEIWT WITH BALLAST 2.675.000 LBS. FOR ACTUAL WMESTIC SHIPPING WEIGHT. AM) 25,000 LBS. FOR BLOCKING.

-

-

............... ................ .................... ........................

ELECTRICAL:

A.C. WTORS DRIVING ROTOR GENERATOR SETS GENERATOR CAPACITY .......................................TO HOISTING WTORS T O EACH 425 HP WITH BLOWER W. P D W I N G HOTORS TWO. EACH 425 H WITH BLOWER P ROTATING MOTORS THREE. EACH 125 H WITH BLOWER BOOn HOIST MOTOR..

-

SUIT ................. MOTORS H ................. 850 HP - ...........................-................. 850 HP ............... 375 HP P 15

..........TOTAL.. .....

1400 H P

BASE: OUTSIDE DIAMETER BEARING AREA DIAnElER O RAIL CIRCLE F W K I t l G TRACTION SHOE WIDTH.. LENGTH.. AREA O BOTH SHOES F LENGTH OF STEP OVERALL WIDTH OF SHOES.. WKING SPEED

.................................. 46 '-Om ...................................... 32'-9' SQ. 1662 ........................... 8'-on ................... 44'-0' .................. ................................ 704 .................................... 6'-8' SQ.n .......................... 64'-0. ..................................... 0.15 WH

HEAVY D m . . B u c m SIZE BOW LENGTH BOOn ANGLE APPROX.. WWING RADIUS m.. W I N G HEIGHT MAX DIGGING DEPTH STANDARD CABLES. DIGGING DEPTH N OVERWIND O MXIMU4 ALLOWABLE LOAD LBS.. CLEARAlKE RADIUS REAR END CLEARANCE UNDER UPPER FRAME.. CLEARANCE HEIGHT OF A-FRAME.. DISTANCE FROM GROUND TO TOP OF HOUSE

........................ 30_CU.YD., ....................................... 184'-0" - - ............................. 174'............................ ....31a4. - .............................. 53'-09 .................. 100'-Om ....................... 167'-Om .................... 48'-0' - - ....................... 5165,000 ..................... 69'-4" '-4" ..................... 34'6. ..............

Revised 7/01/97

295-8 SHOVEL SPECIFICATIONS COAL/ROCK DIVIDER SHOVEL WEIGHTS: NET WEIGHT WITHOUT BALLAST AND WITHOUT DIPPER. LBS .................................. BALLAST FURNISHED BY PURCHASER. LBS ........... ...................................... COAL/ROCK DIPPER (19 CUBIC YARD) LBS ........... ...................................... WORKING WEIGHT. WITH DIPPER LBS ............... ......................................

..

.

.

.

ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT: WARD LEONARD DRIVE CONTROL .SIMPLIFIED STATIC (SPEED REGULATED) POWER .3 PHASE 6 0 CYCLE 7200 VOLTS INDUCTION MOTOR HP 800 CONTINUOUS 2000 INTERMITTENT DC MOTORS:

.

.

CRAWLER TRUCK MOUNTING: WIDTH OF TREADS ...................... OVERALL WIDTH OF MOUNTING ............ OVERALL LENGTH OF MOUNTING ........... TOTAL EFFECTIVE BEARING AREA SQ . FT . BEARING PRESSURE P.S.1 ..............

.

.

HOIST .BLOWN 1 SWING .BLOW4 2 CROWD .B L O W 1 PROPEL .BLOWN 1 (IN LOWER WORKS) WORK1 NG RANGE :

(800 (195 (195 (500

HP HP HP HP

AT AT AT AT

475 475 475 475

V.) 75'~ V.) RISE V.) CONT V.)

HEIGHT OF BOOM FOOT ABOVE GROUND LEVEL ....................... ...................... N. DISTANCE - BOOM FOOT TO CENTER OF ROTATION .................. .p. ...................... OPERATOR'S EYE LEVEL .........................................U. ......................

C O W R O C K DIPPER CAPACITY. CUBIC YARDS ............................................... LENGTH OF BOOM .................................................................. 85'-0" 19 EFFECTIVE LENGTH OF DIPPER M N D L E ...................................................... 471-6" ANGLE OF B m .................................. i ..................................... 41-1/20 DUMPING HEIGHT MAXIMUM .................................... .A ....................... 57"-3" DUMPING HEIGHT AT HAXIMUN RADIUS 35rn-o" DUMPING RADIUS AT M4XIMUM HEIGHT ..................................................... A ........................ .B ....................... 77--6 DUMPING RADIUS - HAXIMUM ............................................................. 84'-0" DUMPING RADIUS AT 16'-0" DUMPING HEIGHT ...................... 82 ...................... 791-gn CUTTING HEIGHT MAXIMUM ..................................... . O D D..................... 75'-6" CUTTING RADIUS - N X I M U M ..................................... E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E 92'-6" 57*-9~ RADIUS OF LEVEL FLOOR ........................................ G ....................... DIGGING OEPlH BELOW GROUND LEVEL MAXIMUM. .................. .H ................... ; ... 5'-0CLEARANCE HEIGHT BOOM POINT SHEAVES ......................... I ....................... 771-9" CLEARANCE RADIUS BOOM POINT SHEAVES ......................... ....................... J rj8*-gM CLEARANCE IUOIUS REVOLVING F W E ............................KKK.. ................... 28'-1CLEARANCE UNDER FRAME TO GROUND ............................ ....................... .L 8'-6" CLEARANCE HEIGHT OF OPERATOR'S CAB ...........................M. ...................... 27'-8* HEIGHT OF A-FRAME M1 49'-10'

-

-

.

. .. .

.

............................................. ......................

12'-2' 8'-5" 24'-0"

FIGURE 8 BUCYRUS-ERIE 2 9 5 8
I

9'

Revised 7/01/97

TABLE 1
Major Equipment List for Kayenta Mine* Primary Excavation Equipment
Draglines: Shovels: Bucyrus-Erie, (1) Model 2570-W, (1) Model 1260-W Marion, (1) Model 8750, (1) Model 8200 Bucyrus-Erie, (1) Model 295B

Major Support Equipment
Blasthole Drills:

(1) Ingersoll-Rand DM252SP, (1) Ingersoll-Rand 270SPC
(2) Ingersoll-Rand DML, (1) Drill Tech D245S (2) Drill Tech D55 SP

Haulage Trucks: Dozers: Scrapers: Loaders: Motor Graders: Water Trucks:

Caterpillar 789, (8) 250-tons, bottom-dump Caterpillar 785, (4) 150-ton end-dump Caterpillar, (2) Model 690, Caterpillar (2) Model D6 Caterpillar (8) Model Dl 0, Caterpillar (9) Model D l 1 Caterpillar, (3) Model 63 1 Caterpillar, (6) Model 992, (3) Model 9 10 Caterpillar, (3) Model 16 (3) Off-Highway Water Trucks

* As of November 2 1,2003

Revised 01/23/04

TABLE 2
Major Equipment List For Black Mesa Mine*
Primary Excavation Equipment Draglines: Marion, (1) Model 8750, (1) Model 7800

Major Support Equipment Blasthole Drills: Drilltech, (1) Model D55SP2L, (1) Model D245S Ingersoll-Rand, (1) Model DMM3, (1) Model DM35SP,

(1) Model DM30
Haulage Truclts: (6) 150-ton, bottom-dump Caterpillar 789, (3) 250-tons, bottom-dump Caterpillar 785, (3) 150-tons, end-dump Rimpull, (2) 250-ton, bottom-dump Dozers: Scrapers: Loaders: Motor Graders: Water Trucks: *As of November 21,2003 Caterpillar, (6) Model D-10, (6) Model D-1 1 Caterpillar, (2) Model 690 Caterpillar, (2) Model 63 1 Caterpillar, (2) Model 637 Caterpillar, (1) Model 916, (5) Model 992 Caterpillar, (4) Model 16 (3) Off-Highway Water Trucks

Revised 0 1/23/04

The overburden excavation process begins with the digging of a narrow slot, or key cut, down to the coal seam to establish the highwall (Figure 10). The location of the key cut and the spoil establishes the width of the pit. The dragline positions itself above the area to be excavated and in line with the direction the cut is progressing. The dragline bucket is lowered to the material to be excavated, drawn toward the dragline, lifted, and swung to the side, at which point it dumps or spoils the excavated material into a previously mined cut or along the side of the cut onto uninined ground, This process is repeated until the entire area in front of the dragline has been excavated. The dragline then repositions itself and begins another key cut and starts the process again. This procedure is followed until the operational limits of the machine are achieved or pit boundaries are reached. At this point, the dragline walks, or deadheads, to where the next cut is to begin. The entire process starts again with each successive cut being excavated parallel to the previously mined cut and continues until excavation activities are complete within the pit.
An alternative to the highwall-side overburden excavation process is to level a bench on the spoil-side and

position the dragline on the spoil-side to excavate the overburden and pull back the spoil over the coal seam (Figures 11 and 12). The main advantage of this method is to enable a dragline which has a limited operating radius to handle overburden covers of greater depth than would nonnally be contemplated. Other advantages of this overburden excavation process include better coal recovery in deeper overburden, reduced auxiliary equipment required for overburden excavation, increased spoil stability, reduced material rehandle, and maintaining an adequate pit width. The disadvantages include the need to prepare a spoil side bench, sequencing the spoil-side benching operation with the pit operations, and increased dragline cycle times. Typically, at the Black Mesa Complex in deeper overburden, the upper coal seams may be uncovered on the highwall side and the lower seams uncovered on the spoil side. The positioning of the overburden removal equipment will be determined on a pit by pit basis to allow the most efficient coal recovery. Partings at the Black Mesa mining complex vary radically due to the Deltaic deposition process that formed the coal beds. The partings may vary in thickness from six inches to more than fifty feet in the length of one cut (pit). Therefore, parting removal must be accomplished with a variety of equipment, which includes draglines, shovels, bulldozers, and sometimes truck and shovel operations. The selection of parting removal equipment is dependent upon the operational requirements within each pit. A dragline will generally remove partings in excess of 15 feet; however, it may occasionally remove partings as thin as 5 feet. Shovels and front-end loaders are utilized to remove partings that range in thickness from 3 to 15 feet. Occasionally, end dump trucks are used in conjunction with a shovel or front-end loader to remove partings within a pit. Bulldozers may remove partings that are less than three feet thick by first ripping the parting and afterwards pushing it off the coal seam to be removed. Once the overburden or parting has been removed from above the coal seam, any remaining overburden material is cleared from the top of the coal seam utilizing rubber-tired or track-type dozers. 12 Revised 05117/02

FIGURE 11
r ADVANCE BENCH

/

EXPOSED LOWER COAL SEAM

UPPER CCUL-/

SEAM REMOVED

LEVEL
THE PREVIOUS

LREHANDLE MATERIAL TO FORM LEVEL BENCH

PIAN AND CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW
SPOIL-SIDE OVERBURDEN STRIPPING

Revised 0511 9/95

FIGURE

12

EXPOSED THIRD C O X S E A M SPOIL PEAKS
. , I

1-

3 A L TO FORM

PLAN

SPOIL-SIDE OVERBURDEN STRIPPING Revised 05/19/95

AND

CROSS SECTIOllAL VIEW

The coal seam is then drilled and blasted using the same procedures that are followed to fraginent overburden parting (see Chapter 7). Rubber-tired front-end loaders and electric shovels are primarily used to load the coal into haulage trucks for transportation to preparation areas. Shovels are used in areas where a large amount of coal is to be loaded and mobility of the loader is not a prime consideration. Rubber-tired front-end loaders are used to load coal on thinner seams and in areas where mobility of the loader is required. Haulage from the pits to preparation areas is accomplished by bottom dump trucks ranging in capacity from 150 to 250 tons. Occasionally, 150-ton end dumps or smaller equipment may also be used. Haulage trucks are routed to pits as necessary to meet production and coal quality requirements.

Revised 05117/02

Coal Leases
The mining leases, which PWCC has signed with the Navajo and Hopi Tribes, are described in Chapter 3. The leases, shown in Figure 18, provide that PWCC may produce up to 290 million tons from the exclusive Navajo Lease Area (Contract 14-20-0603-8580) and up to 380 million tons from the Hopi and Navajo Joint Mineral Ownership Lease Area (Contracts 14-20-0603-9910 and 14-20-0450-5743) for a combined total of 670 million tons.

Coal Supply Agreements
PWCC has signed coal supply agreements and is presently negotiating extensions to supply coal to the Mohave and Navajo Generating Stations. The participants and operating agents for each of these generating stations are shown in Table 3. The forecasted mine plan reserve areas within the leased lands are shown in Figure 19. Approxinlately 803 million tons of potentially econon~icalcoal reserves are available within the existing coal leases and proposed permit boundary. As of Janualy 1, 2003 approximately 345 million of the 670 million tons, currently under lease, has been mined.

Historical Coal Production
,

Peabody Coal Conlpany began mining operations on the Black Mesa at the Black Mesa Mine in 1970. Coal resource areas that have been completely mined since that time include J-1, 5-3, and J-27. The 5-7 and N-6 coal resource areas are currently being mined. As of January 1, 2003, approximately 136,134,000 tons of coal was produced at Black Mesa Mine and approximately 6,870 acres of land was disturbed by mining activities. Tables 4 and 5 summarize the coal production at the Black Mesa Mine. Figure 20 shows annual coal production at the Black Mesa Mine and at the Black Mesa mining complex. Mining operations began at the Kayenta Mine in 1973. Since then, the N-1, N-2, N-718, J-16, and N-14 resource areas have been completely mined. Active mining operations are currently ongoing in the N-11, .I-19, and J-21 coal resource areas. Mining in the N-10 coal area began in 1979. The pit was temporarily closed in 1981 due to poor coal quality. As of January 1, 2003, approximately 206,831,800 tons of coal was produced at Kayenta Mine and approximately 13,843 acres of land has been disturbed by mining activities. Tables 4 and 10 summarize the coal production at the Kayenta Mine. Figure 20 shows annual coal production at the Kayenta Mine and at the Black Mesa mining complex.

.

Revised 11/21/03

FIGURE

18

BLACK MESA LEASES P E A B O D Y COAL COMPANY

TABLE 3
Participants in the Mohave and Navajo Generating Stations

Mohave Generating;Station Participants
56%

Southern California Edison Company (The Operating Agent) Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District Nevada Power Company Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles

20% 14% 10%

Navaio Generating Station Participants
24.3% 21.7% 21.2% 14.0% 11.3%
7.5%

United States Bureau of Reclamation Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (The Operating Agent) Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles Arizona Public Service Company Nevada Power Company Tucson Gas and Electric Company

Revised 0 1/23/04

RESERVES RESERVES

I

I

FIGURE 19 RESERVES OF T H E BLACK MESA LEASES PEABODY WESTERN COAL COMPANY 20

REVISED 0 l/Z3/Z.OO4

-

:
-

EO OZ - ZOOZ COOZ - OOOZ 666 C 866 C L66 C 966 1 S66 C P66 C E66 C 166 C - C66L - 066 C - 686 C 886 1. L86 C
-

986, S86C W P86C

%

Revised 01/23/04

TABLE 4
PRODUCTION SUMMARY BLACK MESA AND M Y E N T A MINES

LEASE NAVAJO NAVAJO NAVAJO JOINT JOINT JOINT BOTH*

PERIOD 1970-2000 2001-END 1970-END 1970-2000 2001-END 1970-END 1970-END

BLACK MESA MINE (MOHAVE STATION)

KAYENTA MINE (NAVAJO STATION)

TOTAL

I

183,593,700 317,308,000

303,419,900 485,296,900

487,013,600 802,604,9001

NOTE: *The total coal reserves leased by Peabody is 670,000,000 tons. An additional 132,745,800 tons is available within the lease boundaries. Current coal supply agreements are curenntly being renogtiated. As of 1/1/2004 approximately 95,000,000 tons is needed to meet existing coal supply agreements.

Revised 1112 1/03

TABLE 5
PRODUCTION SUMMARY BLACK MESA MINE TOTAL
Coal * Acres (Mined) 366.6 Recovered Tons (1000) 4,846.7 Virgin Yardage (1000) 14,973 Virgin Ratio 3.1

Year 1986

I Grand Total
NOTE:

24,632.6

261,384.9

1,340,712

5.1

1

* Coal acres is the traditional industry standard for calculating the aerial

extent of each coal seam. In multi-seam coal operations with multibenches, surface acres have overlap from seam mined. For surface acres, see Drawing No. 85210.

Revised 11121103

Future Coal Production
PWCC is proposing a life-of-mine (LOM) mining plan for the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines, which includes producing approximately 670 million tons between 1970, and the end of the life-of-mine (LOM) mining plan. The LOM Mining Plan has been prepared so as to show the planned sequence of mining by year through the present pernit term (beginning in 2000) and thereafter in approximate five-year increments through 201 0. Mining reserve areas beyond 2010 have been identified on Drawing 85210. If both electric generating stations serviced by the Black Mesa complex complete coal supply renegotiations it is anticipated the combined fuel supply requirements will equal approximately 670 million tons. This leaves approximately 133 million tons of additional coal reserves within the lease boundary that may be leased at some future date (Table 4). In 1987, a total of 670 million tons of coal reserves were leased from the tribes and these coal reserves are sufficient to supply the anticipated coal supply agreements. The current permit assumption is that cessation of mining activities will occur when the 670 million tons of coal reserves have been produced. Given these assun~ptions, coal production at the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mine will continue through 2025. The mining sequence is shown in Drawings 85210. Coal production is summarized by mine in Tables 5 and 10. Similar data for each mine area is given in Tables 6 through 9 and 11 through 17. The dragline utilization sequence for each mine through 2010 is shown in Figure 21. The quality, strike, and dip of each coal seam to be mined is given in Table 18. A summary of coal production by coal seam and mining area is given in Table 19. Coal reserve and recovery information may be found in Table 20. Typical cross sections of mining areas may be found in Chapter 25. The location of the cross sections may be found on the Mine Plan Map, Drawing 85210. Following are discussions briefly outlining anticipated mining operations in each coal resource area.

Black Mesa Mine. The 5-7 coal resource area is located approximately two miles south of the Black Mesa
Mine office in the west tract of the Joint Mineral Ownership Lease Area. Mining began in this pit in 1975, and at the current production rate, mining will continue until approximately the year 2005. The area will continue to be mined to the south with the Blue and Red coal seams being removed. Primary overburden excavation will be performed by the Marion 7800 dragline. In order to extend the life-of-pit to approximately the year 2005 and to maximize coal recovery, the entire 5-7 coal reserve shown on Drawing No. 85210 will be mined.

Revised 11121/03

TABLE 6
PRODUCTION SUMMARY 57 Coal Resource Area Black Mesa Mine
Year 1986 Coal Acres 98.2 Tons (1000) 1,220.6 Coal Thk 8.6 Yards Average Virgin (1000) Burden Depth Ratio 3,508 22.1 2.9

l ~ r a n Total d

1,539.7

21,698.3

9.7

83,938

39.0

3.91

*J7 reserve mined out in 2005

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 7 PRODUCTION SUMMARY
N6 Coal Resource Area Black Mesa Mine
Coal Acres 268.4 Tons (1000) 3,626.1 Coal Thk 8.4 Yards Average (1000) Burden Depth 11,465 26.5 Virgin Ratio 3.2

Year 1986

rand Total

6,505.6

79,651.7

7.9

.

335,609

31.2

4.2

1

*N6 reserve mined out in 2007

Revised 11121I03

TABLE 8
PRODUCTION SUMMARY J2,J4,J6,J8, J9, JlO, 514, J15,J23 Coal Resource Areas Black Mesa Mine
Coal Acres 1,011.2
4,681.7 5,692.9

I
I

Area J-23
J-23 J-23

Year 2006-2010
201 1- End

Tons (1000) 10,591.4
44,581.6 55,173.0

Coal Thk 6.9
6.4 6.7

Yards Avg. Thk. (1000) Ovb. 1 lnt. 39,874 24.4
188,743 228,616 25.0 24.9

Virgin ~atio 3.8
4.2 4.1

1
1

Total

I

Area J-2
J-4 J-6

Year 2011- End
201 1- End 201 1- End 2011- End 201 1- End 2011-End 201 1- End 201 1- End

Coal Acres 894.6
401.9 1,221.I 471.3 546.4 695.9 1,246.9 1,297.5 6,775.6 12,469

Tons (1000) 7,428.9
4,203.1 14,808.5 5,474.4 6,325.9 5,232.3 12,032.2 10,020.9 65,526.2 120,699

Coal Thk 5.4
6.6 7.9 8.0 7.7 4.9 6.3 4.9 6.5 6.5

Yards Avg. Thk. (1000) Ovb. 1 lnt. 44,972 31.2
24,718 128,287 19,856 32,715 34,509 76,237 53,022 414,315 642,932 38.1 65.1 26.1 37.1 30.7 37.9 25.3 37.9 32.0

Virgin Ratio 6.1
5.9 8.7 3.6 5.2 6.6 6.3 5.3 6.3

I
I 1

J-8 J-9 J-10 J-14 J-15

1 1 1 1
[

I
1 1 1

I

Grand Total

I

Grand Total with J-23

5.31

Revised 1 112 1/03

TABLE 9 PRODUCTION SUMMARY
N9 and N10 Coal Resource Areas Black Mesa Mine
Coal Acres Tons (1000) Coal Thk Yards (1000) Avg. Thk. Ovb. / Int. Virgin Ratio

Area

Year

I

N-9 201 1 - END N-9

562.6 1,882.9

6,380.3 16,175.4

7.7 6.3

32,746 86,673

36.1 28.5

5.1 5.4

Total

1 1

Area

Year

Coal Acres
2.235.8 2,235.8

Tons (1000)
23.160.3 23,160.3

Coal Thk
6.7 6.7

Yards Avg. Thk. (1000) Ovb. / Int.
1915 5 9 191,559 53.1 53.1

Virgin Ratio
8.3 8.3

N-10 201 1 - END

1

1

N-10

Total

1

Revised 1112 1/03

TABLE 10
PRODUCTION SUMMARY KAYENTA MINE TOTAL
Coal * Recovered Acres Tons (Mined) (1000) Virgin Yardage (1000) Virgin Ratio

Year

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

648.4 691.7 742.7 869.7 780.0 880.6 822.9 788.8 849.4 751.0 683.8 753.1 799.9 845.4

6,872.2 7,146.9 7,426.1 7,882.5 7,547.0 8,206.8 7,946.0 7,869.3 8,131.3 7,277.1 6,405.6 7,304.7 7,224.2 7,427.6

38,140 34,059 35,586 39,176 37,004 39,716 40,443 39,576 49,916 52,391 50,808 51,461 49,072 42,611

5.5 4.8 4.8 5.0 4.9 4.8 5.1 5.0 6.1 7.2 7.9 7.0 6.8 5.7

I Grand Total
NOTE:

43,360.4

408,906.4

2,454,815

6.01

* Coal acres is the traditional industry standard for calculating the aerial extent of each coal seam. In multi-seam coal operations with multibenches, surface acres have overlap from seam mined. For surface acres, see Drawing No. 85210.

Revised 11121/03

TABLE 11
PRODUCTION SUMMARY 516 Coal Resource Area Kayenta Mine
Coal Acres 171.7 Tons Coal (1000) Thk 1,895.8 7.0 Yards (1000) 10,79 1 Avg. Virgin Ovb. ~ e $ h ~ a i i o 40.0 5.7

Year 1986

I

Grand Total

1,646.5

17,101.5

6.6

103,852

39.1

6.11

Revised 05/17/02

TABLE 12
PRODUCTION SUMMARY J19 Coal Resource Area Kayenta Mine
Coal Acres 0.00 Tons (1000) 0.0 Coal Thk 0.0 Yards (1000) 0 Avg. Thk. 0vb. 1 lnt.
0.0

Year 1986-1992

Virgin ~atio 0.0

(

Grand Total

10,285.57

105,174.8

6.4

585,597

35.3

5.61

Revised 1 1121/03

TABLE 13
PRODUCTION SUMMARY 521 Coal Resource Area Kayenta Mine
Coal Acres 301.00 Tons (1000) 3,065.5 Coal Thk 6.4 Yards Avg. Thk. (1000) Ovb. / Int. 12,269 25.3 Virgin Ratio 4.0

Year 1986

I

Grand Total 17,519.19

160,963.5

6.0

758,328

30.0

4.71

Revised 1 112 1/03

TABLE 14
PRODUCTION SUMMARY 528 Coal Resource Area Kayenta Mine
Coal Acres 1,094.93 Tons (1000) 10,062.4 Coal Thk 6.0 Yards Avg. Thk. (1000) Ovb. 1 lnt. 61,111 34.60 Virgin ~atio 6.071

1

Year 201 1- End

I

Grand Total

1,094.93

10,062.4

6.0

61,111

34.60

6.071

Revised 1 1/21/03

TABLE 15
PRODUCTION SUMMARY Nl1 Coal Resource Area Kayenta Mine
Coal Acres 0.00
- -

Year 1986- 1994

Tons ( I 000) 0.0

Coal Thk 0.0

Yards (1000) 0

Avg. Thk. 0vb. / Int.

0.0

Virgin Ratio 0.0

l ~ r a n Total d

1,575.33

15,002.9

5.4

107,551

46.5

7.21

Revised 1 112 1/03

TABLE 16
PRODUCTION SUMMARY N-14 COAL RESOURCE AREA KAYENTA MINE

AVG.

AVERAGE

YEAR
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1986-1997

COAL ACRES MINED
158.2 138.1 195.9 20 1.2 180.9 209.0 213.4 163.5 10.1

RECOVERED TONS (Xl 000)
1,679.5 1,421.6 2,009.3 2,143.1 2,048.2 2,194.4 2,418.7 2,101.4 168.0 11.3

SEAM THICKNESS FT.
6.7 6.5 6.5 6.7 7.1 6.6 7.2 8.1 10.5

VIRGIN YARDAGE (X 1000)
14,738 12,090 14,601 15,106 13,700 13,924 15,876 9,912

OW. DEPTH FT.
57.8 54.3 46.2 46.5 46.9 41.3 46.1 37.6

VIRGIN RATIO YDS / TONS
8.8 8.5 7.3 7.0 6.7 6.3 6.6 4.7

1,470.3

Revised 01/25/02

TABLE 17
PRODUCTION SUMMARY N99 Coal Resource Area Kayenta Mine
Coal Acres Tons (1000) Coal Thk Yards (1000) Avg. Thk. 0vb. / lnt. Virain Ratio

Year
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2001-2005

60.01 60.01 1,702.07 7,647.56 9,409.64

427.2 427.2 17,343.3 63,163.0 80,933.5

4.62 0.0 6.62 5.4 6.0

9,850.5 9,851 157,296.5 553,838 720,985

73.8 73.8 52.0 45.0 48.5

23.1 23.1

(

2006-2010 201 1-End

1 9.1 1

I
I

8.81 8.91

Grand Total

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 18
SUMMARY OF COAL QUALITY, STRIKE, AND DIP BY COAL RESOURCE AREA AND SEAM
AREA
J-07 HORIZON
% ASH

% SULFUR

BTU
11,162 11,968 12,626 12,328 12,128 12,375 12,703 12,914 11,889 12,866 12,592 13,961 12,596 12,407 12,823 12,336 12,030 12,728 12,807 12,404 12,458 13,066 11,729 12,704 12,964 12,164 12,614 12,851 12,705 12,262 12,883 17,279 12,362 12,724 12,483 12,364

STRIKE (DEGREES) N39W N40 W N31W N42W N38W N29E N22W N15W N50W N22W N17W N27E N59E N57W N40E N35E N71W N21W N27E N59E N57W N48 W N34W N34W N33W N9E N4E N19W N28 W N20W N32W N63E N83E N82E N40W N66W

DIP
(DEGREES) 2.4W 1.5W 2.4 W I .XW 4.2W I.8W 2.0W 2.1W 2.5W 2.2W 2.0W 3.1W 1.3E 1.8W I .6E 2.9W 2.1W 2.0W 2.1W 1.3E I .8W 2.2W ?.OW 1.8W 2.1W 4.4W 5.2W 1.5W 0.8W 1.1W 1.2W 1.4W 0.6W 0.5W 0.3W 0.2E

Violet Cneen Blue Red Violet Green Blue Red Violet ('nee11 Blue Red Yellow Urowu Orange Violet Green Blue Red Yellow Brown Orange Red Brown Orange Brown Orange Red Brown Yellow Orange ireen 131ue Red Yellow Brown
(

9.73 8.84 7.09 9.66 10.31 8.91 6.78 5.59 10.12 5.04 6.77 5.01 7.73 9.35 7.06 8.72 10.94 6.72 6.14 9.7 1 9.14 4.96 5.52 7.67 6.33 10.94 8.28 5.45 7.50 0.77 6.79
9.21 8.97 6.8 8.8 9.79

0.49 0.43 0.61 0.42 0.62 0.51 0.50 0.55 0.51 0.60 0.56 0.57 0.85 0.78 0.48 0.59 0.48 0.62 0.49 1.OO 0.66 0.42 1.14 0.55 0.50

I .06 0.79
1.00 0.67 1.69 0.48
0.66

0.55 0.62 0.74 0.59

TABLE 18 (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF COAL QUALITY, STRIKE, AND DIP BY COAL RESOURCE AREA AND SEAM
AREA
5-25
HORIZON Brown Orange Red Yellow Brown Orange Yellow Brown Orange Yellow Brown Orange
'36 ASH

% SULFUR

BTU

PH

STRIKE (DEGREES)

DIP (DEGREES)

N-9

Red Yellow Brown Red Yellow Brown Red Yellow Brown Red Yellow Brown Orange Red Yellow Brown

m "

k : " *a. . *. 0 N

?
m . a

Revised 1 112 1 I03

TABLE 17 REPLACE WlTH NEW TABLE 20
COAL RECOVERY STATISTICS (2001-END)

J-07 TONS PRODUCED COAL LOSS DURING MINING ( I ) BURIALICULTURAL SITE AVOIDANCE(2) TOTAL IN PLACE GEOLOGIC RESERVES (3) 0.0 6,046.9 549.7 3,489.4 0.0 38,383.4 5,497.2 34,894.0

N-06

MINING AREA J-19 J-21 89,652.7 11,821.8 353.1

N-11 61,357.8 6,464.2 8,051.5 312.2 852.4 0.0

N-10 9,511.2 1,254.2 0.0

101,827.6 69,721.5 7,316.6

10,765.4

NOTES: (1) Coal lost during mining operations, e.g., during coal loading (2) Estimated in-place reserves under burial sites and surrounding areas that will be by-passed from mining at this time. (3) In-place reserves are calculated from the surface to lowest surface mineable seam.

Revised 1 112 1I03

The N-6 coal resource area is located on the exclusive Navajo lease area approximately four miles north of the Black Mesa preparation facilities. Mining began in this pit in 1973, and at the current production rate, mining will continue until approximately the year 2008. Mining will advance on both the east and west sides of this pit until a U-shape is achieved. The Violet, Green, Blue, and Red coal seams will be extracted. Primary overburden removal will be performed by the Marion 8750 dragline throughout the life of the pit. The 5-23 coal resource area is located approximately four miles southeast of the Black Mesa preparation facilities on the east tract of the Joint Mineral Ownership Leases. Mining is planned to begin in this pit as early as 2006. Mining will advance to the south of this pit with the Green, Blue, Red, Yellow, Brown and Orange coal seams being extracted. Primary overburden removal will be performed by the Marion 8750 dragline throughout the life of the pit. At the forecasted production rate, mining will continue in the 5-23 coal resource area until approximately the year 20 18. The N-9 Coal resource area is located approximately 9 miles north of the Black Mesa Mine preparation facilities on the Navajo lease area. Mining is planned to begin in t h s pit as early as 2006. Mining will advance on both the east and west sides of this pit until a U-shape is achieved. The Yellow, Brown, and Orange coal seams will be extracted. Primary overburden removal will be performed by the Marion 8200 dragline throughout the life of the pit. At the forecasted production rate, mining will continue in the N-9 coal resource area until approximately the year 2016.

Kayenta Mine. The 5-16 coal resource area is located approximately two miles west of Kayenta Mine on the
east tract of the Joint Mineral Ownership Leases. Mining began in 5-16 in 1982, and the Marion 8200 dragline completed overburden removal in 1995. This dragline was moved to the N-1 1 area in 1995. The Yellow, Brown, and Orange coal seams were removed. Final reclamation and coal removal activities on the final highwall with the 1260 dragline continued through 1999. Mining in the J-21 coal resource area began in 1985. This area is located approxin~atelytwo miles southeast of the Kayenta Mine preparation facilities on the east tract of the Joint Mineral Ownership Leases. The mining began along the north coal cropline and continued to the south with cuts extending to the southwest along the north and east sides until a U-shaped pit were achieved. A short north-south pit was opened on the west end of J21 in 1996 to accommodate short-term market conditions. This pit was extended in 1997 to connect with the "L" shaped J-19 pit. The Violet, Green, Blue, Red, Yellow, Brown, and Orange coal seams will be removed. Primaiy overburden removal will be performed by the Marion 8750 dragline. Secondary overburden removal will be performed by the Bucyrus Erie 1260 dragline.

Revised 1 1121/03

By the year 2012, at the current production rate, J-21 will still have approximately 21.8 million tons of recoverable coal available to market. A burial site whose centered coordinate location is approximately E65825, N-40446, has been identified and mining plans have been altered to excavate and protect around this site (Mine Plan - Drawing No.852 10) and (Attachment A). The J-19 coal resource area is located approximately two miles southwest of the Kayenta Mine preparation facilities on the east tract of the Joint Mineral Ownership Leases. Mining began in 1993 on the northern side of the resource area and progressed southward until 1997 when there was an "L" shape pit in the east-west and north-south direction. This pit configuration has minimized disturbance, increased the pit length, and improved mining efficiency, and haulage access. The north-south pit eventually extended southward along the western side of the previously mined 5-21 coal resource area and in 1997 joined the existing short north-south pit on the west end of J-21. This J-19 pit extension formed a U-shaped pit junction with the west end of the existing 5-21 pit. Subsequently, the J-19 and 5-21 pits will butt up against the "no coal void area" at approximately N-40,000 and E60,000 area between the two pits (Drawing 85210, Sheet 4 of 4). This mine plan will provide a better opportunity for mining equipment to be used more efficiently and economically between these two pits based on pit conditions, production rates, market conditions, and economics. Merging the J-19 and 5-21 pits will not have any adverse impacts to future coal recovery. The Violet, Green, Blue, Red, Yellow, Brown, and Orange coal seams will be extracted. The affected lands are shown on the Jurisdictional Permit and Affected Lands Map, Drawing No. 85360. The primary overburden excavator in J-19 has been the Bucyrus-Erie 2570 dragline. In early 2004, the Marion 8200 dragline will mine out of the N-1 1 resource area and deadhead to 5-19 to commence mining in the western most portion of the J-19 resource area. The pit configuration for the west extension of 5-19 will be U-shaped (inverted) as pit development continues along the crop extents to the north, west and south (Mine Plan - Drawing No.85210 Sheet SE). The mine plan was developed using the Marion 8200 dragline in this area from 2004 to mid-2005. Afterward, the B.E. 2570 dragline will assume mining responsibilities for the entire J-19 area and by mid-2005 the B.E. 2570 will be the primary overburden excavator in J-19. By the end of year 201 1, at the current production rate, J-19 will still have approximately forty-eight million tons of recoverable coal available to market. As in the case with J-21, there also exists a burial site in the J19 coal resource area that will be bypassed. A burial site whose centered coordinate location is approximately E58937, N-39379, has been identified and mining plans have been altered to excavate and protect around this site (Mine Plan No.85210) and (Attachment A). The N-11 coal resource area is located approximately six miles northwest of the Kayenta Mine preparation facilities on the Navajo Lease. Mining began in 1995 and will continue until the year 2004. The Red, Brown, and Orange coal seams will be mined. Primary overburden ren~ovalwill be performed by the Marion 8200 dragline. Upon completion of mining in this area, the dragline will be moved to the J-19 area.
-

Drawing

Revised 05/17/02

The N-99 coal resource area is adjacent to the N-11 coal resource area. Coal reserves in the N-99 area are an extension of the N-11 reserve. The Brown and Orange seams will be mined in the N-99 area beginning in 2005. Primary overburden removal will initially be performed by the Marion 8200 dragline.

.

Coal Resource Protection
Mining on the Black Mesa involves extraction of nonconcentrated, multiple coal seams having varying overburden depths and innerburden thicknesses. This situation is clearly discernable by examining the cross sections found in Chapter 25. Coal seams split, change to burned coal, and pinch out in very short distances. The initial choice of mining equipment type and size was based upon the type of mining conditions (i.e., area mining in an area with highly changing surface elevations), production requirements, the life of the mining operation, types and thicknesses of overburden and parting, local and regional dip, and thickness of coal seams. Experience in mining on the Black Mesa has resulted in the current mix of major excavators and support equipment and in highly efficient and effective coal removal. Auxiliary equipment has been carefully matched to primary excavators and their capabilities. Mining activities are conducted to maximize the recovery of coal while maintaining environmental integrity. Based upon geologcal conditions and the mix of excavation equipment on Black Mesa, PWCC has defined the maximum recovery depth to be 180 feet. In some conditions, it may be economical to extend the maximum recovery depth to approximately 220 feet; however, this is evaluated by PWCC's engineering department on a site-by-site basis. During reserve development, all the coal encountered during bore hole drilling is recorded. The coi-relatable and estimated mineable seams are cored and analyzed regardless of seam thickness. These data are utilized to finally determine mineable reserves. The quality of thin seams as well as their occurrence in the geologic column is considered when determining whether the seam is mineable or nonmineable. Because of the varying conditions encountered on the Black Mesa, it is impossible to specify precise criteria relating to coal recovery in all mining areas. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) receives copies of PWCC's new drilling data after the drilling is completed. In addition, BLM receives an Annual Mining Activities Report each year, summarizing the mining activities for each mine. Experience in mining the Black Mesa coal seams has allowed PWCC to formulate certain general guidelines regarding coal recovery. In general, when a single thin seam is first to occur below the surface, the guideline PWCC uses is that the seam must average at least three feet in thickness to be considered mineable. If a thin seam occurs lower in the mining zone, then the seam must average at least two feet in thickness and have a maximum innerburden to coal ratio of 3:l to be considered mineable. Thin seams, which have high ash or sulfur content, may be considered nonmineable due to contract quality constraints. Due to the above constraints and conditions encountered during coal loading operations, the amount of coal not being recovered is shown in Table 20. The 44 Revised 1 112 1/03

outermost mineable limit is shown on the Mine Plan Map (Drawing No. 85210, Sheets 1, 2, 3, and 4 of 4). PWCC will utilize surface mining methods to maximize the utilization and conservation of the coal, while utilizing the best appropriate technology currently available to maintain environmental integrity so that reaffecting the land in the future through surface coal mining operations is minimized. As PWCC's mining professionals receive and evaluate exploration drilling and geological data, they determine the geologic limit of the coal reserves. Once the geologic limit of the coal resources area is determined, they must develop a mine plan that applies the economical, market, operational, environmental, and regulatory constraints to the geologic limits to obtain the mineable limits. In some areas, the geologic limit may match the mineable limits, in other areas, the mineable limit may be inside the geologic limit of the coal resource area. The mining professionals continually evaluate the above constraints as they receive new information and they evaluate the coal recovery guidelines to determine the current mineable limits for each coal resource area. Following are some examples of conditions, which may cause a revision to the mining limits of a coal resource area: More exploration drilling has been completed and geological data has been reviewed since the previous mine plan and PWCC has better defined the mineable coal reserves. PWCC has refined the mineable limits giving consideration to environmental constraints such as sediment control, buffer zones, topsoil stockpiles, and support facility locations. PWCC has reconfigured some of the pits for operational reasons (i.e., greater pit length, balanced ratios and haulage distances, andor a revised equipment mix or mining technique, etc.). The coal market has changed due to the Clean Air Act, electrical deregulation, competition fi-om other sources of electrical generation, and other market and regulatory conditions, causing re-evaluation of what is marketable coal.

In conclusion, none of these changes has isolated coal from future recovery as economics andlor technology may
continue to change and the coal recovery is maximized. The resulting outermost mineable limit is shown on the Mine Plan Map, Drawing No. 85210. The mineable limits may be revised on Drawing No. 85210 with the submittal and approval of a PWCC permit revision by the appropriate federal and tribal agencies. During overburden removal, the width of the pits is designed based upon the machine performing the excavation. This prevents pits from becoming too wide resulting in spoil material being placed on uncovered coal. Sloughing of spoil material onto uncovered coal occurs infrequently because of the nature of the overburden and parting material and lack of moisture on Black Mesa. If sloughing does occur, auxiliary equipment is utilized to remove the spoil material so that the coal can be removed and coal fenders are minimized. Negligible amounts of coal are lost during the Black Mesa operations because of either of these two conditions. Further, it is in the operators best interest to recover the maximum amount of coal possible one the overburden has been removed and the coal seam exposed. Revised 05117/02

The number of tons of coal produced per acre-foot (TPAF) can measure the efficiency of the mining operations. Based on drill hole data regarding seam thickness and extent and laboratory analysis of specific gravity (1.30), in place reserves are estimated to be 1,743 tons per acre foot. Actual production is calculated monthly using scale measurements and stockpile fluctuations. This production is applied through the use of monthly aerial and GPS surveys to the area where coal was actually removed to produce the TPAF recovered for each month. The historical average recovery for the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines is approximately 86.0 and 87.0 percent, respectively, for surface mining methods. Mined tonnage is, therefore, estimated at 1,520, and 1,530 TPAF, respectively. These recoveries are well within industry standards (Wood, 1983). For estimating purposes, the mine plan assumed an optimistic 87.8 percent average coal recovery (see Table 20). The "Coal Loss During Mining" given in Table 20 was estimated using the historical average recovery factors discussed above. Coal loss can occur due to a dragline or auxiliary equipment removing some coal while uncovering the seams, removal of some coal during coal cleaning prior to coal loading, sloughing of spoil, mining inside curves, and placement of spoil on coal during mining which form ribs or fenders. Each of these losses are factored into the recovery factors. These losses appear more significant in multi-seam operations due to the fact that there are several coal seams to uncover and clean before loading. Peabody will continue to minimize such loss through efficient stripping and loading operations. The "Burial/Cultural Site Avoidance" listed in Table 20 was estimated using the historical average recovery factors discussed above. The tonnage listed is included in the sum of the "Total In-Place Geologic Reserves" category. In accordance with the requirements of 816.57 and 816.59, PWCC will obtain approval to recover coal to the coal cropline in the J-19 coal reserve area in the Red Peak Valley Wash stream buffer zone area and to allow surface mining activities in the Red Peak Valley Wash to the limits shown on Drawing 85360, (SE Sheet), and Drawing 85642A, (SE Sheet). This will allow the maximum recovery of coal as required in 816.59 while obtaining the specific approval required in 816.57. The thin alluvium in this section of Red Peak Valley Wash is normally dry except during a precipitation-induced runoff event based on 20 years of hydrologic monitoring. The scoured channel bottom with little perennial vegetation displays characteristics associated with high intensity-short duration thunderstorms or runoff from significant snowfall events. There are no sections within this reach wherein steam baseflow occurs. Vegetation in the channel is characteristic of upland sagebrush and pinyonjuniper habitats that predominate adjacent to either side of the wash. Threatened and endangered (T & E) species for the J-19 West area including Red Peak Valley Wash were addressed in an attachment to the February 19, 2002 transmittal letter. A site-specific reconnaissance of Red Peak Valley Wash on July 25, 2002 confimied the earlier results that no T & E species were found nor was suitable habitat present. The J7-Jr MSHA Dam captures, contains, and controls all surface water runoff, including entrained sediment, from upper Red Peak Valley Wash. 46 Revised 11121103

Therefore, this surface mining activity will not cause or contribute to the violations of applicable Federal water
I

quality standards, and will not adversely affect the water quantity and quality or other environmental resources of this section of Red Peak Valley Wash. Chapter 22, Minesoil Reconstruction, presented in Volume 11, provides for the placement of plant growth media over material determined to be unsuitable for the establishment of vegetation. This process will also protect coal seams exposed in the upper portion of reclaimed highwalls and assure all acid-forming, toxic-forming, and combustible materials exposed, used, or produced during mining will be adequately covered. All non-coal mine waste material will be disposed of in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Plan in Chapter 6. When exposed coal seains occur in the lower portion of the final highwall, backfill material at the seam locations will be of noncombustible material placed in a manner to provide at least four feet of covering. Reclaimed highwalls shall be monitored visually on a quarterly basis to identify any evidence of burning coal. Should evidence indicate coal seams are burning, PWCC shall excavate, extinguish, and backfill to the extent practicable, the burning portion of the coal seam. Coal fires may also occur in the mined cut and adjacent spoil, and at coal handling facilities. It is in PWCC's best interest to control fires and prevent loss of the coal resource. Burning coal in these areas will be extinguished under the supervision of a qualified and certified MSHA "Green Card" Surface Certified Supervisor in accordance with 30 CFR, 816.87, by removing and mixing the burning material with noncombustible material to the extent practicable or burial with at least four feet of noncombustible material, if appropriate. Water may be utilized to extinguish coal fires near coal handling facilities where the burning coal can be isolated. Fires, which occur in nonrecoverable coal seams, which are exposed in the highwall, will be extinguished as described above if the seam is reachable by support equipment in the pit. If not reachable, the fire will be extinguished in the overburden removal process. Within 48 hours of its discovery, PWCC shall commence efforts to extinguish any coal-related fire that could affect the anlount of recoverable coal. If the fire is not extinguished within 96 hours after its discovery, PWCC shall notify BLM of that fact by telephone within that period. Within 48 hours of such telephone notice, PWCC shall submit to BLM a written report describing the extent of the fire, its exact location, the amount of recoverable coal affected, and any other relevant information. Within 48 hours of any extraordinary or unusual event other than those specified in the preceding paragraph that causes a loss of recoverable coal (e.g., highwall failure), PWCC shall notify BLM of that event by telephone. Within 48 hours of such telephone notice, PWCC shall submit to BLM a written report describing the event, its exact location, the amount of recoverable coal affected, and any other relevant information. 47 Revised 0810 1/02

Literature Cited
Wood, G.H., et al. "Coal Resource Classification System of the U S . Geological Survey". U S . Geolo~ical Survey Circular 891, pp. 28-29. 1983. Workman, J.L. and Calder, P.N. 1994. "Effective Operation of Mines Using Draglines". Calder & Workman, Inc. Washburn, North Dakota.

Revised 0810 1/02

CHAPTER 6

FACILITIES

CHAPTER 6 INDEX

Page

Introduction Facility Design Schedule Diversions Introduction Existing Pre-July 1990 Diversions (Interim Permit) Existing post-July 1990 Diversion (Permanent Program Permit) Sediment and Water Control Facility Plan Sedimentation Ponds and Impoundments Introduction Design Methodology Hydrologic Design Frequency Curve Number Selection Construction Procedures Exemptions Inspection and Reporting Maintenance and Reclamation MSHA-Size Structures (2000-2022) Permanent Impoundments Engineering Design Design Criteria Water, Waste, and Land Impoundment Design Methodology Adaptation of Water, Waste, and Land Methodology Procedure Probability Determination Structures Reclaimed Dam Break Analysis Transportation Facilities Introduction

1
1

6 6 6 10
11

13 13
21

24 25 28

31
42 43 49 73

74
78 79 79 82
83

86
86

89
89

Revised 02/21/00

INDEX (Con' t )
Page

Primary and Ancillary Roads - General Requirements Location Road Reclamation Primary Roads Design and Construction Drainage Control Maintenance Support Facilities Access Fords Coal Handling Facilities Airport Facilities Solid Waste Disposal Facility Construction Schedule Literature Cited LIST OF FIGURES

99
100 102 103 103 106 113 113 114 116 122 123 124 127

Page

Figure 1A Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15

Typical Cross-Section, Overland Conveyor/Transfer 24-25 to CMW Crossing J2-A Dam Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for J-7 Dam 5-7 Dam Cross Section J16-A Dam Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for J16-A Dam J16-L Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for J16-L Dam KM-FWP Dam Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for KM-FWP Dam N14-D Dam Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for N14-D Dam N14-E Dam Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for N14-E Dam N14-F Dam Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for N14-F Dam

Revised 02/21/00

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Page

Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37

N14-G Dam Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for N14-G Dam N14-H Dam Cross Section Stage-Capacity Curve for N14-H Dam Mean Depth vs. Area Index Mean Depth and Area Index Mean Depth and Volume Determination Example Graph for Determining Mean Depth and Capacity Probability vs. Annual Mean Depth Probability vs. Minimum Depth Proposed Temporary Bypass Road (J7/Navajo Route # 4 1 ) Typical In-Wash Culvert Typical Cross Drain Culvert Headwater Depth for C.M. Pipe Culverts with Inlet Control Pipe Flow Chart Culvert Capacity Standard Circular C.M. Pipe Schematic of Black Mesa Mine Coal Handling Facilities Schematic of Kayenta Mine J-28 Coal Handling Facility Schematic of Kayenta Mine N-7/8 Coal Handling Facility

LIST OF TABLES
Page

Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table

1

Facility Design Schedule Measured Natural Channel Velocities on Black Mesa Observed Total Suspended Solids Concentrations in Streamflows Sediment and Water Control Structure Reference Index NRCS Curve Numbers, Kayenta and Black Mesa Mines, Arizona Conveyor Sediment Control Evaluation Summary Conveyor Sediment Control Evaluation Summary Black Mesa Dewatering Equipment List

2

2
3 4

7

5
6

7

8

iii

LIST OF TABLES (Con't)
Page

Table 9 Table 10

Permanent Impoundment Persistence Probability Facility Construction Schedule Summary

75

125

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Volume Attachment A Attachment B Methodology for Analysis of Existing Diversions Five Existing Diversions (Interim Permit): Coal Mine Wash Channel Change J-16 Channel Change N-7/8 Channel Change N-14 Channel Change N-14s Diversion Attachment C Attachment D Attachment E Permanent Program Permit Diversion: Reed Valley Diversion Channel "General Report", Geotechnic, Hydrologic, and Hydraulic Evaluation of Sedimentation Structures Annual OSMRE Impoundment Inspection Form Monthly MSHA Report Form Annual MSHA Report Form Dames Attachment F Attachment G Attachment H
&

1 1

Moore's Impoundment Inspection Checklist Form

Precipitation Maps Curve Numbers Sedimentation and Impoundment Structures Inspection and Design Reports BM-A1, BM-B, BM-FWP, BM-SS, BM-T, BM-TW, CW-A, J1 -A, J1-PA, J1-RB, J3-A, J3-B, J3-D, J3-E, J3-F, J3-G, J3-H, J3-SL, J7-A, J7-81, J7-CD, J7-E

2

J27-RA, J27-RB, J27-RC, J28-B, J28-C, J28-D, J28-G, J28-SL, KM-A3, KM-B, KM-C, KM-D, KM-E, KM-El, KM-TPB, KM-TPB1, MW-A, MW-B, N1-AC, N1-F, N1-L, N1-M, N1-0, N1-RA

4

iv

Revised 01/20/04

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Volume Attachment H (Continued)

N12-C, N12-C1, N12-C2, N12-M, N12-N, N14-B, N14-C, N14-P, N14-Q, TPC-A, TPF-A, TPF-D, TPF-E, TS-A, TS-B, WW-2, WW-3, WW-4, WW-5, WW-6, WW-9, WW-9A, WW-9B, WW-9C

Attachment I Attachment J Attachment K Attachment L Attachment M Attachment N Attachment N-I Attachment 0 Attachment P

Typical SEDIMOT I1 Inputs for Life-of-Mine Sedimentation Ponds "Review Report
-

MSHA Sedimentation Structure, N14-F"

1985 Peabody Inspection of MSHA Sized Dams Dam Break Analysis for Sedimentation Ponds J28-B, J28-C, J28-D, and J28-G Roadside Ditches Capacity Charts Geotechnical Inspection Report Beltline
-

Haul Roads and Conveyor

Condition #15 Response of 12-28-90 Typical SEDIMOT I1 Inputs for Drainage Control Structures Dodson and Associates Hydraulic Programs:

- TRAP - PIPE
Attachment Q Attachment R Attachment S Attachment T Attachment U Attachment V Attachment W Attachment X Attachment Y Attachment Z Attachment AA Attachment AE Attachment AF Existing and Proposed Culvert Inventory KM-FWP and 5-7 MSHA Dam Geotechnical Investigation Report Sedimentation Ponds SEDIMOT I1 and SEDCAD+ Input Water Persistence Worksheet Calculations N-11 Truck Dump/Facilities Ditch Calculations Primary Roads As-Built Certified Letter Impoundments Hazard Map - Resident List Typical Water Bar and Road Swale Detail Temporary Sedimentation Pond N14-T Permit Information Black Mesa Haul Road Design Report
-

Ephemeral Channel Diversion

N-14 East - Ephemeral Reclaimed Channel Diversion Design Report J21-J Diversion Impoundment Spillway Design Evaluation Report v Revised 01/20/04

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Volume Attachment AG Attachment AH Attachment A1 Attachment AJ Attachment AK Attachment AL Monthly MSHA Dam Inspection Justification Notification of Proposed Geotechnical Investigation for the J7-Jr Dam J7-Jr MSHA Dam Design Report BTCA Plan for Conveyor Transfer C J-19, J-21, & J7-Jr MSHA Dam Construction Project Support Facilities N-11
&

7

N-14 Support Facilities

Revised 02/02/01

CHAPTER 6 FACILITIES

Introduction

This chapter contains a description of the existing and proposed structures to be used in connection with or to facilitate the surface coal mining and reclamation activities at the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines as described in this mine plan. For existing

structures, a showing is made regarding compliance with the performance standards of 3 0 CFR Chapter VII, Subchapter K. For this purpose, the consulting engineering firm of

Dames and Moore was retained to assist engineers at Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC). Where necessary, a compliance plan is included which details the proposed modifications needed to assure compliance with the above standards. In addition, a construction

schedule is included for such modifications (see Drawing No. 8 5 4 0 6 and Table 1 0 ) .

The need for new facilities is discussed.

Where required for compliance or operations,

new facilities have been identified and a schedule for design submission is included (see Table 1). submittal. In the case of diversions, the design information has been included in this

It is important to remember that the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines are existing mines which require numerous support: facilities. All facilities are either pre-law or have

been approved under previous or current permits.

Facilities Design Schedule

New facility designs which are not already included in Volumes 2 through Volume 7 and required in connection with or to facilitate the life-of-mine surface coal mining and reclamation plan are identified in Table 1 along with the estimated date of submission of the design plans. The location of these facilities may be found on the mine plan,
85400, 85405,

facilities, and sediment and water control structures maps (Drawings 85210, and 8 5 4 6 0 to 8 5 4 9 0 ) .

Revised 0 2 / 2 1 / 0 0

TABLE 1 Facility Design Schedule Actual or Estimated Submittal ate*

Mining Subarea N6 5-3 J-2 1 N-6 Overland Conveyor J-21 N-11 J-1 J- 1 N-6 Black Mesa Mine Haul Road J-7 J-19 N-6 N-10 N-10 N-10 N-10 N-10 J-16 N-14 N-14
N-14

Facility I.D. J2-A MSHA Dam J3-G J21-A N5-A TPF-E J21-C N11-G J1-RA J1-RB N5-A2 Moenkopi Crossing J7-R J7-JR MSHA Dam N6-L N10-A1 N10-D N10-F N10-G N10-G1 J16-G N14-F N14-G N14-H J19-RB J3-D J3-E

J-19 J-3 J-3

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 1 ( C o n t . ) F a c i l i t y Design Schedule

Mining Subarea

Facility I.D.

Actual o r Estimated Submittal

ate*

5-7
/

J7-Dam J16-A J16-L N12-C N14-D TPF-D TPF-E J28-SL N11-H
N11-I

(2036) (2036) (2036) (2036) (2036) (2026) (2026) 2026 2007 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004

J-16 J-19 N-6 N-14 Overland Conveyor Overland Conveyor 5-28 N-99 N-99 N-99 N-99 N-99 N-99 N-99 N-99 N-99 N-99 N-99 J-23 J-23 5-2 3 J-23 J-23 J-23 J-23 J-23 J-23 J-23 J-23 J-23

N11-I1 Nll-I2 N11-J
N11-J1

N11-J2 N6-M N6-M1 N-11 EXTENSION NORTH ROAD

2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2005 2005 2005 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008

N-11 EXTENSION SOUTH ROAD J 2 3 -A J23-B J23-C J23-D J23-E J23-F J23-G J23-H J23-I J23-J J23-K J23-L 3

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 1 ( C o n t . )

F a c i l i t y Design Schedule Actual or Estimated S u b m i t t a l ate* 2008 2008 2004 2004 2006 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2005 2005

Mining Subarea J-23 5-23 5-23 J-23 N-9 N-9 N-9 N-9
N- 9

F a c i l i t y 1.D J23-M1 J 2 3 -M J-23 H a u l Road N 1 J-23 Haul Road S1A N-9 Haul Road N9-B N9-B1 N9-C N9-C1 N9-C2 N9-D N9-E N9-F N9-G N9-H N9-I N9-J N9-J N10-H N10-I N10-J N10-K J 8 / J 9 Haul Road J8-A J8-B J 8 -C J8-D J8-E J8-F NR-41 R e a l i g n m e n t

N-9 N-9 N-9 N-9

Revised 1 1 / 2 1 / 0 3

TABLE 1 (Cont. ) Facility Design Schedule Mining Subarea J-9 J-9 J- 9 J-9 J-9 J-9 J-9 J- 9 J-10 J-10 J-10 J-10 J-10 J-10 J-14 J-14 5-14 J-14 J-14 J-14 J- 14 J- 14 5-14 J9-A J9-B J9-C J9-D J9-E J9-F J9-G J9-G1 J10-A J10-B J10-C J10-D J10-E J10-F J14-A J14-B J14-B1 J14-C J14-D J14-E J14-F J14-G J14-H Facility I.D. Actual or Estimated Submittal

ate*

2016 2016 2016 2016 2017 2017 2017 2017 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2018 2018 2018 2018 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

* ~ a t e sin parentheses indicate permanent impoundment design submittal date. date based on calendar year.

Submittal

Revised 11/21/03

Diversions Introduction. PWCC constructed five diversions from 1980 to 1983 on the Black Mesa They include the Coal Mine Wash Channel Change (N-7/8-C.C.), N-14 structures were

leasehold as presented in Attachment B. (C.M.W.-C.C.),J-16 Channel Change Channel Change (NZ4-C.C.), and

(J16-C.C.), N-7/8 Channel Change Diversion. All of

the N14-S

these

previously permitted under Permit AZ-0001.

In addition, in 1993 PWCC constructed the

Reed Valley Channel Diversion. The "as-built" was included in the April 19, 1994 J-19 Haul Road construction certification submittal. Design plans are included as Attachment C. This diversion is required to facilitate the J-19 Haul Road crossing of the Reed

Valley Wash, to enable PWCC to maximize coal recovery, and to perform final reclamation grading in the J-19 mining area next to the J-19 Haul Road crossing. The location of these diversions are located on Drawing No. 85400, Drainage Area and Facilities Map and Drawing No. 85405, Sediment and Water Control Structures Map. Most of the streams on the Peabody leasehold flow only in direct response to

precipitation in the immediate watershed or in response to melting snow and ice. streams have a channel bottom that is above the local water table.

These

Large quantities of (see

sediment are transported from the undisturbed areas during these runoff events Chapter 15).

As these natural channels are highly erodible, it becomes impractical to

design a relocated channel which is nonerodible and which will not carry a large sediment load. It is, instead, more appropriate to design a relocated channel which approximates

the sediment transport capabilities and erosion characteristics of the natural channel. Table 2 contains measured average velocities in natural channels from runoff occurring as a result of precipitation events that are generally less than the design event (i.e., 10year, 6-hour storm or 100-year, 6-hour storm). Most average velocities range from 6 to

10 feet per second(fps); however, velocities as high as 16.8 fps have been observed. These flows occurred in areas not influenced by mining or where the runoff from mining was controlled by sedimentation structures. One of the reasons existing channels can This fact is in

withstand such velocities is that storm runoff is heavily silt-laden. corroborated by actual measurements of total suspended solids

concentrations

streamflows in the area (see Table 3 and Chapter 15).

In addition, similar conclusions

have been made by Simons, Li and Associates in a case study of a nearby coal mine in the Four-Corners area of New Mexico Fluvial Systems", undated). Existing Pre-July 1990 Diversions (Interim Permit). these Based on the construction dates of Permit and Affected Revised 02/21/00 Lands (Simons, Li and Associates, "Engineering Analysis of

structures, and the requirements of the Jurisdictional 6

TABLE 3

Observed Total Suspended Solids Concentrations in Streamflows

Simultaneous Total Suspended Solids Discharge site NO.' Stream Date (cfs) Concentration (mg/l)

Moenkopi Wash Upper Coal Mine Wash 6 miles northwest of Reed Valley Site Upper Yellow Water Canyon Reed Valley Wash Reed Valley Wash Coal Mine Wash at confluence with Moenkopi Wash

Sept. 20, 1985 July 29, 1985

79 120

July Aug. July Aug.

18, 1985 24, 1986
23, 1986

230 81 44 116

22, 1986

-

'see

Drawing No. 85600

Revised 11/11/87

Map, Drawing No. 85360, these structures were permitted permit. by

and approved

in the AZ-0001

The five pre-July, 1990 existing diversions were inspected during October, 1985 from Dames
&

a team of engineers

Moore.

Attachment

A

contains the methodology

employed during the analysis of these diversions.

Attachment B presents the results of The remedial

the diversion analysis and recommended remedial work where appropriate. work has been completed.

All of the diversion channels are designed to divert flows from undisturbed areas around disturbed lands associated with mining. the leasehold. There are no underground mines or workings on

Flow from the N14 and J16 channel changes are part of the watershed to Based on the results of Dames
&

the N14-D and J16-A MSHA dams.

Moore's

analysis

(Attachment B), all of these diversions are designed, located, constructed, maintained, and used to: 1. 2. Be stable; Provide protection against flooding and resultant damage to life and property; (the

combination of channel, bank, and flood plain configuration is adequate to safely pass the peak runoff of a 10-year, 6-hour precipitation event for a permanent

diversion handling miscellaneous flows);
3.

Prevents, to the extent possible

using

the best

technology

currently available

(i.e., MSHA-size dams, concrete fabriform, riprap, revegetation, etc.), additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area; and 4. The Comply with all applicable local, State, and Federal laws and regulations. proposed remedial activities have been completed. These channel changes and

diversions will be maintained throughout the life of the mine and will preserve the existing hydrologic system, facilitate the removal of the coal resource, and provide satisfactory service throughout the life of the structures. The performance of such

structures will be monitored and maintenance will be performed as required. Existing Post-July 1990 Diversion (Permanent Program Permit). The Reed Valley diversion

was designed by Peabody to facilitate the J-19 Haul Road crossing of Reed Valley Wash based on the requirements of 30CFR816.43. conditions. The diversion site was inspected for existing Due to economics and to

The diversion is only approximately 700 feet long.

minimize disturbance to the natural wash, Peabody realigned approximately 250 feet of channel upstream of the J-19 Haul Road crossing and 450 feet of channel downstream. Attachment C presents the design for the Reed Valley Channel Diversion. discusses the general analytical methodologies employed. in 1993. The attachment

This diversion was constructed

The diversion will divert miscellaneous flows or an ephemeral stream around the

10

Revised 07/01/97

mining areas and under the J-19 Haul Road; however, it will drain a watershed larger than one square mile; therefore, based on OSM's regulation, it is also classified as an This diversion is designed as a permanent diversion; therefore, a When the J-19 Haul Road is

intermittent stream.

100-year 6-hour precipitation event is used in the design.

reclaimed, the 108-inch diameter culvert will be removed, and the channel under the culvert will be widened and riprapped to blend into the upstream and downstream channels (see the haul road and culvert reclamation procedures in the Transportation Facilities section of Chapter 6). MSHA Dam's watershed. The flow from the diversion is part of the J16-L, Reed Valley on the results of Peabody's design in Attachment C, this

Based

diversion was designed, located, constructed, maintained, and used to: Be stable; Provide protection against flooding and resultant damage to life and property; Prevent, to the extent possible using the best technology currently available i.., J16-L MSHA Dam), additional contributions of suspended solids to

streamflow outside the permit area; Comply with all applicable local, State, and Federal laws and regulations; and Be revegetated in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. This channel design preserves the existing hydrologic system, facilitates the removal of the coal resource, This and provides satisfactory service throughout the life of the the

structure.

channel

diversion was designed and constructed

to approximate

premining characteristics of the original stream channel.

Sediment and Water Control Facility Plan In accordance with 30CFR816.45, PWCC will design, construct, and maintain appropriate sediment control measures to prevent, to the extent possible, additional contributions of sediment to streamflow or to runoff outside the permit area due to mining activity and to minimize erosion to the extent possible. Sediment control measures include practices The sedimentation storage

utilized within and adjacent to the mining disturbance areas.

capacity practices in and downstream from the disturbed areas will reflect the degree to which successful mining and reclamation techniques are applied to reduce erosion and control sediment. Sediment control measures will consist of the utilization of proper

mining and reclamation methods and sediment control practices, singley or in combination. Sediment control methods may include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Disturbing the smallest practicable area at any one time during the mining and construction operation;
2.

Stabilizing graded material to promote a reduction in the rate and volume of runoff;

11

Revised 02/21/00

Retaining sediment within disturbed areas; Diverting runoff away from disturbance areas including stockpiles, backslopes, and material storage; Diverting runoff through disturbed areas using stabilized earth channels, culverts, or pipes so as to prevent, to the extent possible, additional contributions of sediment to streamflow or to runoff outside the permit area; Using straw dikes, silt fences, small V-ditches, riprap, mulches, check dams,

ripping, contour furrowing, vegetative sediment filters, small depressions, sediment traps, and other measures that will reduce overland flow velocity, reduce runoff volume, or trap sediment; and Treating traffic areas with water or dust suppressant to reduce the potential for wind and water erosion.

Siltation sediment

structures from all

or

sedimentation ponds areas, except

are those

primarily permitted

utilized areas

for

controlling by the

disturbed

exempted

requirements of these regulations.

Other alternative sediment control methods may be

used in conjunction with the siltation structures or, in the case of the permitted areas which are exempt (e.g., roads) they may be utilized individually. The alternative

sediment control methods will be constructed using the following or similar publications for guidance:

1.

Handbook of Alternative Sediment Control Methodologies for Mined Lands; March, 1985; OSM;

2.

Design of Sediment Control Measures for Small Areas in Surface Coal Mining; May, 1983; OSM;

3. 4.

Surface Mining Water Diversion Design Manual; September, 1982; OSM; and Field Manual-Engineering for Conservation Practices; April, 1975; Natural

Resource Conservation Service (NRCS).

Detailed procedures and methodology for the use of alternate sediment control practices are provided in Chapter 26. The location of all the existing and proposed impoundment

structures can be found on Drawing No.85400, Drainage Area and Facilities Map and Drawing 85405, Sediment and Water Control Structures Map. A discussion of the purpose and design

of the siltation structures and impoundments can be found in the following section, Sedimentation Ponds and Impoundments.

Revised 02/21/00

Sedimentation Ponds and Impoundments

Introduction. primarily use

In accordance with 30CFR816.46, 816.47, 816.49, and 816.56, PWCC Coal will sedimentation ponds to prevent, to the extent possible, additional

contributions of suspended solids sediment to streamflow or runoff outside the permit area due to mining disturbance. All surface drainage from the disturbed areas will be

passed through a siltation structure before leaving the permit area, except in permit areas which are exempt from these regulations (see "Exemptions" section in this chapter). In the exempt areas, alternative sediment control structures may be used to meet or reduce additional contributions of sediment off the permit area.

After a careful evaluation of all the watershed boundaries and continual consultation with OSM, as of November 2003, PWCC has determined the need for approximately 266

sedimentation structures and impoundments over the life of the mine.

In addition, due to

changes in the regulations over the years, the redundancy of certain structures, and the changes in topography over time, 70 structures have been approved for reclamation by the regulatory authority. plus structures to be The location of these 336 structures (all impoundment structures, reclaimed) can be found on Drawing 85405, Sediment and Water

Control Structures Map.

The watershed boundaries for each of these structures can be Table 4

found on Drawing 85400, Sheets 1 through 26, Drainage and Facilities Map.

provides a reference index of where design information can be found in the PAP for each structure.

Data describing each of the 266 structures can be found on Drawing No. 85406, Siltation and Impoundment Structures Data. proposed structures. This is a summary table of all the existing and

Within the 266 structures, 40 structures are proposed as permanent

impoundments, and 226 structures are proposed as a temporary.

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 4 SEDIMENT AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES REFERENCE INDEX BLACK MESA/KAYENTA MINES OBS 1 BM-A1 BM-B BM-FWP BM-SS BM-T BM-TW CW-A CW-B J10-A J10-B J10-C J10-D J10-E J10-F J14-A J14-B J14-B1 J14-C J14-D J14-E J14-F J14-G J14-H J15-A J15-B J15-C J15-D J15-E J15-F J15-G J15-H J15-I J16-A 2H Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Structure Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Permanent STRUCTURE TEXT LOCATION FOOTNOTE 1 LOCATION PRIMARY PERMIT CATEGORY Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Impoundment (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Impoundment (2006-2010) Impoundment (2006-2010) Impoundment (2006-2010) Reclaimed Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Impoundment (MSHA) Structure Reclaimed Structure Reclaimed Temporary Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Temporary Sediment Pond (2000-2005) Temporary Sediment Pond (2000-2005) Permanent Impoundment Structure Reclaimed (SAE) (Interim Program) Structure Reclaimed Structure Reclaimed Structure Reclaimed Permanent Impoundment (MSHA)

DESIGN(^)

ENGINEERING REVIEW

Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Sergent, Hauskins, and Beckwith

Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co.

Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Rollin, Brown, Gunnel1

TABLE 4 (Cont.) SEDIMENT AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES REFERENCE INDEX BLACK MESA/KAYENTA MINES OBS Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Permanent Permanent Temporary Structure Permanent Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Permanent Temporary Temporary Structure Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Structure Structure Structure Structure Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Structure STRUCTURE TEXT LOCATION FOOTNOTE PRIMARY PERMIT CATEGORY Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Impoundment Impoundment Impoundment Sediment Pond Reclaimed Impoundment Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Impoundment Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Reclaimed Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Reclaimed
DESIGN (I) LOCATION

ENGINEERING REVIEW

Peabody Western peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Dames and Moore Dames and Moore

Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal

Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co.

Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal

Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co.

Revised 01/25/02

TABLE 4 (Cont.) SEDIMENT AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES REFERENCE INDEX BLACK MESA/KAYENTA MINES OBS 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133
1,5

STRUCTURE PRIMARY PERMIT CATEGORY Permanent Permanent Permanent Structure Temporary Temporary Temporary Structure Structure Temporary Structure Structure Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Permanent Permanent Permanent Temporary Temporary Structure Permanent Permanent Temporary Permanent Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary J27-RA J27-RB J27-RC J28-A J28-B J28-C J28-D J28-E J28-F J28-G J28-H J28-I J28-J J28-J1 J28-SL J1-A J1-RA J1-RB J2-A J3-A J3-B J3-C J3-D J3-E J3-F J3-G J3-H J3-SL J4-A J4-A1 J4-B J4-C J4-D/J3-E J4-Dl J6-A J6-B J6-C J6-D J6-E J6-F J6-G J6-H 4H,7 ~ *

TEXT LOCATION FOOTNOTE
DESIGN LOCATION

ENGINEERING REVIEW

Impoundment Impoundment Impoundment Reclaimed Impoundment Impoundment Impoundment Reclaimed Reclaimed Impoundment Reclaimed Reclaimed Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Impoundment Impoundment Impoundment Impoundment Impoundment (MSHA) sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond Reclaimed Impoundment Impoundment Sediment Pond Impoundment Impoundment Impoundment Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond

Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Sersent, Hauskins, and Beckwith Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co.

Revised

21/03

TABLE 4 (Cont.) SEDIMENT AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES REFERENCE INDEX BLACK MESA/KAYENTA MINES OBS 134 J6-I STRUCTURE TEXT LOCATION FOOTNOTE 4

DESIGN LOCATION
PRIMARY PERMIT CATEGORY Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Structure Temporary Temporary Permanent Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Permanent Temporary Structure Temporary Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Permanent Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary

ENGINEERING REVIEW

*

Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2037) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Reclaimed Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Impoundment (MSHA) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Impoundment (MSHA) Sediment Pond Reclaimed Sediment Pond Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Impoundment Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond

Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Sergent, Hauskins, and Beckwith Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Montgomery Watson ~ a m e iand-Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co.

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 4 (Cant. ) SEDIMENT AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES REFERENCE INDEX BLACK MESA/KAYENTA MINES OBS
T.nrnTTnN *
A

STRUCTURE KM-A KM-A2 KM-A3 KM-B KM-C KM-D KM-E KM-El KM-FWP KM-TPB KM-TPB1 KP LF-1 LF-2 LF-3 MW-A MW-B N9-A N9-A1 N9-B N9-B1 N9-C N9-C1 N9-C2 N9-D N9-E N9-F N9-G N9-H N9-I N9-J N10-A N10-A1 N10-A2 N10-B N10-B1 N10-C N10-D N10-Dl N10-E N10-F N10-G N10-Gl N10-H N10-I N10-J N10-K N/A Structure Structure Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary MSHA Size Temporary Temporary Structure Structure Structure Structure Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Permanent Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Permanent Temporary Structure Temporary Permanent Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Reclaimed Reclaimed Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Structure Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Impoundment Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Impoundment Sediment Pond Reclaimed Sediment Pond Impoundment ( 2 Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond Sediment Pond

177

TEXT LOCATION FOOTNOTE 6

-- -. - -..
PRIMARY PERMIT CATEGORY

DESIGN(^)

ENGINEERING REVIEW

Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Sergent, Hauskins, and Beckwith Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co.

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE .Cont. ) SEDIMENT AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES REFERENCE INDEX BLACK MESA/KAYENTA MINES

Permanent Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Permanent Temporary Temporary Structure Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Structure Permanent Temporary Temporary Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Temporary Temporary Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Temporary Temporary Permanent MSHA Size Permanent Permanent Permanent Structure Structure Structure Structure Temporary

Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Impoundment Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Reclaimed Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Reclaimed Impoundment Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed (SAE) Reclaimed (SAE) Reclaimed (SAE) Reclaimed (SAE) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Impoundment (MSHA) Structure Impoundment (MSHA) Impoundment (MSHA) Impoundment (MSHA) Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed (SAE) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Revised 11/21/03

Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Montgomery Watson Montgomery Watson Montgomery Watson Montgomery Watson Montgomery Watson Montgomery Watson Montgomery Watson Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Sergent, Hauskins, and Beckwith Sergent, Hauskins, and Beckwith Sergent, Hauskins, and Beckwith Sergent, Hauskins, and Beckwith Sergent, Hauskins, and Beckwith Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Co. Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames and Moore

TABLE 4 (Cont. ) SEDIMENT AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES REFERENCE INDEX BLACK MESA/KAYENTA MINES

N/A N/A 7Y
4H 4H 4H

4H N/A 4H
4 H , 7T

N/A
5H, 5H, 5H, 5H,

7T 7T 7T 7T

N/A

*

5H

5H 5H 5H 5H
5H 5H 5H 5H 5H 5H 5H 5H 5H

5H 5H,7T 5H 5H N/A N /A Interim, Vol 5 4 , 5 H Interim, V0l 5 4 Interim, V0l 5 4 5H,7T 5 H , 7T N/A N /A N/A N/A

Temporary Structure Reclaimed (SAE) Structure Reclaimed (SAE) Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Structure Reclaimed Temporary Sediment Pond Permanent Impoundment Structure Reclaimed Permanent Impoundment Permanent Impoundment Permanent Impoundment Permanent Impoundment Structure Reclaimed Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Permanent Impoundment Temporary Sediment Pond Temporary Sediment Pond Structure Reclaimed Structure Reclaimed Structure Reclaimed Structure Reclaimed (AZ-0001) Structure Reclaimed (AZ-0001) Permanent Permanent Structure Structure Structure Structure Impoundment Impoundment Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Reclaimed Revised 11/21/03

Dames and Moore Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Dames and Moore Peabody Western Dames and Moore Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western Peabody Western 0001) Peabody Western

Coal Co. Coal Co. Coal Co.

Coal Co.

Coal Co.

Coal Co. Coal Co. Coal Co.

Coal Co.

Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal Coal

Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. Co. (AZ-

Coal Co.

Peabody Western Coal Co. Dames Dames Dames Dames Dames Dames and and and and and and

Moore Moore Moore Moore Moore Moore

TABLE 4 (Cont.) SEDIMENT AND WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES REFERENCE INDEX BLACK MESA/KAYENTA MINES OBS 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 Footnotes: Text Location Footnote: 1. 2.
3.

STRUCTURE N8-RA TPC-A TPF-A TPF-B TPF-C TPF-D TPF-E TS-A TS-B WW-2 WW-3 WW-4 WW-5 WW-6 WW-9 WW-9A WW-9B ww-9C WW-9D Permanent Temporary Temporary Structure Structure Permanent Permanent Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Temporary Structure 6H,7T 6AH 6AH N/A N/A 6AH,7T 6AH,7T 6AH 6AH 6AH 6AH 6AH 6AH 6AH 6AH 6AH 6AH 6AH N/A Impoundment Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Reclaimed (SAE) Reclaimed (SAE) Impoundment Impoundment Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Impoundment Impoundment Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Sediment Pond (2006-2010) Reclaimed

TEXT LOCATION FOOTNOTE 5
DESIGN (1) LOCATION

PRIMARY PERMIT CATEGORY

ENGINEERING REVIEW

Peabody Western Coal Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Peabody Western Coal Dames and Moore Peabody Western Coal Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Western Technologies Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore Dames and Moore

Co.

Co. Co.

Co.

Temporary sedimentation pond (2006-2010) - See Volume 1, Chapter 6, and Volume 22, Drawing No. 85406 of the PAP. Also see Attachments D, H, S, and U .

Temporary sedimentation pond (2011-2037) (Life-of-Mine) - See Volume 1, Chapter 6, and Volume 22, Drawing No. 85406 of the PAP. Also see Attachment I. MSHA-sized dams - See Volume 1, Chapter 6, and Volume 22, Drawing No. 85406 of the PAP Also see Attachments E, J, K, R, and U. Temporary impoundments (2000-2037) - See Volume 1, Chapter 6, and Volume 22, Drawing 85406 of the PAP. Also see Attachments D, H, S, U, and I. Permanent impoundments - See Volume 1, Chapter 6, and Volume 22, Drawing No. 85406 of the PAP. Also see Attachments D, H, and T. Impoundment to be reclaimed - See Volume 1, Chapter 6, and Volume 22, Drawing No. 85406 of the PAP

4. 5. 6. 7. Design Location:

Structure Reclaimed (SAE) - Small Area Exemption - see Chapter 6 "Exemption" section of the PAP and Volume 22, Drawing No. 85406.

(1) Denotes PAP volume and attachment * Detailed design plans to be provided per schedule, Table 1

Revised 11/21/03

The 40 permanent impoundments were identified in consultation with OSMRE and the Tribes as part of the postmining land use. Sedimentation ponds and impoundments are designed to comply with the requirements of 30CFR780.11, 780.12, 780.25, 816.45, 816.46, 816.47, 816.49, 816.56, and other applicable regulations. and Attachment H in Volumes 2 through 6A contains the individual "Sedimentation Structures Inspection and Design Reports" in alphabetical order.

Impoundment

Included in each report is a description of the field inspection, a site description, input and output results of the stability, hydrology, and hydraulics analysis for each structure, a remedial compliance plan for the geotechnical and hydraulic aspects of the structure when necessary, a copy of the field inspection report for the structure, and a copy of hydrology and Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) or Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) calculations when applicable. Three structures in N-10 are required for the life-of-mine plan these structures are temporary structures. (2010-2036). Two of

These structures are required to control It is the

sediment generated by the mining operations occurring beyond the year 2010.

intent of PWCC to design these ponds to contain the runoff from a 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event and, at the minimum, contain the sediment from more than one design storm event [i.e., Modified Universal Soil Loss Equation (MUSLE) calculations or 2 years of USLE or RUSLE calculations].

The following is an outline of the procedures used to design these structures: 1. Identify the need and probable location of the proposed structure from the 1" 400' scale Drainage Area maps (Drawing 85400); 2. Determine the size and hydrologic parameters of the watershed using detailed procedures described in the "General Report, Geotechnic,
&
=

Hydrologic, Moore

and

Hydraulic Evaluation of Sedimentation Structures" by Dames D); and
3.

(Attachment

Determine the quality of runoff and sediment generated by the watershed using the University of Kentucky's hydrology and sedimentology computer model SEDIMOT 11, SEDCAD+, and/or RUSLE calculations.

Attachment I contain the typical input used for SEDIMOT 11.

Drawing No. 85406 contains a

list of the ponds, the location, map number (Drawing 854OO), proposed construction date, proposed reclamation date, hydrology design input and output variables, and the proposed minimum design storage capacity. The three ponds will be designed alone or in 20 Revised 11/21/03

series to handle the runoff and sediment based on the 30CFR780 and 816 regulations. These results are preliminary; detailed designs will be submitted for approval, according to the schedule provided in Table 1 before construction is initiated. Design Methodology. The Black Mesa is part of the Colorado Plateau Province

characterized by flat-topped mesas and plateaus, isolated buttes, and desert valleys. The mesa covers approximately 2.1 million acres. Along its northern boundary, the mesa

rises abruptly in a 1,200 to 2,000 foot high uneven wall, then descends gently downward through rolling hills to the Little Colorado River. roughly 8,200 feet. The maximum elevation at the rim is

The elevation of PWCC's leases ranges from approximately 7,200 to

6,200 feet and the leases include approximately 64,858 acres. The regional topography is a result of large scale, shallow folding which occurred during the Laramide Orogeny when strata were regionally unwarped and folded into broad, gentle domes and saddles accompanied by minor faulting. Subsequent erosion created the mesas The

during the relatively stable period lasting from the late Cretaceous to the present. topography is characterized by steeply-incised and extensive drainage systems. An arid-steppe climate is experienced on the Black Mesa.

Typically, the mine area has

long dry periods, dry clear air with low humidity, and a high percentage of sunshine. The average annual precipitation is approximately ten inches occurring primarily in the form of convectional showers during the summer months. little or no precipitation. to 7S° F in July. Long periods often occur with

Average annual temperatures range from about 30° F in January The

The elevation of the mesa keeps the location relatively cool.

prevailing wind direction is from the south and southwest. for approximately 150 days from mid-May into September.

The frost-free period extends

The lease area is within the Colorado River drainage system. to the southwest in drainage network parallel

Streamflows are generally Colorado River. The

drainage patterns toward the Little is generally from

on the lease

the northeast

to southwest and

includes Yellow Water Canyon Wash, Coal Mine Wash, Moenkopi Wash, and Dinnebito Wash. These drainages reach their confluence with the Little Colorado River approximately 75 miles southwest of the lease area. Most of the stream channels on the lease area are

classified as ephemeral channels with minor reaches being classified as intermittent; however, due to OSM's 30 CFR 701.5 definition of intermittent streams, the downstream reach of the ephemeral streams are also classified as intermittent streams if a stream channel or reach of a stream channel drains a watershed of at least one square mile.
21

Revised 02/21/00

All

new

sedimentation

ponds

and

impoundments

will

be

designed,

certified

by

a

professional engineer, submitted to and approved by the regulatory authority, constructed under the supervision of a professional engineer, and the as-built drawing will be

submitted to the regulatory authority prior to the occurrence of mining disturbance in the watershed. Sedimentation ponds and impoundments will be inspected and maintained

until the disturbed areas have been stabilized and successfully revegetated, and will not be removed by sooner than two the regulatory (2) years after the last augmented authority. When temporary seeding or prior structures to and

approval

siltation

impoundments are removed, the land on which the structure was located will be regraded and revegetated in accordance with the reclamation plan (Chapter 23).

When sedimentation ponds are used, they will be used individually or in series to control the designed runoff and sediment storage. Ponds will be located as near as possible to The stream channels in the proposed permit of some reaches being

disturbed areas and out of perennial streams. area are classified

as ephemeral streams with minor portions

intermittent (Chapter 15).

All of the sedimentation ponds will be designed and constructed to contain or treat, in addition to the design storm runoff volume, a minimum of two-years of sediment storage based on USLRE or RUSLE calculations or more than one equivalent design storm's sediment inflow based on MUSLE calculations. When the pond's sediment storage volume becomes less

than one year of sediment based on USLE or RUSLE calculations or less than a minimum of one equivalent design storm's sediment inflow based on MUSLE calculations, Peabody will restore the above minimum sediment storage volume. Any material excavated from the

ponding area will be inspected or analyzed by a soil scientist to determine whether the material represents suitable plant growth media. If the material is suitable, it will be If the

spread within the pond disturbance area or on reclaimed areas of the mine.

material is not suitable, it will be disposed of in accordance with PWCC's backfilling and grading plan, a minimum of four feet below the final reclaimed surface.

Ponds will be inspected and maintained to contain or treat the runoff from one 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event and to contain at least one year of sediment storage based on USLE or RUSLE calculations. This minimum storage level beneath the spillway will be

determined by: field surveys or aerial surveys; measuring the difference between the spillway elevation and the water or sediment level, then using the stage-capacity

22

Revised 02/21/00

curve to determine if adequate capacity remains in the pond; by staking at the level beneath the principal spillway elevation where the capacity is equal to the runoff from the design storm; or by other acceptable methods as directed by PWCC's engineer. professional

The storage level beneath this minimum storage volume may be used for, but not

limited to, the following purposes:

1. Additional

sediment

storage

to

reduce

the

frequency

of

storage

capacity

maintenance; and
2. Additional

runoff or pumpage from local facilities

(i.e., transfer wash down

water, pumpage from other ponds, pumpage from sumps and pits, pumpage and runoff from the redrilling or testing of Peabody's Navajo acquifer wells, runoff from local public water supply due to water spillage or washing of vehicles, etc.). This additional runoff or pumpage is too unpredictable to obtain accurate volume estimates; therefore, some ponds are oversized and periodically account for this eventuality. inspected to

All of the sedimentation ponds will be designed, constructed, and maintained to contain or treat the runoff from a 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event plus a minimum sediment storage; therefore, all sedimentation ponds will provide adequate detention time to allow the effluent from the ponds to meet State and Federal effluent limitations.

In addition, all ponds will be designed possible, short circuiting.

and constructed

to minimize, to the extend

With virtually all of the sedimentation ponds designed to

completely contain the runoff from at least the 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event, short circuiting discharge through the spillway outlet should not be a problem in order to meet State and Federal effluent limitation.

All water and sediment control facilities have been designed according to acceptable engineering practices and applicable regulatory requirements. Specific design criteria

and procedures considered applicable are described in this mine permit.

Hydrological

methods

developed

by

organizations Service

such

as

the

U.S. U.S.

Department Army Corps

of of

Agriculture-Natural

Resources

Conservation

(NRCS), the

Engineers, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and the U.S. Department of Transportation are

Revised 02/21/00

utilized by PWCC.

Since NRCS methods are widely used domestically and internationally rural and urban watersheds, these methods are used for most

for analysis of both hydrological analysis.

For more specialized hydrological problems, computer programs

will be utilized such as HEC-1 developed by the Corps of Engineers, SEDIMOT I1 developed by the University of Kentucky, and SEDCAD+ developed by Civil Software of Lexington, Kentucky. Attachments D, I, 0, and S contain a general description of HEC-1, SEDIMOT 1 1 ,

and SEDCAD, and the generic input parameters. However, PWCC's engineers may, on occasion, use methods which differ from the design procedures submitted herein if, in their judgment, such deviation is warranted.

Submittals utilizing a methodology other than described herein will be explained and justified. Designs will be submitted to the regulatory agency and approved prior

to construction.

During construction, any required major deviations from the approved

design will be noted in the certified "as-built" report to the regulatory authorities and a request for a permit revision to the original design will be requested. permit revision is approved, no additional mining disturbance will Until the in the

occur

watershed.

In all cases, a professional engineer will review the deviations during Construction are

construction, and the requirements of the regulations will be followed. deviations reviewed and approved by the Registered

Professional Engineer which

considered to be more conservative or which still allows the structure to exceed the minimum design standard described in this chapter and in the regulations, will not

require a permit revision. During construction, unforeseen topographic, geological, or other conditions may be encountered which could require minor realignment of the

embankment, changes to the size of the ponding area, or other minor deviations. case will the ponding area be constructed less than the design

In no

precipitation event

plus adequate volume for sediment storage when required by the regulations. This will allow the flexibility required by PWCC to make field decisions during construction

without unduly interrupting the construction schedule for each structure. Hydrologic Design Frequency. Design frequency as it is commonly used in hydrologic

design, describes how often a storm runoff event of a particular magnitude or larger is likely to occur. This event is usually expressed in terms of years, meaning that a storm equaled or exceeded on the average of one time during the

runoff event will be

interval. The probability of an event occurring in any one year is the reciprocal of the frequency. Conversely, further probability analyses can determine the required design of the structure design

frequency when the design life and an acceptable probability

Revised 02/21/00

capacity

being exceeded during the design life is specified

Mandatory

minimum

design

frequencies

for

each

type

of

water

and

sediment

control The

facility, except for impoundments, have been specified by the regulatory agency.

following minimum frequencies are used by PWCC to design sediment and water control structures. Due to the rural location of the mine site and with no one living in close

proximity downstream in the floodplain, all structures' Impoundment Hazard Classification are classified as Class (A) structures, (see Drawing No. 85406). Structure Type (Class (A)) Storage Temporary Sedimentation Ponds MSHA-size Dams Temporary Impoundments Permanent Impoundments Structure 2 77.216(a) criteria w/out spillway Structure 5 77.216(a) criteria w/out spillway 10-year, 24-hour 10-year, 24-hour As Designed As Designed General Storm PMP, 6-hour 100-year, 6-hour Minimum Frequency Spillway 25-year, 6-hour 100-y,ear, 6-hour 25-year, 6-hour 50-year, 6-hour Not Applicable Not Applicable

Rainfall amounts for the Black Mesa mining complex are obtained from "NOAA Atlas 2, Precipitation Frequency Atlas of the Western United States, Volume VIII, Arizona".

Selected precipitation maps for the lo-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 6-hour and 24-hour events are presented in Attachment F. The 6-hour and 24-hour return periods for

applicable precipitation events obtained from the atlases are as follows:

Precipitation (Inches) Return Period (years) 2 5 10 25 50 100 General Storm PMP Curve Number Selection. 6-Hour 1.05 1.4 1.6 1.9 2.2 2.4 4.7 24-Hour 1.4 1.8 2.1 2.5 2.7 3.0
---

Perhaps no parameter in hydrology is as subjective as the Traditional methods

selection of the proper runoff curve number for a given watershed.

25

Revised 02/21/00

of curve number estimation

involve the engineer or hydrologist, with some soils and

vegetation information, visiting the watershed in question, observing the vegetation and soils, and then selecting a curve number. Curve number selection relies heavily upon the

judgment of the designer, but this selection process usually performs satisfactorily in practice. Curve numbers are a function of three principal variables: vegetation type, The curve

revegetation cover, and the hydrologic soil group of the watershed soils.

numbers are weighted based on major soil groups and vegetation types in the watershed. Table 5 is the basis for all curve numbers used by PWCC. the revised NRCS, TR-55 publication (see Attachment GI. PWCC will primarily be using the curve numbers within the rangeland use. areas will be evaluated using the herbaceous land use. The reclaimed These curve numbers are part of

The undisturbed areas will be PWCC's lease area is

evaluated using the Pinon-Juniper and the sagebrush-grass land use.

approximately 70-75 percent pinon-juniper and 25-30 percent sagebrush-grass ground cover in the undisturbed areas (Chapter 9).
5-3

These curve numbers correspond closely to Figure

from the NRCS's publication

"Procedures for Determining Peak Flows in Colorado", Curve numbers for disturbed areas will

March, 1980, which is also in Attachment G.

mainly be based on the curve numbers for "Street and Roads", curve numbers for "Newly Graded Areas", and a review of the land use during the life of mining and reclamation. PWCC will use these curve numbers when reviewing existing structures and when designing all new structures. Where the cost of a proposed facility might be extremely large, more extensive analysis will be performed.

Revised 02/21/00

TABLE 5

NRCS Curve Numbers Kayenta and Black Mesa Mines, Arizona

Hydrologic Cover Type Reclaimed Areas (Herbaceous) Pre-law (1977) Post-law (1977) Contoured poor fair Vegetation Cover Hydrologic Conditions Soil Type B C D

-

87 81

-

Undisturbed Areas Pinon-Juniper Poor Conditions Average Mine conditions* Fair Conditions Sagebrush-Grass Poor Conditions Average Mine conditions* Fair Conditions poor
-

poor

fair

fair

Disturbed Areas Paved w/open ditches (including right-of-way) Gravel roads (including right-of-way) Dirt roads (including right-of-way) Newly graded areas or bare ground

Sources:

Revised NRCS Technical Release No. 55. Communication with Colorado and Arizona NRCS State Hydrologist (8-5-85).

Note:

*interpolated

from Figure S-3, NRCS's publication "Procedures for Determining Peak Flows

in Colorado", March 1980 (see Attachment G ) .

Revised 02/21/00

The calculated values for curve numbers reflect an Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC) 11. NRCS criteria defines AMC I1 as between 0.5 inches and 1.1 inches of rainfall in the between 1.4

five days prior to the design event for the vegetation "dormant" season and inches and 2.1 inches during the growing season.

As the most intense precipitation

events are summer thunderstorms during the growing season, using AMC I1 requires that a minimum 2-year, 24-hour event occurs in the five days preceding the design event in question. To insure conservatism in design, PWCC utilizes AMC 11, a condition that may This procedure adds conservativeness to PWCC's runoff

be atypical for the mine site. calculations.

On June 26, 1985 and July 10, 1985, Peabody engineers met with the OSM technical staff in Denver, Colorado to obtain clarifications of the new 30CFR regulations applicable to Indian lands and to discuss Peabody's general approach to the engineering and hydrology sections of these regulations.
&

During August of 1985, Peabody retained the firm of Dames

Moore to assist in the evaluation and preparation of the necessary documentation for

the geotechnical, hydrological, and hydraulic evaluation of facilities on the proposed permit area. Dames
&

On August 29, 1985 and in

subsequent

conversations, Peabody's engineers,

Moore's engineers, and OSM's technical staff have exchanged ideas and arrived at

a formal understanding as far as what OSM considers acceptable methods in complying with the regulations. proposed These methods are incorporated into the evaluation of existing and The General Report (Attachment D), presents a summary of

structures.

assumptions, data, and methodologies that were used to evaluate structure compliance with the 30 CFR Part 780 and 816 regulations. performed for structures meeting the Individual analyses have previously been of 30CFR77.216 regulations by

requirements

independent engineering consultants and, therefore, these structures were not included in Peabody's and Dames companion document
&

Moore's evaluation.

The General Report is intended to serve as a design reports that have been

to

the individual inspection and

prepared for each of the sedimentation and impoundment structures.

Detailed reports were

prepared for those structures required during the current permit term (Attachment H ) , or will be submitted to OSMRE for approval (see Table 1). In addition, general information

such as location and storage requirements is being submitted for ponds to be reclaimed after permit approval and the remaining life-of-mine structures. Construction Procedures. To ensure against excessive settlement and to maintain stable

slopes and compaction of the pond's embankment, PWCC will use, but not be limited to, the following construction specifications or procedures:

Revised 02/21/00

All pond locations will be cleared and grubbed which will consist of removing all trees, debris, underbrush, or any other undesirable materials from within the project grading limits. All clearing will be restricted to the smallest area practicable.

Topsoil will be removed from the project grading limits and stockpiled for later respreading on the graded slopes above the ponding limits. A keyway trench will be excavated a minimum of four feet below natural grade or until impervious foundation material is encountered along the embankment centerline and

extending the length of the embankment up to an elevation equal to the principal spillway flowline. The width of the keyway will be adequate to ensure compaction
If unsuitable material is exposed, the trench will be

across the entire trench. further excavated into a

relatively

impervious material

satisfactory

to

PWCC's

professional engineer. The entire foundation area below the embankment will be graded to remove uneven surfaces, scarified, and prepared to receive fill material. Embankment material will be free of large roots, sod, frozen soil, acid- or toxicforming coal processing waste, coal smut, rocks or hard lumps greater than ten inches in diameter, or pockets of highly pervious sand, gravel, or scoria. The top of the embankment will be constructed with a minimum camber equal to five percent of the design height over the natural stream channel to allow for settlement. Construction of the embankment will start at the lowest point and proceed in

compacted horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve inches in thickness.

Unless noted

otherwise, compaction will be a minimum of 92 percent of the Standard Proctor Density. Care will be taken to ensure bonding between successive lifts. will be adequate to obtain the required compaction. All finished grading of the spillway will be within plus or minus 0.2 of a foot measured at right angle to the spillway. into the surrounding topography. The embankment's upstream and downstream side slopes will not be steeper than those shown in Table 3-6, "Results of Stability Analyses" Dames
&

The moisture content

All slopes will be trimmed neat and graded

(see Chapter 6, Attachment D ,

Moore's "General Report - Geotechnic, Hydrologic, and Hydraulic Evaluation of

Sedimentation Structures"), based on the embankment material classification and the height of the embankment. This will ensure a minimum static safety factor of 1.5 for

the normal pool with steady seepage saturation conditions and a seismic safety factor of at least 1.2 for the stability of the embankment. For embankments of greater

height or different embankment material, an individualistic geotechnical investigation will be performed.

Revised 03/01/95

All impoundments will have a constructed minimum freeboard of one foot plus or minus 0.2 feet to resist overtopping by waves and by sudden increases in storage volume. Once all remedial earthwork is completed at each impoundment site, all slopes above the high waterline will be mulched and revegetated in accordance with PWCC's reclamation plan to protect against surface erosion at the site. the impoundments will be riprapped or The upstream and downstream slopes of stabilized when required by the

otherwise

professional engineer in the impoundment design.

As-built reports for all the necessary

remedial work identified in Drawing No. 85406 and in the Design and/or Inspection Report will be produced, certified by a professional engineer, and kept on file at the minesite. These as-built reports will be completed no later than 45 days following completion of all the necessary work. All temporary sedimentation ponds and impoundments not meeting the size requirements

of 30CFR77.216(a) will have a single spillway that will, at a minimum, safely discharge the runoff from a 25-year, 6-hour precipitation event. All spillway channels will be

constructed of nonerodible material and will be capable of maintaining sustained flows. Spillways will be cut in natural earth or rock wherever possible. spillways will not be earth or grass-lined. All permanent sedimentation ponds and impoundments not meeting the size requirements In addition, the

of 30CFR77.216(a) will have a spillway that will safely discharge the runoff from a 50year, 6-hour precipitation event.

All sediment ponds or impoundments meeting the criteria of 30CFR77.216(a) (i.e. MSHA-size structures) will comply with all MSHA requirements and will have principal and emergency spillways that, in combination, will safely pass a 100-year, 6-hour precipitation event.

Unless noted otherwise on the plans, each pond or impoundment will be constructed with a trapezoidal channel spillway. The spillway capacity will be calculated based on 2:l side

slopes for sedimentation ponds even though the typical cross sections for spillway and outflow channels in Attachment D show 3:l side slopes. construction, side slopes will not exceed 2:l. 2.5:1) . During remedial work and future

However, flatter slopes may result (e.g.,

In these cases, the spillway capacity would still be conservative since a 2: 1 In other words, side slopes flatter than a 2:l

slope was used in the original design.

will provide more cross sectional area, more capacity, and lower velocity.

30

Revised 02/21/00

Precise locations and dimensions of the spillway will be determined at the site by PWCC's project engineer in order to fit the spillway to the existing field conditions after embankment construction and to assure that the outflow channel extends a minimum of 15 feet beyond the toe of the embankment into the natural channel. The spillway and outflow channel will be undercut and brought back to grade as necessary to allow for the proper application of topsoil or geotextile and rock-lining. Where

culverts are used for spillways in order to provide access across the embankment, the inlet of the culverts will be equipped with trash racks to prevent plugging during precipitation events larger than the design storage event. No other treatment facilities in lieu of sedimentation ponds are planned at this time; however, if other treatment facilities are required, they will be designed and

constructed to treat the 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event unless a lesser design event is approved. Exemptions. Examination of the Sediment and Water Control Structures Map (see Drawing

Nos. 85405 and 85400) demonstrates that PWCC will have full sediment control coverage including Management ponds or Best for Technology the Currently Available disturbance (BTCA) structures areas as required or by Best the

Practices

post-law mining

regulations, except for certain portions of the overland conveyor which extends from the Kayenta Mine J-28 facilities to the railroad loadout facility. The BTCA structures may

include rock check dams, rock downdrains, silt fence, straw bale dikes, revegetation, etc. These BTCA structures and locations are shown on Drawing No. 85400. Of the 15.9

miles of conveyor, there are only three watersheds identified between the Transfer "F" site and the railroad loadout facilities that do not drain to a sedimentation pond or do not have BTCA structures in the watershed. The following is a breakdown of each exempt

segment of these watersheds and the drawing and sheet number(s) where they are shown. Watershed Conveyor Length (Miles) 0.14 0.35 0.06 0.55 miles Drawing No. 85400, (J-7) 85400, ( 5 - 7 ) 85400, (J-6, J-7)

v

vI
VII

Total

Revised 11/26/03

The area from N-8 to the silos was constructed prior to SMCRA and, therefore, no provision for sediment control was considered during right-of-way acquisition, design, and construction. To

go into the 100-foot plus wide right-of-way and build sediment control structures would not be practical or feasible. All of these segments are located in rugged topographic conditions

where massive rock outcrops create difficult or impossible excavation conditions, potentially requiring drilling and blasting or in areas where overland flow is difficult or impossible to concentrate at a particular point at the conveyor. Much of the undisturbed upstream area

runoff flows as overland or channelized flow into and across the conveyor's right-of-way; therefore, any sediment control would also have to contain this runoff, increasing the size of a siltation structure considerably. The remaining sections of conveyor have been adequately

controlled by sedimentation ponds or BTCA structures, (see Chapter 6, Figures 36 and 37, and Drawing Nos. 85400 and 85405). In order to evaluate these three segments of the overland conveyor for the purpose of requesting an exemption from providing sedimentation control for these areas, each segment of the overland conveyor was evaluated using the SEDIMOT I1 or SEDCADt Hydrology Computer Model. In addition, due to the rugged terrain and the inability to concentrate the runoff directly within the conveyor beltline's disturbance, a theoretical worst-case approach was developed. This approach assumed all runoff and sediment would be transported to one location in each segment. 1. Each segment was analyzed for three worst-case conditions:

Assume an approximate segment width of ten feet under the beltline could be drained to one point for each segment and fully contained;

2.
3.

Containment of the upstream undisturbed watershed only; and Assume the upstream watershed and the combined conveyor beltline area could be drained to one point for each segment and contained in accordance with the regulations.

The results of the analysis are presented in Table 6 and Table 7

Revised 11/26/03

TABLE 6

Conveyor Sediment Control Evaluation Summary Drainage Area (Acres) Curve Number
89 89 2.49 2.52 0.43 13.07 10.32 89 0.137 0.211 0.087 0.211 0.064 0.137 0.18 0.016 0.202 0.212 0.039 0.999 1.094

Area (Drwg. No. 85400)
#5 Belt Only #5 Undisturbed Area 2.18 2.35 0.42 15.68 16.10 84 83 #5 Total Area
#6 Belt Only

Time of Concentration (Hrs) Peak Flow (CfS)

Runoff Volume (Ac-ft)

Sediment (Tons)
0.60 14.10 14.78 1.14 72.56 66.91

% Area of Total Area

9 Peak Flow of Total Area

? Runoff Volume of Total Area

% Sediment of Total Area

0.17

7.23 92.77

7.14 98.81

7.55

4.06

95.28

95.40

2.61 97.39

4.17 126.65

-

-

89

3.56

1.70

#6 Undisturbed Area #6 Total Area

91.32

108.44

-

-

-

-

Revised 11/26/03

TABLE 7 Conveyor Sediment Control Evaluation Summary Area (Drwg. No. 8 5 4 0 0 )
# 7 Belt Only 0.07 303.95 304.02 84 0.433 147.43 84 0.427 148.37 20.660 20.660 89 0.027 0.08 0.006
# 7 Undisturbed Area

Drainage Area (Acres) Curve Number Peak Flow (CfS) Runoff Volume (Ac-ft)

Time of Concentration (Hrs)

Sediment (Tons)
0.26 8687.28 8657.49

9 Area of Total Area 0.02 99.98

% Peak Flow of Total Area

% Runoff % Sediment Volume of of Total Total Area Area

0.05 100.64

0.03

0.003

100.00

100.34

# 7 Total Area

-

-

-

-

#5,#6,#7 #5, #6, # 7 Undisturbed Area 3 2 1 . 8 1 #5,#6,#7 322.47

Belt Only
0.66

0.20 99.80
-----

Total Area

Note:

Percentages may exceed 1 0 0 % due to differences in time of concentrations

Revised 1 1 / 2 6 / 0 3

After an examination of the topographic maps, a site visit, and a review of Table 6 and Table 7, it should become apparent that the exemption available in 816.46(e) would be appropriate for the overland conveyor. The total drainage area, based on measurements from 1"
=

400'

scale topographic maps, is a very insignificant area within the total area. This represents less than one percent of the total area. The potential sediment generation from only the generated from the total

beltline area is less than 0.03 percent of the total sediment watersheds of the three segments.

Again, this is a very insignificant contribution to the This small disturbance area will contribute

watershed's water quality of the three segments.

no measurable impact to the downstream water quality; the effects of dilution would be so high that the water quality as a result of the runoff from the upstream-undisturbed areas would be virtually undetectable, (see Chapters 15 through 19 for additional discussion of natural

background water quality). for all

Finally, in order to treat the equivalent of 0.061 ac-ft of runoff 22 ac-ft of storage for the runoff and

three-conveyor segments, approximately

additional storage for the sediment would be theoretically required in order to contain the runoff. For the 0.66 acres of initial disturbance, this would be an astronomical amount of

storage required, creating more surface disturbance from pond construction than what was to have been controlled for conveyor disturbance. Therefore, these types of small disturbances represent the type of minor disturbance, which the regulations attempted to exclude sediment control and allowed sediment control exemptions The input for the SEDIMOT I1 and the SEDCADt models was developed using the 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event and standard engineering methods referred to elsewhere in this chapter. The following sediment particle size distribution information was utilized for this analysis: Particle Size (mm) 38.100 4.760 2.380 1.190 0.590 0.297 0.149 0.074 0.037 0.019 0.009 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.000 Percent Finer 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.5 99.2 99.0 94.0 70.0 43.0 29.0 23.0 18.0 15.0 13.0 0.0 Revised 11/26/03
(%)

"k" f a c t o r
CP V a l u e

=

0.43

= 1.0
=

Specific Gravity

2.50

Submerged Bulk S p e c i f i c G r a v i t y = 1 . 2 5 Particle Size Distribution(s) Size PSD-1
% Finer

PSD-2
% Finer

(mm)
38.100 4.760 2.380 1.190 0.590 0.297 0.149 0.074 0.037 0.019 0.009 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.000

100.00 95.00 92.00 90.03 90.02 90.01 90.00 89.00 88.00 77.00 64.00 55.00 43.00 35.00 0.00

Specific Gravity = 2.68 Submerged Bulk S p e c i f i c G r a v i t y = 1 . 2 5

The d i s t u r b a n c e a r e a u n d e r t h e o v e r l a n d c o n v e y o r ,

from T r a n s f e r 24-25

t o where C o a l Mine Wash
N6-M,

d r a i n s u n d e r n e a t h t h e c o n v e y o r , i s c o n t a i n e d i n t h e w a t e r s h e d f o r Ponds N10-B1,
C.

and N10-

The c o n v e y o r m a i n t e n a n c e r o a d on t h e n o r t h s i d e o f t h e c o n v e y o r i s h i g h e r t h a n t h e a r e a the conveyor; t h e r e f o r e , t h e runoff follows t h e s l o p e of t h e conveyor o r d r a i n s t o t h e
N6-M,

under

s o u t h i n t o t h e w a t e r s h e d f o r Ponds N10-B1,
8 5 4 0 0 , S h e e t s K-7

o r N10-C,

( s e e F i g u r e 1A a n d Drawing No.

and L - 7 ) .

Revised 11/26/03

COAL MINE WASH

;TYPICAL CROSS-SECT/ON FROM COAL MINE WASH C OSSING TO TRANSFER 24 25

7

CONVEYOR

WASH

TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION ALONG LWWSTREAM SIDE OF POND N6-M

LEGEND

AGURE lA DATE: 8/1/97
I
m M = C - =

8/97

@

I

-T
DLW(BT

JBna

El&#&

PEABODY WESTERN COAL COMPANY - KAYENTA MINE
p
I

Rzmat6

m.m

m e t

s

TerrrMatrlx
YOWeSOYIIY WATSON

-, , ,
PAMI&SXE Y b Y

waoao

M k

l V I C A L CROSS-SECTION OVERLAND CONVEYOR TRANSFER 24/25 TO CMW CROSSING
37

Revised 12/04/97

In conclusion, based on the data supplied, PWCC requests an exemption from the requirements to provide temporary sedimentation structures along the above segments of overland conveyor. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 6 and Table 7. After an examination of

the topographic maps, a site visit, and a review of Table 6 and Table 7, it should become apparent that the exemption available in 816.46(e) would be appropriate for these areas. The total percentage of drainage area, peak flow, runoff volume, and sediment runoff of the total area is relatively small. These disturbed areas have an insignificant affect on the This small disturbance area will

total watershed's water quality for the five areas.

contribute no measurable impact to the downstream water quality, the effects of dilution with the runoff from the upstream undisturbed areas will be so high that the downstream water quality effect will be insignificant, (see Chapters 15 through 19 for additional discussions of natural background water quality). Treating the runoff from the entire

watershed will require disturbing new areas or areas previously reclaimed; therefore, more surface disturbance and additional retention of runoff will be required. These types of

small disturbances represent the type of minor disturbance that the regulations attempted to exclude sediment control and allow sediment control exemptions.

Revised 11/26/03

(This page is intentionally left blank)

Revised 11/26/03

(This page is intentionally left blank)

Revised 1 1 / 2 6 / 0 3

(This page is intentionally left blank)

Revised 1 1 / 2 6 / 0 3

Inspection

and

Reporting. under

A

qualified

registered engineer's

professional

engineer

or

other

qualified personnel

the professional

supervision, will

inspect the

impoundments a minimum of weekly during active construction and at "critical points" during construction which would include after keyway excavation, and upon completion of construction. and kept on As-built reports will be produced, certified by a professional engineer, file at the minesite. As-built reports for new construction will be

completed and submitted to the regulatory authority prior to any mining disturbance in the watershed.

A

qualified

registered engineer's

professional

engineer

or

other and

qualified

personnel

under at

a

professional

supervision will

inspect

examine

impoundments

least

annually until removal of the structure or release of the performance bond.

An annual

inspection and examination summary will be provided to the regulatory authority in a certified report documenting the present condition of the impoundment and whether or not remedial work is required. Attachment
E

contains

an

example

of

Peabody's
&

Annual

Impoundment Inspection Report.

Inspection reports for 1 9 8 5 prepared by Dames

Moore and

Peabody are included as Attachment H. site.

A copy of these reports will be kept at the mine

Revised 1 1 / 2 6 / 0 3

In addition, 30 CFR 780.25 and 816.49 requires an additional design evaluation for any impoundments meeting the Class B or C criteria for dams defined in the USDA, NRCS Technical Release No. 60, "Earth Dams and Reservoirs" manual. All the impoundments on

Table 4, Drawing No. 85406, and Drawing No. 85408 were evaluated based on the following NRCS definition of Class A, B, and C dams: Class (A). - Dams located in rural or agricultural areas where failure may damage farm buildings, agricultural land, or township and country roads. Class (B). - Dams located in predominantly rural or agricultural areas where failure may damage isolated homes, main highways, or minor railroads or cause interruption of use or service of relatively important public utilities. Class (C). - Dams located where failure may cause loss of life, serious damage to homes, industrial and commerical buildings, important public utilities, main

highways, or railroads. The existing structures were field inspected in the fourth quarter of 1994 and classified under the supervision of a professional engineer. The eleven existing and proposed MSHAThe Black Mesa Complex

size structures have been evaluated based on MSHA's regulations.

is located in a remote and rural area with few public roads, utilities, buildings, or private buildings located in the downstream floodplain; therefore, based on the field inspection and the NRCS definition, all of the non-MSHA-size structures are classified as Class A structures (see Drawing No. 85406). MSHA-sized dams are inspected weekly by a certified MSHA dam inspector and reported annually as required by 30CFR77.216. presented in Attachment E. The weekly and annual inspection report forms are

In addition to the regular inspections, PWCC has numerous personnel including engineers, technicians, environmental scientists, reclamation personnel, and operational personnel that work within the permit area daily who will be observing the condition of impoundments on a periodic basis. the

If a hazard is discovered during an inspection which

threatens the protection of the public, PWCC will inform the regulatory authorities of the finding and of the emergency procedures formulated for public protection and remedial action. The remedial action will be determined on a case-by-case basis, based on the

nature or scope of the hazard. Maintenance and Reclamation. Initially, earthen surfaces associated with all facilities

will be stabilized by applying topsoil or suitable soil material above the high waterline

Revised 11/26/03

and revegetated with the standard seed mix in accordance with the reclamation plan or by applying crushed rock, riprap, concrete fabriform blankets, geotextiles, or other

appropriate methods to minimize erosion or deterioration.

However, excavated slopes in than 2:l

bedrock, fractured scoria, or other competent materials which are steeper will not be topsoiled or further stabilized.

Maintenance will be performed in such a

manner that the integrity of all facilities will be maintained, and the facility will function as designed. Other minor remedial reconstruction will be performed as necessary

to maintain each facility.

Discharge from sedimentation ponds, permanent and temporary impoundments, and diversions will be controlled by energy dissipators, riprapped portion of the channels, and other devices, where necessary, to reduce erosion and to minimize disturbance of the hydrologic balance. Discharge structures will be designed, where necessary, according to standard

engineering design procedures.

After the effluent in the sedimentation ponds has had adequate detention time to meet State and Federal effluent limitations, PWCC will use pumps with an intake screen

attached to a flotation device as a nonclogging dewatering device or other means to lower the water level in the pond and restore the runoff capacity for the 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event. to prevent impoundment. The flotation device will be attached to the pump's intake quality water at the bottom or side of the hose or

suction of poor

pond

The water removed from the pond will be disposed of in a manner consistent PWCC has the pumps and hose, or pipe shown in Table 8

with PWCC's approved NPDES permit.

available on Black Mesa to dewater sedimentation ponds.

In addition, PWCC has access to many pump and hose supply vendors throughout the "Four Corner's" regional area. When PWCC dewaters an impoundment or pond, the water will be

discharged in one of the following methods in order to restore adequate storage capacity and to minimize erosion downstream: 1. The water may be pumped to another pond that has sufficient capacity. The water in

the second pond will be used as a dust control agent, in the construction of earth embankments, or mine-related activity.

2.

If the water is not pumped to another pond, the water will be discharged through the decant system or pumped into the principal or emergency spillway and discharged downstream in accordance with the NPDES permit.

Revised 02/21/00

TABLE 8 Black Mesa Complex Dewatering Equipment List
Pumps
@ 20' G.P.M.

Unit # Kayenta Mine 950 951 952 953 954 955 956

Make

Model

Size

Rate

Gorman Rupp Gorman Rupp Gorman Rupp Gorman Rupp Gorman Rupp Gorman Rupp Gorman Rupp

Black Mesa Mine 693 695 696 Gorman Rupp Gorman Rupp Gorman Rupp

Warehouse

Gorman Rupp

Joint Use 41041 Detroit Diesel-Gorman

TOTAL :

16,300

Hose BM

3,000' 1,200' 500' 3,000'

6" Flex Hose 4" Flex Hose 6" Alum. 3" Alum.

KM Joint Use

Total

7,700'

Revised 02/21/00

3.

If the spillway is not designed to handle the discharge velocities of the dewatering system, the water will be discharged downstream of the toe of the embankment in the natural channel. The discharge point will be located at a nonerodible bedrock or The exit velocity and initial impact of the discharge

rocky colluvial location.

will be absorbed by the rock and the water will be quickly spread over a larger cross-sectional area; therefore, the channel velocities will be reduced. the following equation: Based on

where Maximum Q Maximum V
= =

Q

=

V(A)

4.5 cfs (2,000 gal/min) 5 fps

when the cross-sectional area of the rock exit channel equals or exceeds 0.9 ft2, the velocities will be nonerodible. Note the above will vary based on the discharge from the dewatering system and site-specific conditions. PWCC will

construct a nonerodible channel based on the minimum cross-sectional area if a nonerodible exit channel does not exist. 4. If the downstream channel consists of natural erodible material, PWCC will construct an impact or energy dissipator basin. durable, nonerodible type material. The basin will consist of

The velocity at the outlet of the

dewatering system will be determined by using Manning's equation for open channel flow or the following equation for the discharge from a circular pipe or conduit :

V gpm d

= =

velocity of flow (ft/sec) Gallons per minute diameter of circular pipe or conduit (inches) "Cameron Hydraulic Data", 1984 by Ingersoll-Rand

=

(Reference: Publications)

Once the velocity is determined, the operator of the dewatering system has several options to minimize erosion at the outlet of the dewaterig3 system: (a) If the velocity is too high for the energy dissipator or downstream channel, reduce the quantity of flow or gallons per minute discharged. the velocity and minimize erosion. This will reduce

Revised 02/21/00

(b) If

the velocity

is too high

for the energy dissipator

or downstream

channel,

increase the diameter of the discharge pipe or increase the cross-sectional area of the discharge channel. This will also reduce the velocity and minimize the erosion.

(c) If the quantity of flow or cross-sectional area of the dewatering system cannot be adjusted to minimize the velocity and erosion in the downstream channel, an energy dissipator or impact basin will need to be constructed at the outlet of the

dewatering system. Typically, for the dewatering equipment listed in Table 8, an erosion resistant lining will be required that will take the initial impact of the discharge and spread the water over enough cross-sectional area in the impact basin to reduce the exit velocity. The impact basin will be sized using procedures described in Design of Small Dams 1977). (USBR,

The conjugate depth for the hydraulic jump will be estimated using Figure 268 in The tailwater depth

Design of Small Dams with an estimated head loss of 30 percent.

below the stilling basin will be estimated using Manning's equations for a trapezoidal channel with dimensions similar to the outflow channel. The length of the stilling basin (USACE,

will be estimated based on research reported in Hydraulic Design of Spillways
1965), where basin

lengths of

five times

the hydraulic jump conjugate depth proved

adequate.

The depth of the stilling basin below the natural streambed elevation will be

calculated by subtracting the tailwater depth from the hydraulic jump conjugate depth. Riprap lining for the stilling basin will be sized using the calculated velocity in the outflow channel leading to the stilling basin. The minimum height of riprap along the

sidewalls of the stilling basin will be set equal to the hydraulic jump conjugate depth plus freeboard. Freeboard will be calculated using the following empirical equation from

Design of Small Dams (USBR, 1977).

Where

FB
V

=
=

Freeboard in feet Velocity of flow entering the basin in feet per second Hydraulic jump conjugate depth in feet

d2

=

Freeboard values will be rounded to the nearest half foot.

The walls of the exit channel

will-be transitioned so that the exit channel cross section of the basin approximates the cross section of the natural channel. could increase erosion potential. This will avoid any abrupt transition zone which

Typical design configurations of this basin will be

similar to the stilling basin discussed in Chapter 6, Attachments D and H.

47

Revised 02/21/00

The rate of discharge will be governed by the size of the dewatering system.

Normally,

when a pumping system is used to dewater the impoundment or pond, the discharge rate will be in the range of one to five cubic feet per second. Some of the larger MSHA-size

structures have valve controlled dewatering systems that may have discharge rates from zero to 100 cubic feet per second. Whereas, if a siphon or other means of dewatering is

used, the discharge rate will be limited by the size of the dewatering system and the number of dewatering devices.

Chapter

11

of

the

PAP

contains

a

discussion

of

the precipitation

on

Black

Mesa.

Typically, the mine area has long dry periods, dry clear air with low humidity, and a high percentage of sunshine. The average annual precipitation is approximately ten

inches, occurring primarily in the form of convectional showers during the summer months. Long periods often occur with little or no precipitation; therefore, pond dewatering is not currently necessary for the majority of impoundments.

As a result of the NPDES monitoring during 1985, 1986, and 1987, PWCC has recorded only nine ponds that have exceeded the EPA's 10-year, 24-hour storage level. levels were recorded, that PWCC has PWCC received, to on December 20, 1987, runoff a Since these NPDES the Permit water

Modification

authorized

discharge

storm water

from

retention ponds in the absence of precipitation events. J2-A dam downstream of the CW-A pond.

Also, PWCC has constructed the

As a result of the new NPDES permit and the

remedial work, PWCC anticipates having to dewater only five of the nine ponds in the future. Therefore, based on the above, PWCC has the available equipment to dewater the In addition, PWCC has a

ponds when the maximum allowable storage level is exceeded.

fully equipped water quality lab located at the mine site, a full fleet of construction equipment available, and approximately 750 employees at the mine site available to

maintain access and water levels at all of the sedimentation ponds.

As an alternative to mechanical dewatering devices, such as pumps, some ponds will be designed with principal spillways such as a perforated drop inlet or a trickle tube. In

these situations the principal spillways will be designed to dewater the pond of the runoff from the designed precipitation event, uithin 10 days following an event. dewatering devices will be designed to be non-clogging. These

Final reclamation for all temporary siltation and temporary impoundment structures not

48

Revised 02/21/00

required to support mining operations will be reclaimed in a manner consistent with the reclamation plan. Unless these structures are specifically identified as a permanent structure (see Drawing Nos. 85324, 85405, and 85406) or a request is made by the Tribe and local residents in public comment meetings (i.e., public comment meetings, local

Chapter meetings, or the Black Mesa Review Board meetings, etc.), or a written request is sent directly to PWCC's management, each structure is classified as temporary and

therefore will be reclaimed.

Each request will be evaluated by PWCC to assure the

structure is regulatory and economically feasible to remain as a permanent structure. Sediment control facilities will be retained until reclamation requirements for disturbed lands are met structures. and approval is granted by the regulatory authorities to remove the

All structures not approved as part of the final reclamation plan will be reclaimed by grading the embankment material into the surrounding topography, removing culverts, reestablishing drainage, preparing the graded surface in accordance with the reclamation plan, topsoiling, seeding, and mulching. Permanent sedimentation ponds and impoundments

will be maintained and will meet the requirements of the approved reclamation plan for permanent structures and impoundments. PWCC will renovate such strucures, where

necessary, to conform to the approved reclamation plan.

MSHA-Size Structure (2006-2036) PWCC will utilize eleven structures that meet the criteria of 30CFR77.216(a). structures were constructed prior to September 28, 1984, one structure Eight

(N14-H) was

constructed in 1985, one structure (J2-A) was constructed in 1986 and another structure (J7-JR) was constructed in 2001. will be permanent. Two structures will be temporary and nine structures

The primary purpose of these structures, except for the Kayenta Mine KM-FWP's

Fresh-Water Pond (KM-FWP), is to control sediment from disturbed mining areas. purpose is to hold fresh water pumped from a nearby Navajo aquifer well. all the MSHA structures can be found on Drawing No. 85405.

The location of

The drainage area for each All of the detailed

structure is delineated on Drawing No 85400, Sheets 1 through 26.

design information and site descriptions for these structures constructed before 1995 have been previously submitted to regulatory authorities. A summary of the information

required for 30CFR780.11, 780.12, and 816.49 including location, map number, construction date, reclamation date,

Revised 11/21/03

remedial work schedule, drainage area, storage capacity, and spillway information for the existing structures is included on Drawing No. 85406. Attachment

K

contains

the

inspection report for each existing dam. Following is a description of each MSHA-sized structure and where additional information can be found: I. J2-A (Wild Ram Valley Dam), MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-00533-02. J2-A design

information was transmitted to OSM on 5/14/85. structure completed in 1986.

Approval was received and

J2-A drains a watershed of approximately 2,761

acres and has a total storage capacity of approximately 177.7 acre-feet. Drawing No. 85410, Volume 22, Sheets 1 and 2 shows the proposed site plan and stage-capacity curve. Drawing No. 85411, Volume 7A, Sheets 1 and 2 show the stage-capacity chart for J2-A dam. The dam's

"as-built" condition and

primary purpose is to control runoff from mining areas. embankment dam extending to bedrock. section of the zoned embankment. found in the Sergent,

The dam is a zoned

Figure 1 depicts a typical cross

More detailed design information can be and Beckwith (SHB) "Geotechnical

Hauskins,

Investigation and Design Development Report" submitted 5/14/85. 11. J7-Jr Dam, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-09. Detailed plans in Volume 7.1 for J7-Jr Dam were approved by OSMRE and MSHA on January 11, 2001. J7-Jr Dam was

constructed in 2001. J7-Jr Dam drains a watershed of approximately 3,960 acres and has a total storage capacity of approximately 724 acre-feet. The dam's primary purpose is to control runoff from the J-19 and J-21 mining areas. The J7-Jr MSHA Dam Design Report and more detailed design information can be found in Volume 7.1, Chapter 6, Attachment A1 and the as-built is in Volume 7A. 111. J-7 Dam, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-00533-01. PWCC in 1973. The J-7 Dam was constructed by

The embankment is utilized as a haul road, for sediment

control, and to impound water for dust suppression water and as an emergency water supply for the Black Mesa Pipeline Company's coal slurry transportation system. The J-7 Dam drains a watershed of approximately 9,217 acres, which

includes the J7-Jr Dam's watershed of 3,960 acres and the downstream area in the J-7 Dam's watershed of 5,257 acres. J-7 Dam has a total storage capacity of approximately 669 acre-feet. Drawing No. 85412 shows the current "asFigure 2 illustrates the current stage-

built" conditions of the dam site. capacity curve for the J-7 Dam. 0001 area. 1/29/82.

The J-7 Dam is included in the Permit AZ-

The J-7 Dam was approved by MSHA on 5/12/80 and by OSM on

The embankment consists of a 60-foot wide

Revised 09/12/02

Stage

ft.

-

P n u i cc.A

no 1 7 - Inn

compacted clay core. More detailed design

Figure 3 depicts the cross section of the embankment. information can be found in the SHB Geotechnical

Investigation Report

(8/27/76) previously submitted to regulatory authorities

and included in Attachment R. IV. J16-A Dam, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-07. The J16-A Dam was constructed in 1982 as a zoned rock-fill embankment. of the embankment. 23. See Figure 4 for a typical cross section

The design of J16-A was submitted in Permit AZ-0001, Volume approved the design on

MSHA approved the design on 7/19/82 and OSM

5/13/82. site.

Drawing No. 85414 shows the current "as-built" conditions of the dam J16-A drains a watershed of approximately 2,684 acres with a total Figure 5 depicts

present storage capacity of approximately 333.0 acre-feet. the current stage-capacity curve.

More detailed design information can be

found in the SHB Geotechnical Investigation Report previously submitted to OSM. V. J16-L Dam, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-08. The J16-L Dam (Reed Valley Dam) was constructed in 1984 as a zoned earth embankment to control runoff from mining areas (see Figure 6 for a typical cross section of the embankment). The

detailed design was submitted as an amendment to Permit AZ-0001 in Volume 34. Approval was granted on 12/15/82 by MSHA and on 6/3/83 by OSM. In 1996, PWCC

determined the ponding area had silted sufficiently to require increasing the capacity. A permit revision was submitted and approved to increase the height Drawing No. 85416B shows the J16-L currently drains a

of the spillway and the top of embankment. current "as-built" condition of the dam

site.

watershed of approximately 7,873 acres with a total present storage capacity of approximately 399 acre-feet. curve. Figure 7 depicts the current stage-capacity

More detailed design information can be found in Rollins, Brown and (8/26/82) previously

Gunnell, Inc.'s "Reed Valley Dam, Final Design Report" submitted to OSM. VI.

Kayenta Mine-Fresh Water Reservoir (KM-FWP), MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-01. KM-FWP was constructed in 1972 as a surge facilities, for dust suppression, and to pond to provide water for mine supply the Black Mesa Pipeline

Company's coal slurry transportation system. The pond was lined with a 0.015inch to 0'.020-inch thick PVC membrane pond liner furnished by Water Saver Company, Inc. The embankment was constructed out of locally available material, predominantly clayey silts and clayey sand material. See Figure 8 for a typical cross section of the embankment. The KM-FWP is in Permit AZ-0001 area. The KM-

FWP was approved by MSHA on 3/28/79 and by OSM on 1/29/82. This pond collects

53

Revised 02/21/00

R e v i s e d 03/31/50

Stage-Capacity Curve, Jl6-A Black MesaIKayenta Mines

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200 Capacity ac.-ft. FIGURE 5

220

240

%5---280

300

320

340

360

380

S t a g e

f t .

R e v i s e d 03/!1/q0

Revised 08/31/90

runoff only from the adjacent access road which is approximately one acre, with a total present storage capacity of approximately 21.7 acre-feet. Drawing Figure

No. 85418 shows the current "as-built" condition of the reservoir site. 9 depicts the current stage-capacity curve for KM-FWP.

More detailed design

information can be found in SHB "Geotechnical Investigation Report, Dam No. 1" (8/16/76) previously submitted to OSM and included in Attachment R. VII. N14-D, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-02. N14-D is a multi-zoned earth dam

constructed in 1982 to control runoff from mining areas and as part of the Kayenta Mine Road and PWCC's overland conveyor system typical cross section of the embankment. (see Figure 10 for a

The detailed design for N14-D was Approval was received from

submitted in Volume 19, Tab E of Permit AZ-0001. MSHA on 10/15/81 and from OSM on 7/23/81. "as-built" condition 1,836 of the dam a site. total

Drawing No. 85420 shows the current N14-D drains a watershed capacity of of

approximately approximately curve.

acres

with

present

storage

559 acre-feet.

Figure 11 depicts the current stage-capacity

More detailed design information can be found in SHB's "Geotechnical

Investigation Report" (6/30/81) submitted previously to OSM. VIII.Nl4-E, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-03. N14-E is a multi-zoned earth dam

constructed in 1982 to control runoff from the mining areas and as part of PWCC's overland conveyor system (see Figure 12 for a typical cross section of the embankment). amendment The detailed design of N14-E was submitted in a letter Approval was received from MSHA on

(7/24/81) to Permit AZ-0001.

12/8/81 and from OSM on 2/17/82. built" condition of the dam site.

Drawing No. 85422 shows the current "asN14-E drains a watershed of approximately

157 acres with a total present storage capacity of approximately 66 acre-feet. Figure 13 depicts the current stage-capacity curve. More detailed design

information can be found in SHB's "Geotechnical Investigation Report" (7/24/81) submitted prior to OSM's approval. dam

IX.Nl4-F, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-04. N14-F is a multi-zoned earth

constructed in 1982 to control runoff from the mining areas and as part of the N-14 East haul road (see Figure 14 for a typical cross section of the

embankment).

The detailed design of N14-F was submitted in Volume 21, Table C Approval was received from MSHA on 5/21/82 "as-built"

as an amendment to Permit AZ-0001. and from OSM on 3/25/82. condition of the dam site.

Drawing No. 85424 shows the current

N14-F drains a watershed of approximately 376 acres Figure 15

with a total present storage capacity of approximately 61 acre-feet. depicts the current stage-capacity curve.

60

Revised 02/21/00

FIQURE 11

Capacity (ac.ft.)

I

65

.

R e v i s e d C~/!I/W

N14-F

has

approximately sixty-five percent of its original design

storage

capacity.

The total storage capacity was originally 94 acre-feet, and it This reduction resulted from mine The embankment was not current hydrology and

currently has 61.1 acre-feet of capacity.

spoil being placed in part of the ponding area. affected; therefore, Dames
&

Moore

reviewed

the

hydraulics of the dam to assure compliance with the regulations (see Attachment
J, Dames
&

Moore's "N14-F, Review Report").

The spillway is adequate to handle

the 100-year, 6-hour storm and the ponding area can hold 20.37 acre-feet of runoff plus the equivalent of 33 years of sediment storage. More detailed

design information can be found in SHB's "Geotechnical Investigation Report" (12/30/81) submitted prior to OSM's approval. X. N14-G, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-05. N14-G is a multi-zoned earth dam

constructed in 1982 to control runoff from the mining areas and as part of the N-14 East haul road (see Figure 16 for a typical cross section of the

embankment).

The detailed design of N14-G was submitted in Volume 21, Table C Approval was received from MSHA on 5/21/82

as an amendment to Permit AZ-0001. and from OSM on 3/25/82. condition of dam site.

Drawing No. 85426 shows the current "as-built"

N14-G drains a watershed of approximately 1,479 acres Figure

with a total present storage capacity of approximately 185 acre-feet. 17 depicts the current stage-capacity curve.

More detailed design information

can be found in SHB's "Geotechnical Investigation Report" (12/30/81) submitted prior to OSM's approval. XI. N14-H, MSHA I.D. No. 1211-AZ-09-01195-06. N14-H is a multi-zoned earth dam

constructed in 1985 to control runoff from the mining area (see Figure 18 for a typical cross section of the embankment). The detailed design of N14-H was submitted to OSM on 10/7/82 in Volume 36 of Permit AZ-0001. Approval

was received from MSHA on 3/9/84 and from OSM on 2/21/84. shows the current "as-built" condition of the dam site.

Drawing No. 85428 N14-H drains a

watershed of approximately 1,615 acres with a total present storage capacity of approximately 227 acre-feet. curve. Figure 19 depicts the current stage-capacity

More detailed design information can be found in SHB's "Geotechnical

Investigation Report" previously submitted to OSM. After a review of the above information for each MSHA dam and based on prior review and approval of the structure by the appropriate regulatory agencies, PWCC believes these structures are in compliance with 30 CFR 780.12. Each structure was constructed and/or

modified under the supervision of a registered professional engineer. 68 Revised 02/21/00

Revised O8/31/90

Revised 08/31/90

Stage (ft.)

Drawing No. 85406 compares the design runoff capacity of each existing structure with the present storage capacity and for each structure the present storage capacity is more than adequate to allow storage for the design runoff capacity, plus sediment storage.

Therefore, it is safe to assume storage capacity is more than adequate. The spillway for each structure was constructed according to the approved plan;

therefore, it is safe to assume the spillways will perform as approved. Attachment K and Drawing No 85406 indicate no remedial work is required for any of the existing MSHA-size structures. Therefore, it should be safe to assume there is no

apparent structure problems, which creates a risk of harm to the environment or to the public health or safety. Permanent Impoundments Fifty-one providing total water water for sources wildlife that and fall into three will categories or are of impoundments proposed for for

livestock

exist

being

consideration to permanently exist at final bond release. Law internal impoundments, existing and proposed existing and proposed control structures

These categories include Pre-

Post-Law internal impoundments, and (sediment ponds). All of these

water

impoundments are shown on Drawing Nos. 85324 or 85405. Nineteen pre-law and post-law permanent internal impoundments currently exist that are available for wildlife and livestock use as a part of the post-mining landscape. Three

permanent impoundments are approved permanent internally draining ponds located in the N-2 coal resource area and are designated as N2-RA, N2-RB, and N2-RC. Sixteen

impoundments existed prior to the 1982 issuance of the Interim Program Permit or are PreLaw internal impoundments. The sixteen structures include five Post-Law structures, J1RA(J1-PI #I), J1-RB(J1-PI #2), J3-G(J3-G(PI)), N1-RA(N1-PI #3) and N8-RA(N8-PI #I), and eleven Pre-Law structures. Five Pre-Law structures are located in the J-3 coal resource coal

area, J3-PI1 #1, J3-PI1 #2, J3-PI1 #3, J3-PI1 #4, and J3-PI1 #5, and the N-1

resource area has six Pre-Law structures, N1-PI1 #1, N1-PI1 #2, N1-PI1 #4, N1-PI1 #5, N1PI1 #6, and N1-PI1 #7 (see Drawing No. 85324). The existing N2-RA, N2-RB and N2-RC Post-Law internal permanent impoundments have been previously designed and approved in the AZ-0001 permit. well as the approved design are included in Attachment H. Individual inspection reports as PWCC and Dames
&

Moore

evaluated the current condition of each impoundment based on the new 30 CFR regulations. Included in the inspection reports are a site description; stability, hydrology and hydraulics description; stability, hydrology and hydraulics analysis; remedial compliance plans and the 1985 inspection reports. 73 Revised 01/15/02

One additional internal permanent impoundment is being proposed for consideration in this PAP (J19-RB). It will be located in the J-19 coal resource area. sheet calculations are provided in Attachment T. accordance with schedule provided in Table 1. Water persistence work

Detailed designs will be submitted in

In addition to the nine Post-Law internal impoundments, PWCC is also proposing an additional thirty-one existing or proposed sediment control structures be considered as permanent impoundments (Table 9). These thirty-one impoundments include nine existing

MSHA structures, 20 existing sediment control structures, and 2 proposed sediment control structures. Of the 5 Post-Law, pre-1982 internal impoundments, one existing structure,

J3-G, is currently being utilized for sediment control; however, it is more applicable to consider this structure as an internal impoundment being utilized as a sediment control structure. The other four Post-Law, pre-1982 structures, J1-RA, J1-RB, N1-RA, and N8-RA, are located in the reclamation. Being multi-purpose structures, these impoundments are utilized for sediment control during the life of the mining and reclamation operations and will then be converted to permanent structures prior to final bond release. Detailed designs will be submitted for

approval in accordance with the schedule provided in Table 1 prior to construction. Designs for proposed structures, or modification of existing structures will address permanent impoundment performance standards. are provided in Attachment T. structure in Table 4. Water persistence worksheet calculations

Additional reference information can be found for each

Engineering Design (Permanent Impoundments).

Peabody retained Water, Waste and Land,

Inc. (WWL), Fort Collins, Colorado to study and model pertinent hydrological parameters and analyze the structural stability of potential internal impoundments. report was submitted to OSM in April, 1982 (PAP-Appendix E, Volume 27). The resultant

The hydrologic parameters related to the permanent impoundments were analyzed by WWL through the use of three computer models. The first model developed precipitation

statistics for the Black Mesa leasehold by analyzing a 30-year precipitation record from nearby Betatakin, Arizona. The precipitation statistics were then integrated in a Monte

Carlo simulation to develop a precipitation sequence by day that retains the statistical properties of the 30-year historical record.

Revised 01/15/02

Table 9 Proposed Permanent Impoundments, Including Post-Law Internal Impoundments and Sediment Control Structures

Pond ID J1-RA J1-RB J2-A J3-D J3-E J3-G J7- DAM J7-JR J7-R J16-A J16-G J16-L J19-RB J21-A J21-C J21-I J27-RA J27-RB J27-RC N1-RA N2-RA N2-RB N2-RC N5-A N6-L N7-D N7-E N8-RA N10-A1

~ o n d i ion1 t Existing (I) Existing (I) Existing (M) Existing (S) Existing (S) Existing (I) Existing (MI Existing (M) Existing (S) Existing (M) Existing (S) Existing (M) Proposed (I) Existing (S) Existing(S) Proposed (S) Existing (S) Existing (S) Existing (S) Existing (I) Existing (I) Existing (I) Existing (I) Existing (S) Existing(S) Existing ( S ) Existing($) Existing (I) Existing (S)

Drainage Area (acres) 327.7* 25.5* 2661.3 318.0 251.3 241.8 5256.7 3960.3 260.1 2415.0 272.0 7355.9 517.1* 544.0 1182.0 731.l* 45.8 10.8 86.8 615.6 317.0 349.8 156.2 531.1 402.6 756.0 246.9 305.3 701.8

Revised 01/15/02

Table 9 (cont. ) Proposed Permanent Impoundments, Including Post-Law Internal Impoundments and Sediment Control Structures

Pond ID N10-D

Condition

1

Drainage Area (acres)

Existing(S1 Proposed Existing Existing Existing

N14-D N14-F N14-G N14-H TPF-D TPF-E

Existing (M) Existing (M) Existing ( M ) Existing ( M ) Existing(S) Existing(S)

1 - (S) Sediment Control Structure, (I) Internal Impoundment Structure, ( M ) MSHA Sediment Control Structure

* - Not Designed

Revised 01/15/02

The second model calculated the runoff corresponding to the precipitation input for each day, the pond depth for each runoff event, and the change in water quality for each day. calculations employ accepted NRCS equations and a dimensionless Area Index The runoff for

parameter

corresponding watershed and pond areas.

The water quality calculations were based on a mass

balance model that incorporated evaporation (based on historical record at Many Farms), seepage, runoff water quality, and pond depth.

Revised 02/21/00

The third model determined the sediment yield for each precipitation event. the Modified USLE which has been well documented in the literature.

The model utilized

The runoff volume and peak

discharge were calculated by the runoff model (second model) and the soil erodibility, slope, and conservation factors were determined from NRCS nomographs and tables.

As mentioned previously, the WWL study also addressed the structural stability aspects of the permanent impoundments. reclaimed areas on the Samples of spoil material were obtained from a series of test pits in
PWCC

leasehold.

These

samples were

analyzed

for particle

size

distribution, plasticity properties, and shear strengths.

These parameters were then used in a

slope stability model (BISHOP) to assess slope stabilities in the spoil material under static loading and earthquake loading conditions.

The WWL report addressed the quantity, quality, and persistence of water impounded within graded and topsoiled spoil banks, together with stability of graded spoil and impoundments. In essence,

the WWL study concluded that there should be no problems concerning impoundment stability and water quality, and that persistence of water in the impoundments was dependent on drainage area and impoundment size. The WWL report and this discussion will provide the basis for the general Although data requirements are slightly

and detailed design of all permanent impoundments.

different when using the WWL methodology to modify existing structures to permanent impoundments, the results should be conservative.

Design Criteria.

Based on site visits and infiltrometer tests, WWL personnel determined that the No

most reasonable values for the NRCS runoff curve numbers fell within the range of 80 to 75. attempt has been made to further refine these values.

In examining the minimum probability of

water in the impoundments, a curve number of 75 was used so as to establish a probable lower bound. To maximize the amount of time an impoundment might contain water, the WWL study made the

following recommendations:

1.

The pond should be constructed so that the resultant surface area is as small as possible. The pond should have side slopes as steep as permissible so that surface area does not vary greatly with depth.

2.

3.

The bottom of the pond should be compacted during construction to minimize seepage through the bottom of the pond during the early years of operation.

Revised 02/21/00

Water, Waste and Land Impoundment Design Methodology. "Area Index":

The WWL study produced the concept of an

the ratio of the total watershed area of a theoretical impoundment to the water theoretical impoundment. A computer watershed model was developed to

surface area of the same

simulate characteristics of mined spoil impoundments. This model was analyzed for various runoff curve number values, and various values of the Area Index. Generated data for a theoretical

impoundment include probability of water, mean depth of water, probability of dissolved solids exceeding a specified amount, together with various statistical parameters resulting from the computer simulation. As might be expected, the probability of water and the mean depth of water

in a theoretical impoundment varied directly with the Area Index, i.e., the larger the watershed, the greater chance for water to exist in the impoundment and the higher the mean depth of water.

The WWL computer model is based on the assumption of watersheds of constant Area Index; condition that is impossible to achieve in practice.

a

The boundaries of the watershed can

reasonably be expected to remain constant; the water surface area however, will vary with the depth of water in the impoundment. This is due to the fact that impoundment sides cannot be Typically, the impoundment sides are on a slope of

vertical for stability and safety reasons. three horizontal to one vertical.

Where access to water in the impoundment is desirable, slopes As impoundment area increases

of five horizontal to one vertical or flatter are more desirable.

with the square of the increasing sides, the variation in Area Index over the possible range of water depths becomes very substantial.

Adaptation of Water, Waste, and Land Methodology.

As the WWL study established mean depths for

various Area Indexes, it became possible to graph the mean depth as a function of Area Index for curve numbers of 75 and 80 (see Figure 20). In addition, the standard deviation of the mean

depth was added to the mean depth and graphed as a function of the Area Index for both curve numbers. This was done to give some general idea of the upper range of depths at which water It should be noted that the reported values in inches

might reasonably be expected to persist.

in the WWL report were changed to feet for this graph.

Once the proposed design for an impoundment was determined, it was also possible to determine water surface area, and hence Area Indexes for various depths. depth-Area Index curve. Thus, each impoundment also has a

If this curve is superimposed over the mean depth-Area Index curve for a

specific curve number (Figure 21), the two curves will intersect at a unique value of mean depth and Area Index. This intersection gives a first approximation of depth and Area Index at which

an impoundment might tend to stabilize.

Revised 02/21/00

.

.

,..

.

:.::.I::: . . . . .
. . . ..... . .

t .

I.
.

.

;
... .......
.
6

... -... . .. .. .. ..

a - -

.... . . - ..... .
. .

...I : : : I
.-..

I:::.I.:, 1 , .
.
I

.I !

/

;.; p::.: ;.I. ;;:; ..,-:-

..... . - . .

:.

. 1::;: . . - - . -. -.. ., - I , * . . .. .. . . 1 : : : : . . ..! .. .. . . .: :.: :. ..: .:. .... ..: .:. .. ;. . . . . . 80

. . . . .. .. .. ... . . ....

1

.

1

.

-, .
I

.I .,-I.::!\
-

.

I

-

.

.

,_..

. . .:.i . . - -. . . .

.

1

Revised 08/37/90

AREA INDEX

IMPOUNDMENT DEPTH VS AREA INDEX

-

FIGURE 21 MEAN DEPTH AND AREA INDEX.
81

It should be noted that the "depth" term of each graph has

a slightly

different meaning. Depth

in the graphs of mean depths-Area Index means depth of a theoretical impoundment with vertical sides, as that was assumed in the WWL analysis. As W L methodology does not assume gains W

(runoff) and losses (infiltration, evaporation) to be proportionate to depth of water, only to surface area, it can be seen that a theoretical impoundment will contain a larger volume of water than an actual impoundment at the same depth "dm. The theoretical impoundment will have a bottom area equal to the surface area, while the actual impoundment will have a bottom area sometimes much less than the surface area, due to the sloping sides.

The solution to this problem requires the construction of two more graphs plotted along the same depth ordinate used in the previous two graphs. The first graph is simply the depth-capacity

curve for the actual impoundment to be constructed. The second is the depth-capacity curve of an impoundment whose surface area varies with depth in the same fashion as the proposed impoundment
W does, but whose volume meets the criteria of the W L study, i.e., with vertical sides and bottom

area equal to surface area.

Thus the volume of this theoretical impoundment is always the

surface area multiplied by the depth, Ay(y), where the volume of the actual impoundment is determined by the integral:

"
where A is a function of y.

=

During the design of impoundments of irregular shape, t he above

ky::

y

=

ymax

integral is approximated by the average end area method of determining volume

Procedure.

Various parameters such as actual impoundment depth and volume must be determined. This graphical method

In order to do this, a series of curves are presented on a graph.

facilitates solving four equations for four unknowns when none of the equations can be easily represented by mathematical formulae

W Data for the first set of curves is obtained from the W L documents.

For each curve number

utilized, a theoretical mean depth and theoretical mean depth plus standard deviation-Area Index curve is plotted (see Figure 20). This basic curve set can be used for any impoundment design.

The use of the curves will be explained below.

A second set of curves is generated from data specific to the proposed impoundment.

This data

includes water surface area, theoretical volume, Area Index, and actual volume for various water depths. Both sets of curves are plotted on the same graph.

Revised 02/21/00

The basic calculations for a detailed design are as follows: 1. 2. 3.
4.

Determine required sediment capacity. Determine maximum design water capacity. Determine impoundment required capacity and depth. Determine worst-case storage requirements and resulting water depth. Compare actual impoundment capacity to required storage. Compare actual impoundment capacity to the standard deviation depth to worst-case storage requirements.

5.
6.

7.

Determine water persistence.

The procedure for determining mean depth and volume of water in each impoundment is as follows: (refer to Figure 22) locate the intersection of the actual depth-Area Index curve and the theoretical mean depth-Area Index curve (PT. Al. 1.1 times the mean depth located by intersection. Assume an actual depth approximately equal to Determine the Area Index corresponding to this For

actual depth for the impoundment in question from the actual depth-Area Index curve (PT. B ) .

this Area Index, determine the theoretical mean depth from the theoretical mean depth-Area Index curve (PT. C). This depth assumes an impoundment with vertical sides. For this theoretical

depth, determine the theoretical mean impoundment volume from the theoretical mean depth-capacity curve (PT. D). Finally, determine the actual depth required for this volume from the actual If these two

depth-capacity curve (PT. El, and compare to the initial assumed actual depth.

depths are not approximately equal, adjust the assumed depth and repeat the above procedure until these depths are equal.

Probability Determination.

A general evaluation of water persistence was conducted for two

proposed and one existing (J3-G) internal permanent impoundment, one proposed and eight existing MSHA sediment control structures, 6 proposed sediment control structures, and
16 existing

sediment control structures. in the impoundments.

The evaluation estimated the probability that water would persist The above

Results of this evaluation are provided in Attachment T.

previous discussions described the detailed design procedure that will be conducted when detailed designs are formulated. The discussion below describes the general evaluation procedure used to

determine the persistence probability.

From the graph shown on Figure 23, assuming a NRCS runoff curve number of 75, it can be seen that an impoundment will tend to stabilize at a specific Area Index. The

83

Revised 01/15/02

k

rIMPOUNDMEN~ DEPTH

Vq

inrn r ~ n c v

/

THEORETICAL AREA CAPACITY V=Ay ( Y )

'

I /

ACTUAL AREA CAPACITY CURVE

DEPTH

-

FIGURE 22

MEAN DEPTH AND VOLUME DETERMINATION

Rev i sed

08/b1/90

I . ! .

. . I , . . : .. ; . I.: . , .

../ ,

.: -j

corresponding annual probability of water that would exist for this Area Index is determined from annual depth/probability curves found in the WWL report such as is shown on Figure 24. The

probability of water existing in the impoundment was calculated based upon an assumed minimum depth of, the greater of, 3.0 feet or a depth corresponding to a capacity of at least 2.0 ac-ft to ensure livestock and wildlife utilization. The Area Index for that minimum depth is then

calculated and worst-case probability determined from the WWL study (monthly) depth/probability curves (Figure 25). The month of July is generally used because this month exhibits the lowest The month of June is utilized

probabilities of depth when the area index is greater than 130. for area indexes of 130 or less.

In addition, it should be emphasized that there will be a substantial increase in Area Index for increasing impoundment depths. As depths approach zero, the Area Index for the impoundment As the Area Index increases, so does the probability of

approaches a respective upper bound. water existing in the impoundment.

Drawing No. 85406 contains a list of existing and proposed permanent impoundments, locations, map numbers (Drawing 85400), construction dates, and when the remedial work, if applicable, will be completed, embankment stability category, hydrology design data, design storage capacity, and spillway information, when applicable.

Structures Reclaimed

As of January 2004, seventy structures have been identified that will not be required for operational or regulatory purposes. Table 4 contains a summary list of all ponds and location in The purposes of these ponds were discussed

the permit where additional information is available.

with OSM Technical Staff on August 29, 1985, and in subsequent permit revisions. These ponds are either redundant ponds where another pond downstream is designed to cover the entire watershed or they are ponds which fall in the category of 816.46(a)(2). No design or evaluation is included for these structures. After regulatory agency approval, these structures will be reclaimed in

accordance with PWCC1s approved reclamation plan and schedule.

Dam Break Analysis As a result of the August 29, 1985 meeting with OSM's Technical Staff, Dames
&

Moore, and

Peabody, OSM instructed Peabody to perform a Dam-Break Analysis on those temporary impoundment structures which Peabody will want to retain upstream from existing MSHA-size

Revised 11/21/03

FIGURE 23
P r o b a b i l i t y vs. Annual Nean D e p t h

.

LU

0

I

I

I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

100

'200

I

I

I

300

400 500 RRER I~UOEX

S O

700

323

Annua 1 )lean Depth

Plate 2

FIGURE 25 Probability vs. Minimum D e ~ t h

.9

-

JULY
1

SCS
I

1

CN
1

= 75.00, h =
I

-03
I

I

I

1

-

I

I

I

I

1

I

t .

Z

"

-

.
W X W
U

.

'*

0

W

I I
.3

I

c. .

a
m
11

LI:

.2

0
i 00 200
300

I I I
I
400

I

.I

560

600

700 '300

RREH INOEX

Minimum Depth
Plate 3

dams.

These upstream structures are redundant structures; however, Peabody desired to retain

these temporary impoundments to localize the runoff around the new Kayenta Mine facilities. Based on these decisions, Peabody retained Dames
&

Moore to perform a Dam Break Analysis on the

J28-B, J28-C, and J28-D impoundments upstream from the J16-A MSHA dam and also on the J28-G impoundments upstream from the J16-L MSHA dam. found in Attachment L. The results of Dames
&

Moore's report can be

The results of the evaluations indicate both MSHA dams have adequate storage and spillway capacities to safely discharge the dam-break flood waves. As noted in the report, the mechanisms

hypothesized to induce breaches in the sedimentation ponds are extremely conservative and highly unlikely.

Transportation Facilities

Introduction.

There are four types of roadways inside or crossing PWCC's permit area.

These

roadway types are primary roads, ancillary roads, non-mining related roads (i.e., public roads and private roads), and pit ramps or routes of travel which are within the mining and spoil grading areas. The location of these roadways and main ramps are found on the Jurisdictional OSMRE's 30 CFR 701.5 definition of a

Permit and Affected Lands Map, Drawing No. 85360. includes the following:

road

"Road means a surface right-of-way for purposes of travel by land vehicles used in surface coal mining and reclamation operations or coal exploration. A road consists of the entire

area within the right-of-way, including the roadbed, shoulders, parking and side areas, approaches, structures, ditches, and surface. The term includes access and haul roads

constructed, used, reconstructed, improved, or maintained for use in surface coal mining and reclamation operations or coal exploration, including use by coal hauling vehicles to and from transfer, processing, or storage areas. The term does not include ramps and routes of

travel within the immediate mining area or within spoil or coal mine waste disposal areas".

This definition for road only refers to primary and ancillary roads. definition of spoil includes the following: surface coal mining operations.

OSMRE's 30 CFR 701.5

spoil means overburden that has been removed during

The non-mining related roads definition is taken from Flannery's decision.

"The affected

Revised 02/21/00

area shall include every road that is constructed, reconstructed, improved, or maintained for access to or from, or for hauling coal or overburden to or from, surface coal mining and reclamation operations. The affected area shall also include every existing and new road that is

used for the same purpose where the EFFECTS from mining are MORE than relatively minor when compared to the effects from other uses." This definition will apply to designated public roads This definition for the

as well as other private roads, which access living or grazing areas.

non-mining related road classification does allow for infrequent mine use on these non-mining related roads. Public roads are roads constructed for public use when financed, maintained, and owned by the government. Public road means a road which has been designated as a public road pursuant to the

laws of the jurisdiction in which it is located; which is maintained with public funds in a manner similar to other public roads of the same classification within the jurisdiction; which there is substantial standards for other (more than incidental) public use; and which meets public roads of the same classification as the road construction jurisdiction.

local

Governmental agencies involved with public roads on Tribal lands in the vicinity of Black Mesa include the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and the Hopi and Navajo Tribal Transportation Departments. After discussions with the BIA and the Hopi

and Navajo Transportation Departments, the only public roads within or crossing the Black Mesa complex permit area are U.S. Highway #I60 and Navajo Route #41. Navajo Route #41 is an open

range, collector, dirt/paved road which does not have a recorded right-of-way and limited BIA maintenance activities; however, due to its location and ability to provide north/south access south o f Highway #160, it is part of the BIA's 1990 Master Road Plan and included on BIA' road inventory since at least 1979. In order to allow the maximum recovery of coal while maintaining the general north/south traffic flow pattern on Navajo Route #41 in the J-7 mining area during 1998 until the end of mining in the year 2003, it will be necessary to temporarily reroute traffic around the east side of the J7 mine area and reconnect traffic to the existing Navajo Route #41 at the intersection at the

south end of the J-7 Dam (see the updated Drawing No. 85210, 85360, and Figure 26 85400 for the proposed alignment). With a portion of the new alignment crossing the southeast portion of the

5-7 coal reserves (approximately 0.2 miles in length) and to allow maximum coal recovery while

protecting the safety of the public, it will be necessary to conduct limited mining-related surface disturbance within 100 feet of the relocated Route #41. This activity will not include

any coal removal operations and will not necessitate utilization or crossing the road with mining equipment. A fence or traffic control berm will be constructed prior to mining disturbance

within 100 feet of Route #41 between the traffic on Navajo Route #41 and the mining disturbance activity to prevent co-mingling of traffic in this area.
90

Revised 01/15/02

TRAFFIC SlGN DESCRIPTION
(See FIGURE 26 for description)

SlGN LOCATION NUMBER

SlGN DESCRIPTION

"LOCAL ACCESS ONLY - DEAD END" "PINON"

-

(4'~8') (4'x4')

"DANGER LOOK OUT FOR TRUCKS & MINING EQUIPMENT" "KAYENTA HIGHWAY 160"

(4'x8')

"KAY ENTA HIGHWAY 160"

'MINE ACCESS ONLY NO TRESPASSING" 'ROAD CLOSED" "KAYENTA HIGHWAY 160" (4'x4')

Revised 0 6 / 2 3 / 9 8

TRAFFIC SIGN DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED) (ROAD CLOSED - MILES AHEAD. LOCAL TRAFFIC ONLY) (-I) Right & Left

k
WL-RB, WL-RL

(DO NOT ENTER)

(ROAD CLOSED AHEAD) (DETOUR) Right & Left

(STOP AHEAD)

(SPEED LIMIT) (CURVE SIGNS) (ROUTE MARKERS) Type Ill barricade

(STOP) (ROAD CLOSED)

(ROAD CLOSED TO THRU TRAFFIC)

(DO NOT ENTER) (OPEN RANGE)

(WATCH FOR LIVESTOCK)
93

Revised 0 6 / 2 3

In addition to the traffic signs in the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices" and shown on Figure 26, PWCC will also post signs for announcing when the relocated Navajo Route #41 will be open for traffic, large stop signs at the J-7, Ramp # 3 intersection with red flashing lights in both directions, open range signs, heavy equipment crossing roadway signs, and watch for livestock signs. PWCC will provide a security vehicle with flashing

red lights at this intersection for the first 30 calendar days the road is open to public traffic, which will be used as a safety warning to the public. In addition, PWCC's

security will conduct a traffic count of vehicles crossing the intersection during this 30day period. PWCC has in the past and will continue to inform and instruct all PWCC

personnel on safety-related procedures and the safety procedures for the new intersection at the crossing of the 5-7 haul road and Route #41. In addition, the new road alignment

and associated safety rules will be posted on the appropriate bulletin boards where this information will be available for the Black Mesa Mine employees to read. Approximately 30

percent of the coal production for the Black Mesa Mine is mined and hauled from the J-7 mining area to the Black Mesa Mine Facilities area. The coal haulage is currently

scheduled for three to four days per week, two shifts per day, and approximately 180 days/year or approximately 25 mine truck loads of coal per shift. The estimated average

daily mine vehicles crossing this intersection is approximately 50 to 200 vehicles per day depending if 5-7 coal haulage and overburden removal operations are occurring, the J-7 equipment maintenance and operational support activities required during the shift, and the road maintenance requirements in this segment of the road. The mine traffic estimate into

and out of the J-7 mine area can be highly variable on a day-to-day basis. After additional discussions with the Tribes and the government agencies, PWCC has agreed to restrict mine haulage traffic to only one ramp (Ramp # 3 ) at the J-7 pit to provide access from the J-7 pit to Black Mesa Mine's facilities. The non-mining related traffic

will only be required to cross the 5-7 traffic at a new intersection at the south end of the 5-7 Dam (see Drawing No. 85210 and Drawing No. 85400, Sheets K-10 and L-10). For

safety purposes, the non-mining traffic will stop in both directions prior to proceeding through this intersection. The large coal trucks and PWCC heavy equipment will have

visible running lights and all PWCC equipment will have MSHA-regulated vehicle lights and signals. The mine traffic will have the right-of-way when crossing the intersection. The

new intersection will connect with the existing Navajo Route #41 (approximately 0.1 miles long). During mine coal haulage, the intersection will be inspected during each shift and Revised Figure 26, "Proposed

any coal spillage will be removed from the traffic lanes.

Temporary Bypass Road (J-7/Navajo Route #41)", is the proposed alignment for non-mining related traffic. This alignment will be constructed and maintained in accordance with the

94

Revised 01/15/02

BIA Road Standards, the latest edition of the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices," and the traffic control devices recommended by OSM, BIA Branch of Roads, or shown on Figure
26.

The proposed route will have a gravel surface and be similar to the existing route in There is no plan to pave or blacktop the temporary relocated Navajo Route #41. The

width.

BIA Chinle Agency Road Engineer will be requested by PWCC to inspect and improve this route prior to utilization by non-mining related public traffic. PWCC will provide written

notification to the Tribal Governments, local police, schools, and chapters of the date that the relocated road will be open to public traffic. In conclusion, this proposed

realignment of Navajo Route #41 will not require the merging of PWCC's mine traffic with the non-mining related traffic.

The J-7 west side existing Navajo Route #41 will continue to be open to local traffic; whereas, the J-7 east side route will provide the primary north/south access for public traffic traveling through the Peabody coal lease area. The existing Navajo Route #41

across the south side of the 5-7 coal reserve will be closed to non-mining related traffic to allow mining to continue in the 5-7 pit. This road will be closed on the west end at

the Water Well # 9 and residential access road intersection and at the east end at the wye intersection, north of Yucca Flat Wash. PWCC will establish a signed barricade with The school bus routes will not

reflecting tape at both locations where the road is closed. be affected by the road relocation. required.

School bus turnarounds will be constructed by PWCC, as

A meeting will be held with the person in charge of school bus transportation

advising him of the road relocation and safety procedures.

The temporary J-7 east side route is an existing roadway, and only a short section (approximately 0.4 miles long) of the south and east route will be reconstructed and realigned with the southeast edge of the J-7 coal recovery area (see Drawing No. 85210A) This new section will shift the road to the southeast to allow maximum J-7 coal recovery In addition, a short section of new access road will be constructed through the Jreclamation area (approximately 0.5 miles long) to connect the east route with the

north/south section of PWCC's old J-7, Ramp #1 road.

PWCC will install a cattle guard in The proposed temporary J-7 coal

the road where the road crosses the Hopi/Navajo Partition fence.

Navajo Route #41 route will allow safe passage of traffic while maximizing recovery.

Peabody will undertake appropriate measures to protect the general public and

traffic on the roadway from mine-related activities including appropriate traffic control signs, compliance maintenance. Blasting signs will meet the specifications of 30 CFR 816.11. PWCC will: (1) Conspicuously place signs reading "Blasting AreaN along the edge of any blasting area that comes within
95

with

blasting

regulations

as

described

in

Chapter

7,

and

roadway

Revised 02/21/00

100 feet of any public road right-of-way, and at the point where any other road provides access to the blasting area; and (2) At all entrances to the permit area from public roads or highways, place conspicuous signs which state "Warning! Explosives in Use," which clearly list and describe the meaning of the audible blast warning and all-clear signals that are in use, and which explain the marking of blasting areas and charged holes awaiting firing within the permit area. Warning and all-clear signals of different character or pattern that are audible within a range of
%

mile from the point of the blast will be given.

Each person within the permit

area and each person who resides or regularly works within 1/2 mile of the permit area will be notified of the meaning of the signals in the blasting schedule. Audible warning and all-clear signals are given prior to and following a blast,

respectively.

The warning signal consists of ten short blasts using an air horn audible The all-clear signals consists of one long Warning and all-

for one-half mile from the point of the blast. blast from an air horn audible for +mile

from the point of the blast.

clear signals are explained on the blasting warning signs, the signs located at the main entrances to the mining complex, and on bulletin boards in certain buildings which the general public may frequent. The signals are also explained in the blasting schedule which is published and distributed as explained above. Access within the blasting area will be controlled to prevent presence of livestock or unauthorized persons during blasting and until an authorized representative of PWCC has reasonable determined that (1) No unusual hazards, such a imminent slides or undetonated charges exist; and (2) Access to and travel within the blasting area can be safely resumed. Access to the blasting area is controlled by ensuring that the blasting area is clear of all livestock or unauthorized persons, and assigning a person to block and monitor access, or barricading roads leading into the blasting area. Fluorescent orange traffic cones and

plastic tape are used to identify blasting areas in which holes have been loaded, charged, and not yet detonated. Boreholes are not considered charged until an electric-type

detonator is introduced into the detonation system or when connection to trunklines is started. The all-clear signal is given only after the area has been checked to ensure that

no unusual hazard such as slides or undetonated charges exist. When blasting occurs in the J-7 mining area, a person will be assigned prior to the blast to monitor and temporarily block access along the Non-PWCC roads to protect the safety of the general public traveling in the area. Peabody has or will have the appropriate Tribal Chapter, Road Agency Committee, BIA Chinle Road Engineer, and Tribal approvals prior to OSM's written findings required in 30 CFR,

96

Revised 02/21/00

7611l(d 2

i

i

In addition, after mining is completed, Peabody has committed to obtain

regulatory approval to return Navajo Route #41 to approximately the original north/south route by utilizing Peabody existing 5-7 Ramp #1 and haul road system to reroute traffic to Navajo Route #41. At this future time, Peabody will submit a new permit revision for

appropriate regulatory approval with the proposed alignment and a request to permit these roads as permanent roads. The BIA and the Navajo Transportation Department base their classification of private roads on the following: a) Local roads which do not have right-of-way applications performed in

accordance with 25 CFR, Part 169 and have not been designated as a public road pursuant to the laws of the Tribes are considered private roads. b) None of these private roads are maintained with public funds in a manner similar to other public roads; C) There is not substantial (more than incidental) public use of these roads; and d) The Tribe or BIA does not have construction standards for these remote rural roads. Due to the "open range" nature of the reservation, many miles of private roads on the Tribal lands have been and continue to be developed by local residents and other non-PWCC entities. The Black Mesa mining complex is different from most other mining operations in

that people are living and livestock are grazed inside the permit boundary (see Drawing No. 85445, which shows the residential home sites and escrow grazing areas). difference, the road network is fluid. Because of this

The private road network is similar to a road

developed by a farmer, rancher, or any other landowner on their private property in any state or county. These private roads are typically two-track vehicle roads or graded dirt residential sites, residential improvement areas,

roads traversing across country to

grazing sites, wood gathering areas, water sources, utilities sites, ceremonial, religious, or Tribal meeting sites, etc. Therefore, because the surface area cannot be completely

controlled, many of these private access roads are available for PWCC or the general public on an infrequent basis to utilize. When PWCC's vehicles are traveling on non-mining

related roads, it will only be with on-highway vehicles or road maintenance equipment requested by local or regulatory entities. The mine-related traffic will be on an

infrequent basis and the majority of the total traffic on the non-mining related roads will be non-mining related traffic. In addition, the primary purpose of the road will be for access by non-mining related traffic.

Revised 02/21/00

In addition, if these public or private roads were outside the permit area, a mining company would be allowed to use these roads on an infrequent basis to access remote environmental monitoring or surveying sites (e.g., low usage). Therefore, it stands to

reason that PWCC should be allowed to use these roads on an infrequent basis inside the permit area; however, if PWCC uses a private road more frequent than once a shift, the road becomes classified as an ancillary road. This is not to imply that, because an employee

drives a company vehicle on a road to get to and from work, the road is an ancillary road.

The lease arrangements between PWCC and the Tribe enable PWCC to conduct those activities necessary to the efficient operation of mining, which includes the relocation of residences and associated roads. Likewise, if the Tribe or BIA were to construct a road within the

leasehold, they are required to consult with PWCC and subject their plans to the reasonable rights of PWCC under the leases to utilize the surface for mining purposes. Thus, the

Tribe, which OSMRE recognizes as the governmental agency having jurisdiction over public and private roads on the leasehold, has already established a mechanism through the leases for dealing with issues relating to these roads. OSMRE is the lead regulatory agency for

permitting primary and ancillary roads, and where appropriate, 30 CFR 761.12(d) will be applicable to those public roads within 100 feet of the proposed mining operations.

PWCC considers those roads within the leasehold designated as private roads, which are included in the non-mining related roads, to be like private ranch roads, and the

appropriate governmental agency(s1, including the Navajo and Hopi Tribes, has already agreed through the signing and renewal of the leases, that mining activity may take place near, on, through, or around such roads.

The remaining two type of OSM-defined roads (e.g., primary and ancillary roads), and ramps are utilized to facilitate mining activities. 30 CFR 816.150 and 701.5. The primary Primary and ancillary roads are defined in are any road which is (a) used for

roads

transporting coal or spoil and not considered a ramp which is inside the mining disturbance and spoil grading area; (b) frequently used for access or other purposes for a period in excess of six months; (c) no longer subject to frequent changes in location, are graded "on-grade" with the surrounding topography, and are located in areas undergoing topsoil redistribution and permanent revegetation; or (d) to be retained for an approved postmining land use.

An ancillary road is any mine road not classified as a primary road.

Infrequently used

temporary roads solely for PWCC access or other purposes, which do not include coal or spoil haulage and that will be in existence for an extended period of time will be
98

Revised 02/21/00

considered ancillary roads.

PWCC's roads used once or less each shift for the purpose of

monitoring, surveying, and/or maintenance will not be frequently used roads and therefore, are classified as ancillary roads. The ramps at the Black Mesa Complex are located within the active pit and spoil areas. These ramps are temporary routes unless they are needed to facilitate the postmining land use. In such cases, they will be permitted as a permanent primary road. The ramps in the

spoil grading and mining areas are subject to frequent surface change, are graded in spoil, surface drainage from these areas are controlled by outlying siltation structures around the perimeter of each mining area, are located in areas which will undergo reclamation in accordance with the approved reclamation and surface stabilization plan, and are included with the ancillary, primary roads, and mining areas reclamation costs in the bonding calculations. Typically, if the post mining drainage channel is located where the old ramp was located, then the ramp could be graded and shaped to a reclaimed channel, this demonstration is included in the PWCC Annual "Surface Stabilization Plan" Reports and the design criteria is included in Chapter 26. If the ramp is left as a primary permanent road, then the road will be provided with adequate ditches to handle the drainage runoff. Based on the post mining land use plan, the backfilling and grading plan is flexible enough to allow PWCC to consider several options for the reclamation of ramps. Primary and Ancillary Roads - General Requirements. Primary and ancillary roads will be

located, designed, constructed, used, maintained, and reclaimed so as to: (a) control or prevent erosion, siltation, and the air pollution attendant to erosion by vegetating, watering, using dust suppressants, or other methods in accordance with current, prudent engineering practices, (b) control or prevent damage to fish, wildlife or their habitat, and related environmental values, (c) control or prevent additional contribution of suspended solids to runoff outside the permit area, (d) neither cause nor contribute to the violation of State or Federal water quality standards applicable to receiving waters, (e) refrain from seriously altering the normal flow of water in intermittent or perennial streambeds or drainage channels, (f) control or prevent damage to public or private property, and (g) use non-acid or non-toxic forming substance in road surfacing.

Revised 02/21/00

Within stream buffer zones designated on Drawing No. 85642 and 85642A, roads utilized as mine-related road crossings, PWCC will request appropriate regulatory approval prior to construction of these crossing. In addition: Use of each crossing will be limited to light vehicles (passenger vehicles), on-highway vehicles and appropriate road maintenance equipment traffic of infrequent use by PWCC. No PWCC coal haulage, spoil haulage, large trucks, or large mine equipment will be using the crossings. The only exceptions to this will be any need for repairs,

construction, or reclamation of the crossings, sedimentation ponds and monitoring sites. Other exceptions will need prior approval form the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE). Use of the crossings will not impact the physical integrity of the stream channel. No channel realignment, stream bank degradation, fill material in the stream channel and other significant changes to the physical characteristics of the streambed will occur without OSMRE approval. Maintenance activities will be minimized, with only minor repairs/grading after storm events. Within the primary and ancillary road classifications there are five sizes of roads based on use and traffic volume. There are three typical sizes of primary roads, including haul

roads and mine vehicle roads, Primary Road #1, that are a minimum of 50 feet wide for twoway traffic and a minimum of 30 feet wide for one-way traffic; coal haulage, mine vehicle, and dragline deadheading roads, Primary Road #2, that are approximately 130 feet wide; and mine access roads, Primary Road #3, which are used frequently for periods longer than six months that are a minimum of 24 feet wide for two-way traffic and a minimum of 10 feet wide for one-way traffic (see Drawing No. 85430). The two types of ancillary roads are used by

vehicles on a less frequent basis to gain access to mine facilities or to remote sites. These ancillary roads are constructed exclusively for PWCC's use and no local residents live at the roads' terminus. The first type is typically a two-lane road. This is a

minimum of 24 feet wide, and the second type is usually a single lane road that is a minimum of a dozer blade or motor grader blade in width (see Ancillary Road #1 and #2, Drawing No. 85430, respectively). The first type may require a two-lane road where an allweather road is required to gain access to remote sites. The second type of ancillary road

usually follows the natural topography and typically has less frequent use than the first type. Location. an No part of any primary or ancillary road will be constructed in the channel of or perennial stream unless specifically approved by the regulatory

intermittent

authority (See Drawing Nos. 85210, 85360, 85400, and 85642A).

Roads will be located to

Revised 02/21/00

minimize downstream flooding and sedimentation to the extent possible.

The Jurisdictional

Permit and Affected Lands Map, Drawing No. 85360 shows the location of all existing and proposed ancillary and primary roads.

When ancillary roads are shown crossing an intermittent or perennial stream, the crossing will be constructed in accordance with the applicable regulations, including 816.150, and as shown on Figure 30, Drawing Nos. 85430, and 85432. Ancillary roads are utilized

infrequently for access to monitoring sites, surveying sites, maintenance sites, and/or access around PWCC's active mining areas for non-PWCC and PWCC vehicles. In the arid and

semi-arid southwestern United States, due to OSM's "640 acre" rule, the majority of these streams within the permit area are classified as intermittent streams and most of the washes are dry arroyos. The water quality of the runoff during precipitation events for

the major washes in the permit area is heavily sediment laden. The purpose of these at-grade-stream channel crossings are to provide adequate access across the wash during periods of low flow or no flow, and to minimize potential

environmental effects by constructing a stable road crossing to accommodate the anticipated low volume of traffic and the historical stream flows. Within stream buffer zones designated on Drawing No. 85642 and 85642A utilized as minerelated road crossings, PWCC will request appropriate regulatory approval prior to

construction of these crossing. In addition: 1. Use of each crossing will be limited to light vehicles (passenger vehicles), on-highway vehicles and appropriate road maintenance equipment traffic of infrequent use by PWCC. 2. No PWCC coal haulage, spoil haulage, large trucks, or large mine equipment will be using the crossings. The only exceptions to this will be or any need for repairs,

construction,

reclamation of the crossings, sedimentation ponds

and monitoring

sites. Other exceptions will need prior approval form the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE). 3. Use of the crossings will not impact the physical integrity of the stream channel. 4. No channel realignment, stream bank degradation, fill material in the stream channel and other significant changes to the physical characteristics of the streambed will occur without OSMRE approval. 5. Maintenance activities will be minimized, with only minor repairs/grading after storm events. D r a w m g No. 85432 shows the ancillary road stream crossing will be constructed utilizing gravel, rock riprap, and geotextile to stabilize the road surface and minimize pollution. As much as practicable, the ancillary road will cross the stream channel at grade and the 101 Revised 02/21/00

road will start daylighting of the road grade beyond the toe of the existing natural stream's side slopes. The cross section of the stream at the road crossing will equal or

be greater than the capacity of the unmodified stream channel immediately upstream and downstream from the road crossing. During construction, a temporary silt fence or a straw bale dike will be installed

downstream in the stream channel of the proposed crossing to minimize any addition of sediment to the wash. Once the crossing and ancillary road construction is completed, the When the ancillary

adjacent disturbance area will be reclaimed to stabilize the surface.

road and crossing are no longer required, the site will be reclaimed in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. Road Reclamation. 1. The roads on PWCC's Black Mesa leasehold can be categorized as follows:

Non-mining related roads which have not been built by PWCC and which may or may not have been in existence prior to the initiation of mining activities;

2. 3.

Roads built by Peabody prior to December 16, 1977; and Roads built by PWCC on or after July 6 , 1990 in the permanent program permit area.

All roads in categories (2) and (3) are considered temporary and will be reclaimed unless they have been approved by the regulatory authority as a part of the postmining land use plan (see Permanent Roads Map, Drawing No. 85445). All roads in category (1) are not the

responsibility of PWCC and, therefore, are not addressed.

Because of the size and nature of PWCC's Black Mesa mining activities, very few of the roads in category (3) will be reclaimed until the end of mining activities on the entire leasehold (see Table 10). and ramps, which Exceptions would include roads in the immediate vicinity of pits

are created in the spoil and reclaimed as the general reclamation Access to the various facilities

activities progress within a specific coal resource area.

and reclaimed areas necessitate retention of most roads in category (3).

Roads which:

(a) were constructed by Peabody prior to December 16, 1977; (b) are no longer

needed for reclamation or monitoring; and (c) are not approved by the regulatory authority as an element of a postmining land use plan will be reclaimed in the following manner:
1.

Close the road to traffic; culverts will be removed and fill slopes will be shaped to establish appropriate drainage.

2.

If the road surface does not consist of native materials, surfacing materials will be collected and properly disposed of by hauling to an approved landfill location or buried a minimum of four feet below the final revegatated surface.

Revised 02/21/00

3. 4. 5.

The roadbed will be ripped, plowed, and/or scarified. Cross drains, dikes, and/or water bars will be constructed to minimize erosion. Revegetation will be accomplished by utilizing the seed mix specified in the reclamation plan.

Roads which:

(a) were built by PWCC on or after July 6, 1990; (b) are no longer needed not approved by the regulatory

for operations, reclamation or monitoring; and (c) are

authority as an element of the postmining land use plan will be reclaimed in the following manner : 1. 2. Close the road to traffic and the culverts will be removed. If the road surface does not consist of native materials, surfacing materials will be collected and properly disposed of by hauling to an approved landfill location or buried a minimum of four feet below the final revegetated surface.
3.

The roadbed will be ripped, plowed, and/or scarified. Cut and fill slopes will be shaped to conform the site to adjacent terrain and to restore natural drainage unless a regulatory authority has approved an

4.

alternative grading plan. 5. Cross drains, dikes, and/or water bars will be constructed as necessary to minimize erosion.
6. 7.

Road surfaces and adjacent areas will be covered with topsoil. The disturbed area will be revegetated in accordance with the mulching, soil amendment, and seeding provisions of the approved Mining and Reclamation Plan.

Primary Roads. areas to

Transportation of coal and spoil from outside mining and spoil grading sizing, shipping, or disposal areas requires construction of

handling,

transportation facilities, primarily haulage roads, or conveyors. extensive network of haulage roads for material movement

PWCC maintains an

on the Black Mesa Complex.

Designs for haulage roads constructed beyond the ramp limits shown on Drawing 85360 will be submitted for approval. The drainage plan and culvert description can be found on Drawing

85400, Sheets 1 through 26, and Chapter 6, Attachment Q. Design and Construction. Map, Drawing No. 85210. Proposed life-of-mine haulage roads are shown in the Mine Plan Proposed five year permit term primary roads and existing primary

road plans or drawings and culverts and ditch flow direction are shown on Drawing No. 85400, Sheets 1 through 26. The typical cross sections are shown on Drawing No.85430.

Primary roads constructed during the 1990-1995 permit term included the J-19 Haul Road, J19 Deadhead/Haul Road Spur, and N-11 Facilities Plans (see Drawing Nos. 85440, 85442, and 85482). During the 2000-2005 permit term, any new primary road will be submitted to OSMRE

Revised 02/21/00

for approval before construction in accordance with the schedule in Table 1, unless the road is a former ramp where the road's existing definition conforms with one of the four (a)-(d) criteria for primary roads in this chapter. If the Primary Road is a former ramp then only the appropriate as-built certification report will be submitted. cross sections on Drawing No. The typical

85430 and the following sections describe the typical

specifications utilized for road construction.

Coal haulage is primarily dependent upon the location of the coal resource, the mine plan, and the terrain. Until adequate quality assurance drilling and coal analyses are

completed, the exact location and alignment of life-of-mine coal haulage roads cannot be specified. drainage PWCC will submit certified centerline alignment, typical cross-sections, and for approval before construction are started. (see Drawing Nos,

designs

85400,85430, and Attachment Q ) . Once construction is completed and adequate time has occurred to collect the "as-built" data, a Registered Professional Engineer will submit a certified report indicating construction has been performed in accordance with the approved plan. In addition, certified "as-built" drawings are kept on file at the mine site and are

available for inspection. Additional as-built certification information is presented in Attachment V and on Drawing 85400. New haulage roads proposed for construction are typically designed with a minimum 50 feet driving width for two-way traffic. An additional 15 feet is added to each roadway edge to

provide room for drainage ditches in cut areas and for safety berms in fill sections. Total minimum design width of such a roadway is, therefore, 80 feet (see Primary Road #1, Drawing No. 85430). Roadways utilized for movement of draglines are built with sufficient A total design width of 130 feet is Access roads

additional width to accommodate dragline passage.

usually adequate for this purpose (see Primary Road #2, Drawing No. 85430).

used on a frequent basis and for a period longer than six months are designed with a minimum width of 24 feet for two-way traffic, unless topography restricts the width of the road from two lanes of traffic to only one lane (see Primary Road #3, Drawing No. 85430). Roads to be used for dragline relocation are typically built without crowns or

superelevation.

This helps to eliminate lateral thrust, which can impose large stresses on After dragline movement is accomplished, regrading is performed to Minimum roadway crown is 2 percent. The dragline sequencing, which

walking draglines.

crown and/or superelevate the roadway as required.

Superelevation may increase the cross slope to 6 percent.

requires deadheading the dragline between coal resource areas, is shown on Figure 14 in Chapter 5. As indicated on the Primary Road #2 typical cross section, when this road is

not utilized for dragline deadheading, this road is a part of the mine's road network and is used by mine equipment to support the mining and reclamation operations. 104 Revised 05/10/02

Sight distance for haulage roadways is based on a minimum design speed for light duty vehicles of 45 mph. Required sight distance for this criteria is greater than that The more stringent

required for coal haulage vehicles at their normal operating speeds.

sight distance requirements are considered applicable due to the use of haulage roads by light duty vehicles. Sight distance on access roads will vary based on the topography,

traffic load, and other site-specific conditions.

PWCC will construct safety berms only on those portion of the roads where potential safety hazards exist and along road sections where haul road runoff may be controlled from eroding the fill slopes.

Cut and fill embankment

slopes

are

typically 3 horizontal

to 1 vertical.

The

primary

purpose of this ratio is to facilitate equipment safely during topsoil placement and for revegetation of slopes. In some cases, steeper slopes may be required based on materials,

height of embankment, and the need to minimize disturbance in steep, rolling topography. Attachment N contains the "Geotechnical Inspection Report - Haul Roads and Conveyors" which describes and analyzes the "worst case" embankment slope stability at the Black Mesa Complex.

The permanent roads on Drawing No. 85445 are proposed to be part of the postmining land use. These roads will allow access to residential home sites, grazing areas, and to the Unless BIA and the Navajo Tribe accepts these roads

local residents customary use areas.

into the BIA regional road system, these roads will be considered as a private road for local residents and local Tribal Chapter use.

During the reclamation process, these roads will be narrowed and the adjacent disturbed area reclaimed, such that these roads will be compatible to the postmining land use and to the volume and frequency of traffic anticipated after reclamation liability release.

Similar to the non-PWCC private roads on Black Mesa, if the local residents and Chapters request these primary roads remain as part of the postmining land use, the local residents and Chapters will assume responsibility for maintenance of these roads after PWCC completes mining, reclamation, and the reclamation liability release application is approved.

After final reclamation of adjacent areas, each road will be addressed individually in PWCC's reclamation liability release application. PWCC will continue to work with the

local residents, Chapters, Black Mesa Review Board, BIA, and Tribal officials to identify postmining structures which are feasible to remain as permanent structures after mining and reclamation is completed. 105 Revised 02/21/00

Drainage Control.

Each primary road will be designed, constructed or reconstructed, and

maintained to have adequate drainage control using structures such as, but not limited to, ditches, cross-drains, temporary channel fords, low-water crossings, and culverts. The

drainage control system will be designed to pass the peak runoff from a 10-year, 6-hour precipitation event or greater event unless otherwise specified by PWCC's engineers.

Culverts will be installed to avoid plugging or collapse and to avoid erosion at the inlets and outlets. Riprap will be installed where a culvert does not discharge upon resistant A riprap blanket, a The minimum

bedrock, and where the exit channel velocity exceeds 6-ft./sec.

minimum five pipe diameters long will be installed at the culvert outlet. width will be the width of the natural downstream channel.

The riprap will be sized in the

field by PWCC's project engineer based on the "as-built" slope of the culvert and final configuration of the exit channel slope area. The sizing shall be based on the Federal

Highway Administration's HEC No. 11 "Use of Riprap for Bank Protection" or other standard methods. All pipes will have a minimum cover of 18 inches for a pipe diameter up to 48", a and a minimum cover of 3

minimum cover of 2 ft. for pipe diameters from 54" through 7 2 " , ft. for pipe diameters of 78" through 144". maintained in a free and operating condition.

Culverts and drainage ditches will be

Ditches are placed on the inside of roadway cuts for drainage.

A typical v-ditch section

would be a minimum 2 feet deep with 4:l side slopes adjacent to the roadway and 3:l slopes at a cut section. Attachment M. Ditch capacity charts for this ditch configuration are presented in 0.03 is utilized

A Manning's "n" of 0.025 is used for unlined ditches and

for lined ditches.

As most road cuts are into erosion resistant material, ditches normally

do not require lining.

The following is an outline of the general design procedures used in the design of culverts and roadside ditches: 1. Identify the need for a structure from the 1"
=

400' scale maps, Drawing No.

85400, the ln=lOOO' scale map Drawing Nos. 85210 and 85360, and a visit to the site. 2. Determine the size and hydrology of the watershed in question. This procedure is

explained in detail in the "General Report, Geotechnic, Hydrologic, and Hydraulic Evaluation of Sedimentation Structures" by Dames
3. Perform
&

Moore, (Attachment D). determine the peak runoff.

SEDIMOT

I1

or

SEDCAD'

computer

run

to

Attachment 0 contains the typical inputs used for these SEDIMOT I1 calculations.
SEDCAD'

is a PC version of SEDIMOT I1 and will have similar input values only in a

user interactive mode. 106 Revised 02/21/00

4.

Using the peak flow rate from SEDIMOT I1 or SEDCAD~, the depth of flow and velocity of flow for the road ditch analysis is calculated using the Manning's Equation or the charts in Attachment M. The Manning's Equation calculations are

generally performed on a personal computer utilizing a program written by Dodson and Associates entitled TRAP. this program. 5. The design analysis of culverts is performed utilizing another program written by Dodson and Associates entitled PIPE. required The tailwater depth and downstream velocity the previously described TRAP program. Attachment P contains a complete description of

for input is determined by

Attachment P also contains a description of the PIPE program.

Basically, this program determines the capacity of the culvert using two procedures, inlet control and outlet control. The procedure resulting in the higher headwater is the value

upon which culvert design is based.

Attachment Q contains an inventory of existing and proposed culverts at the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines. The flow rates indicated on this inventory are proportional to the number For existing culverts with a freeboard less than

of pipes in parallel flow of each site.

1.0 foot, the freeboard will be increased by placing additional cover on the pipe or by diverting some of the flow through another pipe. Figures 30 and 31 show typical

installation of culverts.

The location and watershed boundary for all of the

culverts

in Attachment Q can be found on Drawing No. 85400, Sheets 1 through 26. methods include the use of charts developed by the Federal

Other applicable

Highway Administration,

published in Hydrologic Engineering Circular HEC-5 Series HDS-3 (FHA, 1980) (see Figures 32 and 33).

(FHA, 1980), and Hydrologic Design

Charts published in HEC-10

(FHA, 1978)

(see Figure 3 4 )

are also used; however, exit are typically

velocities must then be determined by other methods. examined by using HEC-5 inlet control monographs.

Headwater conditions

Some of the culverts are installed with

flared end sections; therefore, the "mitered to conform to slope" scale would be used to determine required pipe diameter or pipe capacity; however, to be conservative and to allow for adequate freeboard, PWCC usually uses "projecting" conditions (Figure 32).

.

As virtually all culverts have free outfalls, inlet control assumptions can be verified by the "Pipe Flow charts" in HDS-3 (Figure 33). If flow in the culvert has a free surface,

entrance control exists, and exit velocity can be approximated by using the greater of normal or critical velocity determined by the "Pipe Flow Charts" in HDS-3.

107

Revised 02/21/00

I . . . .

....

...

I . .

. . . .

.
.
.

I
, t i
ROADWAY.

..I..&:I : : :
,
i . . -. . . . . . . -. --

,

.

- . . . . . . . . ........

-

- ..

1

-L
N O T DRAWN T O SCALE

' 7

- .

. -

CHART 5

10,000
8,000 6,000 5,000'

EXAMPLE
0 -3 6
inches (3.0 f e e t ) 9 - 6 6 cfs

HW
D

SCALE

ENTRANCE TYPE

(2)

M i t e r e d l o conform t o slope Projecting

(4 .

To use scale ( 2 ) or ( 3 ) p r o j a c t h o r i i o n t o l l y to scols ( I ) , l h c n use s t r o i p h l i n c l i n e d l i n e throuph D ond 9 scolcs, or r e v e r s e o r illustrotcd.

BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS J4N. 1963

HEADWATER DEPTH F O R C. M. P I P E CULVERTS W I T H I N L E T CONTROL
( f r o m HEC-5)

(See HEC-5 f o r f u r t h e r I n f o r m a t i o n )

F I G U R E ,32
Revised 12/01/88

I

PIPE FLOW CHART 36-INCH DIArWET'ER
( S e e HDS-3 for A d d i t i o n a l c h a r t s )
(From HDS-3)

F I G U R E 33

111

Revised 12/01/88

CHART 2 4

D I S C H A R G E - 0 - CFS
EXAMPLE

@ GIVEN
CFS. A H * . 9 5 FT La'20 F T . S , = O 0 0 8 3

w0

@ SELECT
HII

* 0

84' 0 FT

UNPAVED

(see HEC-10 for Addi t i o n n l C h a r t s )
BUREAU OF PUSLIC ROADS JAN 1963

CU L V E R T CAPACITY STANDARD CIRCULAR CORR. M E T A L PIPE HEADWALL ENTRANCE 72" TO 120" 0
(From HEC-10)

F I G U R E 34

112

Revised 12/01/88

Maintenance.

Based on the anticipated volume of traffic and the weight and speed of

vehicles using the roadways, a minimum of 6 to 12 inches of crushed rock, scoria, or native bedrock material is placed on the road surface. regularly maintain all mine-related roads. PWCC will continue to inspect and

Maintenance will include, but may not be

limited to, repairs to the road surface, blading, filling potholes, and adding replacement surfacing material. It will also include revegetation, brush removal, and minor

reconstruction of road

segments as necessary.

PWCC also periodically applies water

containing commercial additives to enhance the effectiveness of this dust control method.

During the fall of 1985, Dames

&

Moore's engineers performed a geotechnical stability

inspection of all primary roads and the overland conveyor beltline for the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines (Attachment N). The purpose of Dames
L

Moore's inspection was to observe the

existing conditions of the cuts and fills along the haul road and conveyor beltline alignments and to evaluate the stability of the roads and conveyor beltline embankments against the performance standards set forth in 30 CFR Parts 780 and 816. Dames
&

Moore's

report included a "worst case" evaluation of the steepest and highest embankment slopes encountered during the inspection. where remedial work Table 7-1 in Dames
&

Moore's report lists the locations

is recommended.

Also, in Table 7-1 is the recommended remedial

treatment for each problem.

Most of the remedial treatment has already been implemented. Remedial treatments

The remaining remedial work will be implemented according to Table 23.

will include, but may not be limited to, the installation of riprapped channels, the periodic cleaning of culverts, the buttressing or reinforcing of slopes, the use of

alternative sediment control measures to reduce erosion, and other remedial measures based on site by site evaluations.

Support Facilities

All disturbance for facilities at the mine site will be contained within the disturbance area delineated on Drawing No. 85360. is discussed in this chapter. following types of facilities: A discussion of the facilities use and maintenance

Support facilities include but are not limited to the primary and ancillary roads, mine buildings, offices and

shops, bath houses, ANFO storage silos and cap magazines, coal loading facilities, coal crushing and sizing facilities, coal storage areas, equipment storage areas, water sheds

treatment and water

storage facilities, sedimentation ponds, water

diversions,

constructed on permanent foundation and greater than 100 square feet in size, utilities, permanent fuel storage and tank farms, and railroad and surface conveyor systems. The

Revised 02/21/00

location of the facilities can be found on Drawing Nos. 85210 and 85400 with the major facility sites located on Drawing Nos. 85462 through 85482.

As stated in OSM's March 10, 1995 permit revision request, OSM does not, however, mean to imply that prior approval must be operations. sought for every minute detail of routine mining

To do so would be exceedingly burdensome to both PWCC and OSM and would not Therefore, OSM has determined

result in any benefit to either party or the environment.

that certain other support facilities and items of a temporary nature may be placed within the approved disturbance area without prior OSM approval. Examples of this type of mulch

temporary support facilities shall include, but not be limited to the following:

storage area, irrigation line either in service on reclamation areas or the temporary yarding of irrigation pipe to be put into or being removed from service, skid mounted fuel and water tanks, small skid mounted sheds and storage bins, fire, first aid and portable toilet stations located in active working areas, small structures less than or equal to 100 square feet in size, and portable dragline power substations or transformers and trailing cable lines.

Support facilities will be located, maintained, and used in a manner that: 1) Prevents or controls erosion and siltation, water pollution, and damage to public or private property; and 2) To the extent possible using the best technology currently available: (i) Minimizes damage to fish, wildlife, and related environmental values; and (ii) Minimizes additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow or runoff outside the permit area. Any such contributions shall not be in excess of

mitations of State or Federal law.

New support facilities, in addition to those identified in the March 1, 1995 permit renewal application will be approved by OSM prior to construction regardless of their location.

Maintenance of all facilities and reclamation of the temporary facilities will be in accordance with this chapter and the approved reclamation plan.

Access Fords

Access

along

the Kayenta overland conveyor is necessary

for service and maintenance

activities. cases.

As the conveyor crosses washes, so must service and maintenance roads in some

The purpose of these fords is to provide adequate access across washes during

114

Revised 02/21/00

periods of low flow, and to minimize potential environmental effects by designing a stable structure to accommodate the anticipated traffic and stream flows. Water Canyon is planned and described below. A crossing of Yellow

The need for a crossing of Yellow Water Canyon stems from a need to have

complete

access

to the Kayenta Overland Conveyor for the purposes of service and maintenance.

The present

access to the Kayenta Overland Conveyor north of Yellow Water Canyon is inadequate during periods of low flow. Light-duty service and maintenance equipment such as pick-ups, to travel as much as six

cranes, small loaders, and forklifts are currently required

additional miles in order to gain access to the north side of Yellow Water Canyon.

The design selected for the Yellow Water Canyon crossing is a concrete ford based on an Arizona Department of Transportation Standard Drawing. The deslgn dimensions provided for The

a length of 230 feet, a width of 14 feet (single lane), and a thickness of 8 inches.

design also provides for upstream and downstream cutoff walls of two feet and four feet, respectively, to prevent under cutting of the ford during periods of high flow. The

downstream cutoff wall will include the installation of three-inch weep holes to pass any subsurface flow that might be encountered. The concrete used in the construction of this

ford will be provided by PWCC and will have a required strength of 3,000 psi in 28 days.

The hydraulics of this design are based on a

maximum flow of approximately 2,000 cfs Site 15 is a Parshall Flume located in Uslng

recorded at environmental monitoring Site 15.

Yellow Water Canyon approximately 3,000 feet upstream of the proposed crossing site.

the Dodson and Associates trapezoidal channel analysis program and a flow of 2,000 cfs, 0.7 feet of freeboard would be available as a safety factor. four feet would result in a flow in excess of 3,200 cfs The total available flow depth of

During construction, silt fence will be installed In Yellow Water Canyon downstream of the proposed crossing to minimize any addition of silt to the wash. Maintenance will generally flow activity

consist of removal of debris and silt that may accumulate as the result of across the ford.

Reclamation will be performed when the crossing is no longer needed for This reclamation will consist of

service and maintenance of the Kayenta Overland Conveyor.

removal and disposal of the concrete and returning the wash to the approximate original contours that existed prior to construction of the crossing.

Revised 02/21/00

Coal Handling Facilities

The coal produced at the mining operation is conveyed to power generating plants via conveyor and rail or slurry pipeline. prepare the coal prior to Coal handling facilities at each mine physically to the power plants. All coal handling

transportation

facilities are located within the proposed permit area and can be seen on Drawings 85210, 85400, 85480, and 85482.

The Black Mesa Mine produces coal destined for the Mohave Generating Station in Nevada near Bullhead City, Arizona. The coal handling facilities are located at the Black Mesa

preparation plant area and have been designed to receive run-of-mine coal from the existing truck dump, perform a preliminary size reduction to three inch by zero (3 in. x O), and transport the coal to the raw coal stockpiles at the Black Mesa Coal preparation plant. A schematic of the existing and proposed and Black Mesa coal handling facilities are shown on Figure 35.

The existing Black Mesa truck dump facility, feeder, reclaim conveyor, and crusher feed conveyor will be utilized as is. The existing crusher facility will be modified to permit the installation of a 1,800 ton per hour capacity material product will be discharged onto a forty-eight inch sizer. The material sizer 1,800 ton per hour

(48 in.) wide,

capacity run-of-mine coal stockpile feed conveyor. The run-of-mine coal stockpile feed conveyor will be equipped with a sweep sampling system and an ln-llne nuclear analyzer t h a t will be utilized to determine which stockpile the run-of-mine coal will be stored ln. The run-of-mine stockpile feed conveyor wlll transport the coal to the top of an elghty-elght foot (88 ft.) tall, fourteen foot diameter (14 ft. I.D.) reinforced concrete stacking tube. The discharge chute of run-of-mine stockpile feed conveyor will be equipped with flop gate that is control by the analyzer. The flop gate will either direct the coal into the stacking tube, or divert it onto a forty-eight inch (48 in.) wide, 1,800 t o n - p e r hour

capacity transfer conveyor that transports the coal a second stacking tube. Each stacking tube is designed to create a thirty thousand ton (30,000 ton) capacity run-of-mine coal stockpile.

The run-of-mine coal stockpiles will be formed on top of a four hundred twenty-five foot (425 ft) long run-of-mine coal reclaim tunnel. The run-of-mine coal reclaim tunnel will be equipped with two (2) 1,000 ton per hour capacity variable vibratory feeders under each run-of-mine coal stockpile and a forty-eight inch (48 in) wide, 1,400 ton per hour capacity coal preparation plant feed conveyor.

Revised 11/21/03

Coal refuse will be transported from the coal preparation plant to the five hundred ton (500 ton) capacity refuse loadout bin by a thirty-six (36 in) wide, 200 ton per hour

capacity refuse transfer conveyor. Coal refuse will be transferred into haul trucks at the refuse loadout bin.

Processed coal will be transported from the coal preparation plant to the existing crusher product conveyor by a forty-eight inch (48 in) wide, 1,200 ton per hour capacity clean coal transfer conveyor. The processed coal will be delivered to either the existing slot storage facility or the ground storage facility at the existlng pipeline terminal.

The proposed Black Mesa Preparation Plant has been designed with the goal to consistently meet the quality requirements of the Mohave Generating Station, from a varied and multiple seam reserve. The plant will consist of two (2) 600 ton per hour circuits that will permit

a total plant feed of 1,200 ton per hour.

The proposed preparation plant is designed to process 6.2 million tons of run-of-mine coal produced annually by the mine. consistently low ash product. Washing all of the coal will allow the plant to maintain a

Mineral sizers at each run-of-mine truck dump will maintain a 3" top size feed control to the preparation plant. cyclones. The All coarse coal, (3" x 1 mm), will be processed by heavy media circuit, (1 mm x 0.07 mm), will utilize two-stage spiral

fine coal

concentrators.

All ultra fines, (minus 0.07 mm), collected from the washing process in the

static thickener, will be dewatered utilizing horizontal belt presses and dlsposed wlth the fine and coarse refuse generated from the plant washing process. All "washed" coal and

coarse refuse will be either mechanically dewatered with centrifuges or with vibrating screens. All coarse coal, greater than 2" in size, will be crushed by roll crushers so

that the saleable product top size will be maintained the current contractual limits of 2"

All refuse, (the extraneous rock that is part of the recovered run-of-mine coal), including coarse, fines, and ultra-fine fractions removed from the "washing" process will be

transported via truck back to previously mined areas for disposal and final reclamation.

The

saleable product

dewatered in the preparation plant

will be

transported

by

belt

conveyor to the existing 40,000 ton, slot storage stockpile or to the existing long-term stockpile, (dead storage). Delivery to the BMPI, on a 24/7 basis, is controlled from

feeders under each of the stockpiles and transported by belt conveyor.

Revised 11/21/03

The run-of-mine tonnage is anticipated to average 6.2 million tons per year. plant operating schedule will be based upon a 3 shlft per day operation
-

The proposed

5 days per week.

Maintenance for the plant and material handling facilities will be conducted 2 days per week. At the designed plant feed rate, a 90% overall plant availability will be required

to maintain this schedule.

The proposed plant design allows the operational flexibility to meet the original boiler design of the Mohave Generating Station of 9% dry ash. Controlling the separating gravity

within the heavy media circuits, along with segregating capabilities with the run-of-mine and saleable stockpile areas will ensure that the plant saleable product ash variability will be minimized.

The coal is conveyed from the bunkers through a processing plant which produces 1/8 inch, or less, diameter material to be mixed with water for preparation of a coal slurry. The

slurry is transported 273 miles via Black Mesa Pipeline Company's pipeline to the Mohave Station.

Coal produced at the Kayenta Mine is destined via Salt River Project's Black Mesa and Lake Powell railroad spur for the Navajo Generating Station at Page, Arizona. Figure 36 shows

a schematic of the primary coal handling facilities at Kayenta Mine.

Coal hauled to the Kayenta coal handling facility is dumped into a 2,000-ton or a 300-ton capacity dump hopper using bottom-dump and/or end-dump haulage trucks. The open-top

hoppers are spanned by four beam-supported runways with one side of the hoppers open to receive coal that, when necessary, is placed on the ground during peak loading or

breakdowns and shutdowns. tired or track-type dozers.

This coal will later be pushed into the hopper using rubber-

Coal is fed from the bottom of the 2,000-ton dump hopper by two reciprocating plate feeders onto two 72" run-of-mine belts with one feeder for each belt. rate of coal transfer equal to 1,300 tons per hour. Each conveyor has a normal

The maximum rate of 2,000 tons per Coal is fed from the bottom of

hour will be utilized when only one unit is operational.

the 300-ton dump hopper by a reciprocating plate feeder onto a 60-inch run-of-mine belt. The three run-of-mine conveyors are totally covered on the windward covered on the leeward side. side and halfway

This will leave an opening for belt idler lubrication, belt

inspection, and general maintenance. Revised 11/21/03

777

REVISED 1 1/27/03

LIVE STORAGE

20,000 TON

2-80 x 30 ROLL 2 MINUS PROD.

300 TON DUMP
2-84''

PLATE FEEDERS

R A W COAL STORAGE

KAYENTA MINE

w
NO SCALE

PEABODY COAL COMPANY

SCIiEMAT I C 5-28 COAL IIAIIDLING FACII. ITIES

DATE:

"r)3/90

Each 72 inch belt and 60 inch belt discharges coal into totally enclosed chute work at the primary crusher building. The coal is gravity fed into one of two 80" x 30" roll-type The crushed coal

crushers which reduce the size of the run-of-mine product to 2" maximum.

is gravity fed from the crushers through totally enclosed chute work onto a 60" screen feed belt having a maximum rate of coal transfer equal to 2,600 tons per hour. This belt, which

carries coal through a scale house, is totally covered on the windward side and covered halfway down the leeward side for the entire 500-foot length. totally enclosed chute work at the secondary crusher building. The belt discharges into

The first function of the secondary crusher building is taking a sample, or cut of coal, which will be conveyed away from the main flow of coal by means of an 18" covered sample feed conveyor to a totally enclosed sampler building where secondary and tertiary sampling and crushing is performed, and to a coal analyzer tower where the coal quality is checked. All reject from sampling and sample crushing is conveyed back to the secondary crusher building on a parallel 18" covered return sample belt and discharged along the main flow of coal onto a stockpile belt.

The second function is screening of coal fed from the primary crushers and scalping of any coal that exceeds 2" in size. All coal that passes the screen will fall through totally

enclosed chute work onto a 42" stockpile bypass belt or a 60" stockpile feed belt.

Oversized coal which does not pass through the screens will fall into totally enclosed chute work that feeds a secondary crusher which recrushes the oversized coal and discharges through a bin onto the stockpile bypass or feed belt. which may be used to discharge coal onto the bypass belt. Beneath the bin is a feeder belt When the feeder belt is stopped

or running at a reduced rate, the bin above the feeder will fill and discharge onto the 60" stockpile feed belt. The feed belt beneath the bin is variable speed, thus the rate of The bypass belt can be varied from 0 to 2,600 tons per hour

feed can vary on both belts.

while the rate of feed of the stockpile feed belt can be simultaneously varied from 800 to 2,600 tons per hour.

The 60" stockpile feed belt conveys coal at a rate of 800 to 2,600 tons per hour for a horizontal distance of 584 feet. This belt is totally covered o n the windward side and Coal from this belt is fed into totally enclosed

covered halfway down on the leeward side.

chute work atop a covered conical structure which discharges into a 20,000-ton capacity live storage pile. The live storage pile is totally enclosed with sheeting. When the pile

Revised 02/21/00

is at capacity, approximately 63 percent is retained below grade and 37 percent of the pile is above grade. Coal is withdrawn from the bottom of live storage as needed. The 42"

stockpile bypass belt originates within the same transfer as does the 60" stockpile feed belt. This bypass belt, depending upon the bin feeder belt setting, can carry 0 to 1,800 This belt is a

tons per hour and will convey coal a horizontal distance of 1,050 feet.

zero grade belt that travels underneath the 20,000-ton live storage stockpile, through a 12-foot diameter tunnel and discharges into totally enclosed chute work at a transfer structure. Where this conveyor is exposed, either going or coming from the live storage

tunnel, it is completely covered on the windward side and covered halfway down the leeward side. Coal is reclaimed from the live storage onto this belt at a rate of 0 to 1,800 tons through the use of a reciprocating plate feeder located within the tunnel

per hour

underneath the live storage pile.

A combination of direct run (bypass) stockpile drawdown

and/or blending can be accomplished by matching the variable speed feeder belt and bypass belt to deliver a total rate of 1,800 tons per hour to the overland conveyor system.

The direction of the coal flow from the bypass conveyor is turned 31° within totally enclosed chute work at a transfer and discharged through totally enclosed chute work at a transfer structure onto the first leg, conveyor 20, of the overland conveyor extension.

Coal is transferred from the J-28 coal handling facility 37) via an overland conveyor consisting of six

to the N-7/8 or "legs".

facilities (Figure The first leg,

segments

conveyor 20, of the 42" 1,800-ton per hour overland conveyor will cover a horizontal distance of 8,890 feet. The second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth legs, conveyors 21

through 25, of the overland conveyor, are 6,973 feet, 6,715 feet, 8,623 feet, 7,418 feet, and 13,922 feet, respectively. The total horizontal length of the overland conveyor

between the two facilities is approximately ten miles.

In 1995 when the N-14 mine area was mined out, the N-14 facilities were dismantled and relocated to the N-11 truck dump/facilities area (see Drawing No. 85482). began in 1994. The N-11 coal handling facilities consists of a Construction coal

300,000-ton

stockpile, a 500-ton truck dump hopper, 72-inch R.O.M. conveyor, primary and secondary crusher buildings, sampling system, and transfcr conveyors, as well as a coal lab building and truck ready line area. The total conveyor length is approximately 1,480 feet. The

drainage from the material storage area on the west side of the Kayenta Mine Road is channeled to the existing sedimentation Pond N1-0. The drainage from the truck dump and

Revised 02/21/00

Revised

coal stockpile area on the east side of the Kayenta Mine Road will drain into the existing sedimentation Pond N10-D (see Attachment U for calculations). The disturbance to Coal Mine Wash will be minimal.

The

N-7/8

facilities consist of

coal

storage, conveying, and

coal quality

analyzer

facilities similar to the J-28 facilities.

Coal can be blended and/or stored at the conveyor.

facility prior to transfer to the rail loadout facility via a 5.8 mile overland

The coal analyzers provide continuous coal quality information and assist in coal blending operations.

Airport Facilities

In February 1986, PWCC submitted the general design and construction plans for new airport facilities. The old airport is located in the N-6 mining area. The new airport is located

in the reclaimed J-3 area (see Drawing Nos. 85210 and 85462). The new airport location was chosen primarily on aviational areas, considerations, relative topography, to mine minimal and disturbance future to

previously undisturbed activities.

location

offices,

mining

The new airport facilities include an approximately 7,500-foot long by a 75-foot wide paved runway and a small airplane tie-down, taxiway, and storage building area. The new airport facilities have been designed, constructed, and maintained to comply with all applicable local and Federal regulations. Sediment and runoff control are provided by The locations of these structures

the existing J3-A, J3-F, and J3-G sedimentation ponds. are shown on Drawing No. 85405. 85400, Sheet K-9.

The watershed boundaries are delineated on Drawing No.

The detailed inspection and design report for each impoundment structure

can be found in Attachment H.

The N-6 airport facilities area will be reclaimed as part of the N-6 mine area.

The new

airport facilities will be considered a temporary facility unless approved as a component of the postmining land use plan. The airport facilities will be reclaimed in the year Reclamation will be in

2011, if it is no longer required to support mining operations. accordance with the approved reclamation plan.

Revised 02/21/00

Solid Waste Disposal PWCC operated a solid waste landfill at the J-3 coal resource area until it was closed in 1997. The J-3 Landfill Closure reclamation plan was submitted to the regulatory authority

in 1998 and subsequently approved. The reclamation plan permit revision is located in AZ0001 Permit, Volume 54c, Item 31, J-3 Solid Waste Landfill Closure Permit Revision. PWCC has contracted with a solid waste vendor to haul the solid waste off-site to a regulated landfill. PWCC is also working with the EPA and the Tribe on a final J-3 solid waste
A Solid Waste

closure plan.

(Non-Coal) Disposal Plan for the landfill is contained in

Appendix C, Volume 12.

The plan addresses the kinds of non-coal wastes that were disposed

of at the site, the methods used to prevent leachate or surface runoff from degrading surface or ground water, fire prevention, landfill operations, and reclamation. Non-coal

wastes shall not be placed within eight feet of any coal outcrop or coal storage area.

No hazardous chemical wastes, radioactive materials, hazardous sludges and liquids, or any other type of hazardous waste will be disposed of within the permit area. All hazardous

materials as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) will be disposed off-site in accordance with applicable Federal and State regulations. Rinse water that is

the result of washing blasting agent residue off explosive trucks will be disposed of in active mine pits in a manner such that ground water quality is not degraded
5-7,

and J-19,

revegetation efforts are not hindered. J-21, N-6,

Currently these active pits are at the

N-11, and N-11 Extension(N-99) coal resource areas.

As resource areas are

reclaimed and mining progresses, an additional active pit will be developed at the N-10 coal resource area. Disposal sites within the active mine pit will be above the ground The rinsing will occur on benches in the pit that

water table, and away from ponded water. will be blasted. parting material.

Residue will therefore be mixed with the shot overburden, coal, or Chapter 22, Minesoil Reconstruction (Volume 11) describes the procedures

used to determine the thickness of suitable plant growth material to be placed on top of the graded spoil. As a worst case, four feet will be placed. To prevent a public hazard,

the pits are secured by a combination of fencing, security personnel patrolling the mine site, or mine personnel inspecting the active pit area during work shifts.

Revised 01/20/04

During the excavation and removal of the Kayenta and Black Mesa Mine underground storage tanks, PWCC's contractor encountered petroleum contaminated soil. One of the more common

types of treatment or remediation methods for petroleum contaminated soil is on-site bioremediation or landfarming. The location of the 5-16 and N-6 landfarms were selected in areas approved by Region IX USEPA and Navajo EPA (see Drawing 85210). in previously permitted mining disturbance areas. accordance with USEPA and NEPA requirements. This material is These two sites are being landfarmed in

When the remediation process has been

completed and USEPA has approved the final closure reports, PWCC will dispose of the material in the adjacent mining area and reclaim the sites in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. Bioremediation of the material is expected to be completed prior to or.

to coincide with the reclamation of the adjacent J-16 and N-6 pit areas.

Facility Construction Schedule

As a result of reviewing all the existing and proposed structures needed for the five-year permit term for the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines, PWCC has developed Drawing No. 85406 and Table 10, Facility Construction Schedule Summary, for all construction after January 2004. A list of all major facilities is included in Chapter 24, Bonding, Attachment 24-4. All construction and remedial schedules for siltation structures and impoundments are shown on Drawing No. 85406.

In accordance with 30 CFR, 780.12 (a)( 3 ) , all pre-existing structures constructed prior to 12-16-1977 are shown in AZ-0001 Permit, Volume 8, Drawing No. 406. "Existing structure" means a structure or facility used in connection with or to facilitate surface coal mining and reclamation operations for which construction begins prior to the approval or

implementation of the 12-16-1977 Federal Program. Construction was begun and completed on the structures shown on Drawing No. 406 after construction started on the mines in the late 1960's and early 1970's. For all other existing or reclaimed structures not shown on

Drawing No. 406, construction was begun and completed after 12-16-1977.

On Drawing No. 85406 and Table 10, the remedial and new construction work was prioritized based on site specific information, potential future mine-related disturbance in the watershed, projected coal sales, and minimizing the risk of harm to the environment or to the public health and safety. time. Future events may The construction schedule is PWCC's best estimate at this (i.e., delayed permit

require alterations in the schedule

approval, mining progress, etc.).

Revised 02/21/00

TABLE 10

FACILITY CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE SUMMARY
STRUCTURE IDENTIFICATION PERMIT CATEGORY
2004 Calendar Year

PROPOSED ACTIVITY

N11 Extension North Haul Road and conveyor Crossing N11 Extension South Haul Road 523 Haul Road BM/Moenkopi CMP N9 Haul Road Black Mesa Mine Wash Plant All temporary primary roads not required for reclamation maintenance and monitoring. Narrow and reclaim the nonpermanent portion of permanent primary roads. J8/J9 Haul Road

Primary Haul Road

New Road Construction

2005 Calendar Year Primary Road 2006 Calendar Primary Road Existing Haul 2007 Calendar Primary Road Coal Handling

New Road Construction

Year

Road Year Facility Modification

New Road Construction Remedial Construction Work New Road Construction New and Updated Facility Construction Primary Road Reclamation

2013 Permit Year (July 2013-July 2014) Primary Road

Primary Road

Primary Road Reclamation

)Primary Road Reclamation N-11 Haul Road
spurs NR- 41 Realianment Public Road Realignment
2022 Permit Year (July 2022-2023)

2016 Calendar Year Primary Road 2017 permit Year (July 2017-July 2018)

New Road Construction

Public Road Construction

J-19 Haul Road J-19 Deadhead/Haul Road Spur J-19 West Haul Road Reclaim all remaining temporary primary roads.

Primary Haul Road Primary Haul Road Primary Haul Road Primary Road

Primary Road Reclamation Primary Road Reclamation Primary Road Reclamation Primary Road Reclamation

Revised

Literature Cited Akers, J.P. and Harshbarger, J.W. Guidebook of the Black Mesa "Ground Water in Black Mesa Basin and Adjacent Areas" in Basin, Northeastern Arizona". New Mexico Geological

Society, pp. 172-183. Algermissen, S.T., et al.

1958. "Probabilistic Estimates of Maximum Acceleration and Velocity in USGS Open-File Report 82-1033. 1982.

Rock in the Contiguous United States".

American Association of State Highway Officials. Highways". American 1965.

"A Policy on Geometric Design of Rural

Iron and Steel Institute. 1983. and Harshbarger, J.W.

Handbook of Steel Drainage

&

Highway Construction

Products". Anderson, R.Y.

(editors).

Guidebook

of

the

Black

Mesa

Basin,

Northeastern Arizona.

New Mexico Geological Society, p. 212.

October 1958. 1968.

Arizona Highway Department. "Hydrologic Design for Highway Drainage in Arizona". Barfield, B.J.; Warner, R.C.; and C.T. Haan. Distributed Areas". Casagrande, A. 1983. Through Dams". Journal of the New England

"Applied Hydrology and Sedimentology for

"Seepage

Water

Works

Association, pp. 295-336. Chow, T.T.

June 1937. McGraw-Hill, New York. 1959.

Open Channel Hydraulics.

Cooley, M.E.

"Physiography of the Black Mesa Basin Area, Arizona" in Guidebook of the 1958.

Black Mesa Basin, Northeastern Arizona",pp. 146-149. Cooley, M.E., et al.

"Regional Hydrogeology of the Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations, USGS Professional Paper 521-A, p. 61. Texas. "Pipe 1985. Arizona Bureau of Geology and Culvert and 1969 Trapezoidal Channel

Arizona, New Mexico and Utah". Dodson
&

Associates,

Inc.,

Houston,

Analysis". Dubois, S.M.

User's Manual and Program Reference.

"Earthquakes, Fieldnotes, Vol. 9, No. 1. March 1979. "Soil Baseline Studies,

Mineral Technology". Espey, Huston
&

Associates.

Black

Mesa

and

Kayenta

Mines"

September 1981. Fassett, J.E. (editor). "Cretaceous and Tertiary Rocks of the Southern Colorado Plateau". 1973 1985

A Memoir of the Four Corners Geologic Society, p. 218.
Intermountain Soils, Inc. Kelley, V.C.

"1985 Intermountain Sol1 Survey for Peabody Leasehold".

"Tectonics of the Black Mesa Basin Reglon of Arlzona In Guidebook of the New Mexico Geological Society, pp 136-145. McGraw-Hill, New York. 1972.

Black Mesa Basin, Northeastern Arizona". Linsley, R. and Franzini, J.

Water Resources Engineering.

Revised 02/21/00

McCuen, R.H. A Guide to Hydrologic Analysis Using SCS Methods. Mirafi, Inc.

1982. 1983.

"Fabrics for Armored Erosion Protection of Slopes and Shorelines".

O'Sullivan R.B., et al.

"Stratigraphy of the Cretaceous Rocks and the Tertiary Ojo Alamo

Sandstone, Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations", Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Professional Paper 521-E, p. 63. Page, H.G. and Repenning, C.A. 1969. "Late Cretaceous Stratigraphy of Black Mesa, Navajo and

Hopi Reservations, Arizona" in Guidebook of the Black Mesa Basin, Northeastern Arizona. New Mexico Geological Society, pp. 115-122. Peterson, F. and Kirk, A.R. 1958.

"Correlation of the Cretaceous Rocks in the San Juan, Black

Mesa, Kaiparowits and Henry Basins, Southern Colorado Plateau" in Guidebook of San Juan Basin 111, Northwestern New Mexico. Reynolds, S.J. New Mexico Geological Society, pp. 167-178. 1977.

"Geologic Features of Northeastern Arizona" in Fieldnotes. 1982.

Arizona Bureau

of Geology and Mineral Technology, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 1-8. Rollins, Brown and Gunnell, Inc., Provo, Utah. AZ-9-0010. Sergent, 1982. and Beckwith, Phoenix, Arizona. 1976.

Reed Valley Dam Final Design Report,

1211-

Hauskins

Geotechnical

Investigation

Report,

Kayenta Fresh Water Pond, 1211-AZ-9-0001.

Sergent, Hauskins and Beckwith, Phoenix, Arizona. Dam, 1211-AZ-9-0003. 1976.

Geotechnical Investigation Report, J-7

Sergent, Hauskins and Beckwith, Phoenix, Arizona. Retention Dam N14-D, 1211-AZ-9-0004. 1981.

Geotechnical Investigation Report, Water

Sergent, Hauskins and Beckwith, Phoenix, Arizona. Retention Dam N14-E, 1211-AZ-9-0005. 1981.

Geotechnical Investigation Report, Water

Sergent, Hauskins and Beckwith, Phoenix, Arizona. Retention Dam N14-F, 1211-AZ-9-0006. 1981.

Geotechnical Investigation Report, Water

Sergent, Hauskins and Beckwith, Phoenix, Arizona. Retention Dam N14-G, 1211-AZ-9-0007. Sergent, Hauskins and Beckwith, 1981.

Geotechnical Investigation Report, Water

Phoenix, Arizona. 1985.

Geotechnical

Investigation

Report,

Sediment Retention Dam N14-H, 1211-AZ-9-0008.

Sergent, Hauskins and Beckwith, Phoenix, Arizona. Retention Dam J16-A, 1211-AZ-9-0009. 1982.

Geotechnical Investigation Report, Water

Sergent, Hauskins and Beckwith, Phoenix, Arizona.

Geotechnical Investigation and Design 1985.

Development Report, Wild Ram Valley Dam J2-A, 1211-AZ-9-0011. Simons, Li Undated. Society for Range Management. "Rangeland Hydrology". 1982.
&

Associates, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Engineering Analysis of Eluvial Systems.

Revised 02/21/00

Stokes, W. L.

"Geomorphology of the Navajo Country" in Guidebook of Monument Valley and New Mexico Geological Society, pp. 61-67. 1973.

Vicinity, Arizona and Utah. Sumner, J.S. March 1976.

"Earthquakes in Arizona".

Fieldnotes Vol. 6, No. 1, Arizona Bureau of Mines.

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. Curve Numbers". T.R. No. 16 Hydrology. 1960.

"Rainfall-Runoff Tables for Selected Runoff

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. Runoff in Small Watersheds. SCS-TP-149. 1968.

Method for Estimating Volume and Rate of

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. T.R. NO. 39 Design Unit. Washington, D.C. 1968.

Hydraulics of Broad-Crested Spillways.

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. Hydrology. PB-244 463. Washington, D.C.

National Engineering Handbook, Section 4,

1972. Hydrologic Design Manual for Drainage Areas

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. Under 25 Square Miles. Arizona. 1974.

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. No. 55. 1975.

Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds.

T.R.

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. Practices. PB-244 668, Part 1 of 2.

Field Manual-Engineering for Conservation 1975.

Washington, D.C.

United States Department of Agriculture, SCS. Practices. PB-244 668, Part 2 of 2.

Field Manual-Engineering for Conservation 1975.

Washington, D.C.

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. Planning Note No. 11". Arizona. 1976

"Universal Soil Loss Equation, Conservation

United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS. 1976.

Earth Dams and Reservoirs.

T.R. No. 60.

United States Department of Agriculture, Science and Education Administration. Rainfall Erosion Losses, A Guide to Conservation Planning. AH537. United States Department of Agriculture, SCS. Colorado". 1978.

Predicting

"Procedures for Determining Peak Flows in 1980. 1965.

Includes and Supplements T.R. No. 55.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, USACE. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Hydraulic Design of Spillways. EM110-2-1603. 1981.

User's Manual HEC-1 Flood Hydrograph Package. User's Manual HEC-2 Water Surface Profiles. "Mineral Resources". "Mineral Resources". 30 CFR 0 to 199. 30 CFR 700 to End.

1982. 1984. 1984.

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations.

United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Precipitation - Frequency Atlas of the Western United States. Vol. 111. Arizona. 1973.

Revised 02/21/00

United States Department of Commerce, NOAA. Colorado River and Great Basin Drainages". United States

"Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, Hydrometeorological Report No. 49. "Preliminary Guidance 1977.

Environmental Protection Agency.

for Estimating

Erosion on Areas Disturbed by Surface Mining Activities in the Interior Western United States". EPA-908/4-77-005 Interim Final Report. 1977. Design of Surface Mines Haulage

United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines. Roads

-

A Manual.

I.C. 8758.

1977. Engineering and Design Manual. "Coal

United States Department of the Interior, M.E.S.A. Refuse Disposal Facilities". Undated.

United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Water Resources Technical Publication. 1977. United States Department of the Interior, OSM, Region V. Sedimentology Manual. 1981.

Design of Small Dams.

A

Surface Water Hydrology and

United States Department of the Interior, OSM. Manual. OSM/T.R.-82/2. 1982.

Surface Mining Water Diversion Design

United States Department of the Interior, OSM.

Design Manual for Sedimentation Control 1982.

Through Sedimentation Ponds and Other Physical/Chemical Treatment. United States Department of the Interior, OSM. Small Areas in Surface Coal Mining. 1983.

Design of Sediment Control Measures For

United States Department of the Interior, OSM. Methodologies for Mined Lands. 1985.

Handbook of Alternative Sediment Control

United States Department of the Interior, OSM. Denver Technical Center. June 26, 1985.

"OSM Meeting - Engineer Session".

At

United States Department the of Interior, OSM. Denver Technical Center. July 10, 1985.

"OSM Meeting

-

Engineer Session".

At

United States Department of the Interior, OSM. Denver Technical Center. August 29, 1985.

"OSM Meeting

Engineer Session".

At

United States Department of the Interior, OSM. Coal Company March 1985a. 22, 1985 from Allen

"Undated Letter Received by Peabody Western D. Klein, Administrator, Western Technical

Center".

United States Department of the Interior, OSM. Keith Kirk of OSM, October 18, 1985". 1985b.

"Communication with Mike Rosenthal and

United States Department of Transportation. BPR. 1967. United States Department of Transportation, FHWA. Highway Culverts".

HEC-11 Use of Riprap for Bank Protection.

"Hydraulic Charts for the Selection of 1965.

HEC-5 Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 5.

Revised 02/21/00

United States Department of Transportation, FHWA. Hydraulic Design Series No. 3. 1980.

"Design Charts for Open-Channel Flow",

United States Department of Transportation, FHWA. Hydraulic Design Series No. 4. 1983.

"Design of Roadside Drainage Channels".

United States Department of Transportation, FHWA. Circular No. 19. 1984.

"Hydrology".

Hydraulic Engineering

University of Kentucky

-

College of Agriculture. Undated.

Design Manual

for the SEDIMOT I 1

Hydrology and Sedimentology Model. Woodward, L.A.

"Structural Framework and Tectonic Evolution of the Four Corners Region of

the Colorado Plateau" in Guidebook of Monument Valley and Vicinity, Arizona and Utah. New Mexico Geologic Society, pp. 94-98. Woodward, L.A. and Callender, J.F. 1973.

"Tectonic Framework of San Juan Basin" in Guidebook of New Mexico Geological Society, pp. 209-

San Juan Basin 111, Northwestern New Mexico. 212. 1977.

Young, R.G.

"Cretaceous Stratigraphy of the Four Corners Area" in Guidebook of Monument New Mexico Geological Society, pp. 86-93. 1973.

Valley and Vicinity, Arizona and Utah.

Revised 02/21/00

CHAPTER 8

S O I L S RESOURCES AND OVERBURDEN

CHAPTER 8 INDEX
Page

Introduction Soils Studies Soil Identification Soil Maps Soil Series and Map Unit Descriptions Present and Potential Productivity of the Soils Topsoil Material Suitability Evaluation (1979, 1983, and 1985 Soil Surveys) Topsoil Material Suitability Evaluation (2000 and 2003 Soil Surveys) Overburden Sampling Program

1
1
4

6

6
11

-

Background

Overburden Analytical Assessment Procedures Overburden Assessment (1977-1985 Core Data) Overburden Assessment (2003 Core Data) Quality Control and Duplicate Samples (2003 Core Data) Radioactive Materials Literature Cited

LIST OF FIGURES
Page

Figure 1.

Soil Survey Areas

3

LIST OF TABLES
Page

Table

1.

Taxonomic Classification of the Soil Series Identified on the Black Mesa Leasehold

Table Table

2.
3.

Order 1, 2, 3, and 4 Soil Survey Map Unit Legends SCS Form 5 Potential Vegetation Production for the Soils Identified in the Order 1 and 2 Surveys

Revised 11/21/03

LIST OF TABLES (CONT.)

Table

4

Summary of Overburden Sampling Intensity by Mining Area

Table Table

5.
6.

Parameter Suites Used on the Overburden Cores Summary of the Parameters Analyzed on the Overburden Cores by Mining Area

Table

7.

Evaluation of Overburden Suitability in the Mining Areas

Table

8.

~vaiuationof Overburden Suitability in the Mining Areas (2003 Core Data)

Table

9.

Duplicate Core Sample Results for Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1. Attachment 2. Attachment 3.

Prime Farmland Determination Analytical Procedures Diagnostic Criteria and Suitability Limits Used to Evaluate the Black Mesa Overburden (OSMRE Draft Guidelines)

Attachment 4.

Typical Geophysical Logs and Geophysical Log Locations from the Black Mesa Leasehold

Revised 11/21/03

CHAPTER 8

SOILS RESOURCES AND OVERBURDEN

Introduction

This chapter provides a description of the soils resources on the Black Mesa leasehold including: (1) an overview of the studies that have been conducted; (2) soil

identification;

(3) maps delineating the different soils; ( 4 )

maps delineating topsoil

material salvage depths and acreages; (5) soil and map unit descriptions; (6) present and potential productivity of the soils; and (7) evaluation of the soils suitability for use as topsoil materials. This chapter also provides a description of the overburden strata

in each mining area and characterizes the quality of these strata with regard to their potential liability to, or resource for, successful revegetation. The quantity of

available topsoil material and near-surface overburden for suitable soil supplements is presented in Chapter 2 2 . The potential effects of overburden quality on surface and

ground water resources are addressed in Chapter 18.

Soils Studies

In 1979, Peabody retained Espey, Huston and Associates, Inc. (EH&A) of Austin, Texas, to study the soil resources on and surrounding the Black Mesa leasehold. necessary because no pre-existing The study was

soil survey information of the kind and intensity

necessary for mine planning purposes was available for the region which includes the leasehold. The only previous study of which Peabody was aware was a soil and range

inventory of the 1882 Executive Order Area conducted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA 1964).

The objectives of the EH&A study were to develop the soils information descriptions and chemical and physical data) necessary

(maps, soil for

to assess the potential

reclamation following coal mining, and characterize the present soils environment within a buffer zone surrounding the mine permit area. project area at three levels of intensity. Soil scientists from EH&A surveyed the

An Order 1 survey was made on approximately An Order 3 survey was conducted on the

1,127 acres of area to be disturbed by mining. remaining parts of the leasehold.

An Order 4 survey was conducted on a buffer area The project resulted in a report

comprising about 78,000 acres surrounding the leasehold.

1

Revised 11/21/03

prepared for Peabody (EH&A, 1980) that accompanied a permit application package submitted to the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) in 1981 in support of Permit AZ-0001.

In 1983, Peabody began preparation of a Mine Plan Modification to mine in a previously unpermitted portion of the leasehold. Peabody contracted with Mariah Associates to

conduct an Order 2 survey and mapping of those soils in the disturbance area which had potential for use in reclamation. This included the alluvial soils along wash terraces,

the valley soils occupying side slopes, and the deeper inclusions of eolian material in the pinyon-juniper woodland. Approximately 4,400 acres were surveyed with the primary The

objective of characterizing the quality and quantity of topsoil material in the area.

information derived from the project was inserted in the Mine Plan Modification package which was approved upon issuance of Mining Permit AZ-0002A.

In conjunction with the Order 2 soil survey performed by Mariah, Peabody conducted a geobotanical study in the project area. for selenium toxicity, because The study was designed to evaluate the potential species occurred in the

selenium accumulating plant

baseline vegetation studies.

In 1985, Peabody contracted with Intermountain Soils, Inc. (IMS) to survey all remaining areas to be disturbed on the Black Mesa leasehold during the life-of-mine (as projected thru 2011) and conduct geobotanical studies. The soils in the projected disturbance The soils under the

areas, including a 1,000-foot buffer were surveyed and mapped by IMS.

pinyon-juniper woodland were mapped at the Order 2 level while the remaining deeper soils were mapped at the Order 1 level. In addition, IMS was contracted to review, consolidate,

and standardize the 1979, 1983, and 1985 soil survey data, and prepare a comprehensive summary report on the soil resources of the leasehold. The Scope of Work for this project was reviewed with appropriate personnel from the OSM prior to beginning the fieldwork.

In 2000 and 2003, Peabody Western Coal Company (PWCC) contracted James Nyenhuis, Certified Professional Soil Scientist, to conduct soil surveys of the various remaining life-of-mine coal resource areas and the coal transportation corridors between Black Mesa Mine and the J-23 coal resource area. The report for this Order 2 survey, covering about 18,973 acres,

can be found in Appendix A-1.

In summary, the status of the soils resources studies on the Black Mesa leasehold is as follows (Figure 1). Order 4 survey information is available for approximately 78,000

2

Revised 11/21/03

'AS

I

FIGURE 1 S O I L SURVEY AREAS PEABODY WESTERN COAL COMPANY

REVISED 12121 12003

acres surrounding

Peabody's leasehold.

Order 3 survey information

is available for

approximately 41,026 acres within the leasehold and between Tracts 1 and 2 of the Joint Mineral Use Area leases excluding the proposed mining areas. These surveys characterize Order 1 and 2 survey These

the present soils environment surrounding areas to be disturbed.

information is available for the proposed mining areas plus a 1,000 foot buffer.

surveys characterize the present soils environment in the disturbance areas, assess their chemical and physical quality for use as topsoil material, and determine the quantity of topsoil material available for reclamation purposes. The varying levels of intensity of

the surveys in mining areas were required based upon the spatial complexity of the soils relative to their potential for use in reclamation. Geobotanical studies have been

completed in all disturbance areas to assess the potential for selenium toxicity.

The comprehensive summary reports prepared by IMS and James Nyenhuis are included in this permit application package as Appendices A and A-1, respectively. The appropriate

material in the report has been extracted to prepare the soil resources sections of this chapter. The survey and sampling methods, analytical data, detailed soils descriptions,

and interpretation records may be found in Appendices A and A-1.

Soil Identification

Fourteen soils, representing four major soil groups have been identified and mapped in proposed disturbance areas (Table 1). These soils represent the components of less The soil groups are
( 1 ) residual soils

resolved mapping units throughout and surrounding the leasehold. distinguished on the basis of parent materials.

These groups include:

derived from interbedded sandstones and shales of the Mesa Verde Formation Chapter 4 for a complete description of the regional geology); soils; (3) eolian soils; and (4) alluvial soils.

(refer to

( 2 ) porcellanite-derived

The Dulce soil (Table 1 ) is considered a series taxadjunct because the colors of the soils on the leasehold outlie the range given in the formal description. Two other soils, Soil

A and Soil B, could not be classified beyond the family level because no series have been established by the SCS for them. Both are derived from porcellanite.

Based on recent taxonomic reclassification of three soils by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in the last 1990s, the site-specific Peabody soils that were previously named Cahona, Pulpit, and Sharps have been recorrelated. The soil that was

4

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 1

Taxonomic Classification of the Soil Series Identified On the Black Mesa Leasehold

Series

Family

BeWY Bond Cahona (Blanding) Chilton ~ulcel

Coarse-loamy, mixed, superactive, mesic Ustic Haplocambid Loamy, mixed, superactive, mesic Lithic Ustollic Haplarqid Fine-silty, mixed, superactive, mesic Ustic Haplargid Loamy-skeletal, mixed, calcareous, mesic Ustic Torriorthent Loamy, mixed, superactive, calcareous, mesic, shallow Ustic

Torriorthent Las Lucas Oelop Pulpit, ustic-aridic San Mateo Fine-silty, mixed, active, mesic Ustic Haplocambid Fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, mesic Ustic Haplargid Fine-silty, mixed, superactive, mesic Aridic Haplustalf Fine-loamy, Torrifluvent Sharps, ustic-aridic Travessilla Fine-silty, mixed, superactive, mesic Aridic Haplustalf Loamy, mixed, superactive, calcareous, mesic Lithic Ustic mixed, superactive, calcareous, mesic Ustic

Torriorthent

Zyme

Clayey, smectitic, calcareous, mesic, shallow Ustic Torriorthent

Soil A

Loamy-skeletal over fragmental, mixed, calcareous, mesic Ustic Torriorthent

Soil B

Loamy-skeletal over fragmental, mixed, mesic Ustic Haplocalcid

l ~ h i ssoil is a taxadjunct to the series

Revised 11/21/03

named Cahona is renamed Blanding.

An "ustic-aridic" soil moisture regime modifier has

been added to the Pulpit and Sharps soil names (Pulpit, ustic-aridic; and Sharps, usticaridic). Because these soils are not new soils, but rather recorrelated to different soil

name modifiers, they were not sampled for baseline laboratory characterization following taxonomic reclassification.

Soil Maps

Four sets of soils maps are contained in Chapter 25.

Drawing 85300, Sheets 1 through 9, Mapping was with

provides the map units and boundaries of the Order 3 and 4 soil surveys. conducted at a scale of 1"
=

2000'

on

black

and

white

aerial

photography

orthophotoquad topographic line overlay.

Drawing 85305A, Sheets 1 through 15, provides

the map units and boundaries of the Order 1 and 2 soil surveys conducted in 1979, 1983, and 1985. Drawing 853058, Sheets 1 through 15 provides topsoil salvage depth delineations The base map for Drawing 85305A and 853058 is a 1" The 2000 and 2003 soil survey and topsoil Each base map is a
=

for the 1979, 1983, and 1985 surveys.
=

400' scale black and white aerial photograph.

salvage information is presented on Drawing 85305C (11 sheets total).

rectified orthophotoquad with topographic contour overlay at a scale of 1"

400'.

Soil Series and Map Unit Descriptions

Fifty-four map units were described in the 1979, 1983, and 1985 Order 1 and Order 2 surveys (Table 2; Drawing 85305A, Sheets 1 through 15). Thirty-seven map units were

described in the 2000 and 2003 Order 2 surveys (Table 2; Drawing 85305C, 11 sheets total). Seventeen map units were identified in the Order 3 survey and four map units were Map unit

identified in the Order 4 survey (Table 2; Drawing 85300, Sheets 1 through 9). descriptions may be found in Appendices A and A-1.

Each description provides basic

information about the soils in the map unit, such as position on the landscape, type(s) of soil dominating the unit, and contrasting and similar soils which may occur within any delineation. Those descriptions, as originally prepared by EH&A, Mariah Associates, or

IMS have been modified by James Nyenhuis only to achieve agreement with the most recent taxonomic classification.

Soil series descriptions for the 14 soils identified in the Order 1 and 2 surveys may be found in Appendices A and A-1. The relevant physical and chemical data and SCS Form 5

Soil Interpretation Records are presented as well.

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 2

Order 1, 2, 3, and 4 Soil Survey Map Unit Legends

Map Symbol

Map Unit Name

Order 1 and 2 Surveys (1979, 1983, and 1985) :

1A

Dulce very channery fine sandy loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes Dulce very channery fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes Dulce very channery fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Dulce very channery fine sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Bond very fine sandy loam, 1 to 8 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce complex, 6 to 15 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce complex, 15 to 50 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes Ustic Torriorthents-Rock outcrop complex, 50 to 80 percent slopes Zyme very channery loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes Zyme very channery loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes Zyme very channery loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Zyme very channery loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Pulpit very fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Sharps very fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Sharps very fine sandy loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes Sharps very fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes Sharps very fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Travessilla-Zyme-Dulce complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes Zyme-Travessilla-Rock outcrop complex, 6 to 15 percent slopes Zyme-Travessilla-rock outcrop complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes Zyme-Travessilla-rock outcrop complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes Cahona very fine sandy loam, bedrock substratum, 2 to 8 percent slopes Cahona very fine sandy loam, bedrock substratum, 1 to 4 percent slopes
7

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 2

Order 1, 2, 3, and 4 Soil Survey Map Unit Legends

Map Symbol

Map Unit Name

Order 1 and 2 Surveys ( 1 9 7 9 , 1 9 8 3 , and 1985) (Cont.):

10B

Cahona very fine sandy loam, bedrock substratum, 4 to 8 percent slopes

1OC

Cahona very fine sandy loam, bedrock substratum, 8 to 15 percent slopes Cahona very fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes Cahona very fine sandy loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes Cahona very fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

11C

Cahona very fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Cahona very fine sandy loam, gravelly substratum, 2 to 8 percent slopes Cahona-Cahona, bedrock substratum, very fine sandy loams, 2 to 10 percent slopes Cahona-Cahona, bedrock substratum, very fine sandy loams, 1 to 4 percent slopes Cahona-Cahona, bedrock substratum, very fine sandy loams, 4 to 8 percent slopes Cahona-Cahona, bedrock substratum, very fine sandy loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes Begay loam, 2 to 10 percent slopes Begay loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes Begay loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes Begay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes San Mateo loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Oelop very fine sandy loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes Oelop very fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes Las Lucas sandy clay loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes Soil A-Soil B extremely channery very fine sandy loams, 4 to 15 percent slopes Soil A-Soil B extremely channery very fine sandy loams, 15 to 50 percent slopes
8

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 2

Order 1, 2, 3, and 4 Soil Survey Map Unit Legends

Map Symbol

Map Unit Name

Order 1 and 2 Surveys (1979, 1983, and 1985) (Cont.) :

16F

Soil A-Soil B extremely channery very fine sandy loams, 50 to 70 percent slopes Chilton gravelly fine sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Disturbed Land Reclaimed Land Topsoil Stockpile Riverwash

Order 3 Surveys (1979 and 1985) :

20 21 22

Zyme-Cahona-Dulce association, 0 to 30 percent slopes Zyme-Las Lucas complex, 0 to 15 percent slopes Zyme-Las Lucas-Dulce association, 0 to 30 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce complex, severely eroded, 0 to 30 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce association, 8 to 30 percent slopes Zyme-Dulce-Las Lucas association, 0 to 30 percent slopes Cahona-Zyme association, 0 to 30 percent slopes Begay-Las Lucas association, 0 to 8 percent slopes Las Lucas-Zyme-Dulce complex, 0 to 8 percent slopes Dulce gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 30 percent slopes Dulce-Zyme association, 15 to 30 percent slopes Dulce-Cahona association, 0 to 30 percent slopes Dulce-Las Lucas association, 0 to 15 percent slopes Dulce-Las Lucas-Zyme association, 8 to 30 percent slopes Pits and dumps

35 36

Torriorthents, reclaimed San Mateo silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes

Order 4 Surveys (1979 and 1985) :
40

Haplargids-Torriorthents association, undulating to hilly

9

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 2

Order 1, 2 , 3 , and 4 S o i l Survey Map U n i t Legends

Map Symbol

Map Unit Name

O r d e r 4 Surveys (1979 and 1985) (Cont.): 41

Torrifluvents, nearly level Torriorthents, undulating t o h i l l y Torriorthents, sloping t o very s t e e p

42 43

Order 2 Surveys (2000 and 2003) : Dulce v e r y c h a n n e r y f i n e s a n d y loam, 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 1AB Dulce v e r y c h a n n e r y f i n e sandy loam, 8 t o 30 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Bond v e r y f i n e sandy loam, 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Zyme - Dulce complex, 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Zyme - Dulce complex, 8 t o 30 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Zyme - Dulce complex, 30 t o 50 p e r c e n t s l o p e s U s t i c T o r r i o r t h e n t s - Rock Outcrop complex, 50 t o 8 0 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Zyme v e r y channery loam, 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Zyme v e r y channery loam, 8 t o 30 p e r c e n t s l o p e s P u l p i t v e r y f i n e sandy loam, u s t i c - a r i d i c , 2 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s S h a r p s v e r y f i n e sandy loam, u s t i c - a r i d i c , 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 6AB S h a r p s v e r y f i n e sandy loam, u s t i c - a r i d i c , 8 t o 1 5 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 6C T r a v e s s i l l a - Zyme - Dulce complex, 2 t o 6 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 7B Zyme-Travessilla-Rock Outcrop complex, 6 t o 30 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 7CD Zyme-Travessilla-Rock Outcrop complex, 30 t o 50 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 7E Blanding v e r y f i n e sandy loam, bedrock s u b s t r a t u m , 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 1O B A Blanding v e r y f i n e sandy loam, bedrock s u b s t r a t u m , 8 t o 1 5 p e r c e n t 1C O slopes Blanding - Blanding, bedrock s u b s t r a t u m , v e r y f i n e sandy l o a m 1 t o 8 percent slopes Blanding - Blanding, bedrock s u b s t r a t u m , v e r y f i n e sandy loams, 8 t o 1 5 XllC percent slopes Blanding v e r y f i n e sandy loam, 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 1l A B Blanding v e r y f i n e sandy loam, 8 t o 1 5 p e r c e n t s l o p e s 11C Blanding v e r y f i n e sandy loam, g r a v e l l y s u b s t r a t u m , 2 t o 8 p e r c e n t GllB slopes Begay loam, 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Begay loam, 8 t o 1 5 p e r c e n t s l o p e s San Mateo loam, 0 t o 3 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Oelop v e r y f i n e s a n d y loam, 1 t o 8 p e r c e n t s l o p e s Las Lucas sandy c l a y loam, 2 t o 6 p e r c e n t s l o p e s S o i l A - S o i l B, e x t r e m e l y c h a n n e r y v e r y f i n e sandy loams, 4 t o 1 5 percent slopes Soil A S o i l B, e x t r e m e l y c h a n n e r y v e r y f i n e sandy loams, 1 5 t o 50 percent slopes S o i l A - S o i l B, e x t r e m e l y channery v e r y f i n e sandy loams, 50 t o 7 0 percent slopes D L D i s t u r b e d Land Pond P Reclaimed Land, no t o p s o i l RL Reclaimed Land, t o p s o j l e d RLT Topsoil Stockpile TS R e c o n s t r u c t e d Drainage RD Riverwash RW

-

Revised 1 1 / 2 1 / 0 3

Present and Potential Productivity of the Soils

The soils which occur on the Black Mesa leasehold are predominantly in SCS land capability Classes V I and V I I . The land capability class for each soil series is listed on the SCS Soils in Classes V I and V I I have severe to

(NRCS) Form 5 in Attachment 6 of Appendix A.

very severe limitations that make them unsuitable for cultivation and limit or restrict their use largely to pasture, range, woodland or wildlife habitat. Soils in these

groupings are used primarily for livestock grazing.

The lands on the leasehold have

received a negative determination as prime farmland from the SCS (NRCS) (Attachment 1).

Potential rangeland vegetation production can be inferred from the SCS (NRCS) Form 5 Soil Interpretation Records for soils correlated to established series. For a number of soil

series, ranges of potential production have been established on the basis of site to site variation in soil moisture availability, the length of the frost-free period and range condition. and
2

The potential vegetation production for the soils identified in the Order 1 have been extracted from the records and are presented in Table 3. The potential

surveys

Productivity values include both the moist and dry phases of the soils.

vegetation production estimates are based upon normal year precipitation and excellent range condition.

Official Form 5's are not available for the Dulce taxadjunct, Soil A and Soil B, since they are not established series. The Dulce Form 5 was used for the Dulce taxadjunct soil

because soil color was the only parameter that did not match the official description. The average potential production for the Dulce and Zyme soils was used to estimate the potential productivity of Soil A and Soil B. Soil A and Soil B occur in the same

landscape positions as the Zyme and Dulce soils, have similar depths, and support similar vegetation.

The present estimated Executive

productivity

of the soils on the leasehold is well below that which is The 1964 soil and range inventory of the 1882 the Bureau of Indian Affairs substantiates this

under optimum conditions. Order Area conducted by

observation (BIA, 1964).

The entire leasehold below the Executive Order Area boundary is The inventory characterized the pinyon-juniper range sites, soils on the leasehold as having low The sagebrush-grassland range sites,

included in the inventory. which

include the Zyme, Dulce, and Travesilla

productive potential and to be in poor condition.

which includes the deeper alluvial and eolian soils on the leasehold (e.g. Cahona soils)

11

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 3

SCS Form 5 Potential Vegetation Production For the Soils Identified in the Order 1 and 2 surveys1

Soil

SCS Form 5

(Potential Production (lb/ac. air dry)

Series

Number

Moist Phase

Dry Phase

Begay Bond Cahona Chilton Dulce Las Lucas Oelop Pulpit San Mateo Sharps ~ravessilla* ~yrne2 Soil A Soil B Ustic Torriorthents
-

l ~ o r m a lprecipitation year; annual production for shrubs, half-shrubs, grasses and forbs. 2~hannerysurface

were

characterized as

having

medium

to high potential,

but to be

in poor

to fair

condition.

The inventory found 1,420,401 acres to be in poor conditions, 328,535 to be in

fair condition, and none to be in good or excellent condition.

The

results of production

samples conducted

in the native plant

communities on the

leasehold further support the observation that the present productivity of the soils is low (Chapter 9). Approximately 119 to 190 acres of pinyon-juniper woodland range are Approximately 10.5 to 13 acres of

required to support one animal unit for one month. sagebrush range are required

to support one animal unit for one month with a high These figures reflect directly on the current poor

proportion of sagebrush in the diet. condition of the soils.

The low productivity of the soils on the leasehold is due to the These

eroded condition of the soils and the retrogressive composition of the vegetation.

conditions in turn have been caused by severe overgrazing of soils that are inherently susceptible to erosion. The loss of the soil resource is so severe that it is doubtful

that most of the land will ever recover productivity levels near its potential, even under intensive management.

Topsoil Material Suitability Evaluation (1979, 1983, and 1985 Soil Surveys)

By definition, topsoil means the A and E soil horizon layers of the four master soil horizons (30 CFR Part 701.5). The soils on the leasehold have A horizons which range in The topsoil is of

thickness between 0-1 inches and 0-4 inches, depending upon the soil. insufficient quantity to salvage as a separate layer.

The topsoil, suitable subsoil, and

suitable unconsolidated material below the subsoil, in situations where the material is very thick, are salvaged and the mixture is treated as topsoil material. is required because of the lack of topsoil reclamation. This procedure for

(as defined above) that is available

The results of laboratory and field chemical and physical analyses were used to evaluate the soils on the leasehold with regard to their suitability for use as topsoil material. The criteria overburden. used were those established by the Wyoming

DEQ (1984) for topsoil and

In addition to the analytical results, geobotanical studies were conducted to The physical and chemical properties

assess the potential for elevated selenium levels. of the soils are presented in Appendix A.

Soils on the leasehold can be placed in one of four major soils groups.

These groups are:

13

Revised 11/21/03

residual soils, procellanite-derived soils, eolian soils, and alluvial soils.

Since the

soils occurring in each group generally have similar characteristics, the suitability for topsoil material of each soil will be discussed on the basis of the soil group in which it occurs.

The residual soils found within the lease area are the Dulce, Travessilla, and Zyme soils. The Dulce and Travessilla soils have no chemical properties that limit suitability. amount of surficial rock fragments (20-50 percent by volume) makes High

them marginally

suitable to unsuitable based upon the Wyoming DEQ guidelines. amounts of surficial rock fragments. to clay content.

Zyme soils also have high

Additionally, Zyme soils are marginally suitable due

Each of these soils is generally severely eroded, with bedrock occurring Topsoil salvage of these soils would be infeasible in many

at less than six inches. cases.

The unnamed Soils A and B are the porcellanite-derived soils and are found primarily in the J-21 mining area. These soils were not sampled since the rock-fragment content

throughout their profiles (35-70 percent by volume) make them unsuitable for topsoil.

The soils that

formed in eolian material,

Cahona, Pulpit, Sharps, and Bond are all

suitable for topsoil. They have similar

The Begay soils formed in eolian material mixed with alluvium. to the eolian soils and are included here for

characteristics

discussion.

These soils have been extensively evaluated to determine suitability.

Out of

the ten Cahona pedons sampled, with the deepest down to 186 inches, only one horizon in one pedon was unsuitable. Sample 11-1-8 has an acid-base potential of -63.1 tons

CaC03/1000 tons dry material. profile. 117.0.

This sample represented ten inches out of a total 105-inch

The material directly above this sample, 11-1-7 has an acid-base potential of Mixing which occurs during topsoil salvage and replacement will ameliorate any

problems with these soils should thin horizons with negative ABP be encountered on a consistent basis. In the same profile, Samples 11-1-6 and 11-1-7 have marginally suitable Again, this is

EC levels of 10.8 and 11.5 and clay content of 3.1 and 2.2, respectively.

not typical of the Cahona profile. will ameliorate these problems.

Mixing of materials during salvage and replacement

Cahona soils in GllB map unit are underlain by a horizon They are otherwise similar to

high in rock fragments at a depth between 20 and 40 inches. other Cahona soils above that depth.

The four remaining eolian soils are suitable for One pedon of Begay soils (27-108) showed an

topsoil based on the analytic results.

unsuitably high SAR value (16.3) at 71 inches. soils. 14

This high value is anomolous for these

Revised 11/21/03

The alluvial soils, Las Lucas, San Mateo, and Oelop, are affected by high salt and sodium levels at varying depths in the profile due to their landscape position. been extensively sampled as part of a deep-hole sampling program These soils have as well as for

representative profiles because their depths make them excellent sources of great volumes of topsoil material. 12. A summary of the deep-hole studies is presented in Appendix A, Table

San Mateo

soils

have been

sampled

at

ten different

locations.

At

three of these increments; the

locations, the pedons were sampled either by horizon or in two-foot

remaining seven sites were sampled below ten feet in two-foot increments.

Of the three

pedons sampled from the surface, all of which were in Reed Valley, depth to unsuitably high EC values ranged from 8 to 16 feet. in any of these three pedons. very low acid-base potentials. Values for SAR did not exceed suitability levels

At one location (13-14DSS), layers below 14 feet showed

In the remaining seven sampled pedons, four were sampled in a tributary of Dinnebito Wash in the southern part of the J-21 mining area. All of the samples from this area have good Samples 13-

suitability for all suitability criteria, with the exception of five samples. 2DS (20'-22' and 22.0'-22.5') and 15-23DS (20.0'-22.0') had

slightly low acid-base

potentials.

All were between 0 and -5 tons CaC03 which, though suitable, is close to the Mixing with the overlying horizons will alleviate any deleterious Two

unsuitable level.

effects of these levels should the demand for topsoil material require their salvage. samples, 13-10DS (10'-12' and 12'-14'1, had slightly elevated selenium levels. 0.11 ppm and 0.13 ppm, respectively.

They are

These levels are considered marginally suitable.

The other three sampled San Mateo pedons were located in Reed Valley Wash or a side tributary to Reed Valley Wash. Depth to unsuitable EC values occurred at ten feet in the At the other location (13-19DS), sampled to 18.7 feet, The San Mateo soils are suitable Close attention

two samples in Reed Valley Wash.

neither EC nor SAR levels exceeded suitability criteria.

for use as topsoil material to variable depths that average 13.7 feet.

will be given to the topsoil depth maps, which designate the recommended salvage depths based on the deep-hole sampling results.

Las Lucas soils have been sampled at 13 locations, five of which were sampled from the surface to bedrock. Four of these five pedons were located in tributaries to Reed Valley At these three locations, the depth to

Wash and three show high EC and SAR values.

Revised 11/21/03

unsuitabily high levels of one or more parameters ranged from 31 inches to 10 feet (at a location sampled at ten feet and below). mmhos. Conductivity levels were between 12 and 20 The fifth pedon sampled The samples from the nine

Site 19-67 did not exhibit any unsuitably high levels.

from the surface downward showed high SAR values at 96 inches. other locations did not show any unsuitably high levels.

Las Lucas soils are, therefore,

suitable for topsoil down to bedrock except in the Reed Valley area, where close attention will be given to the topsoil depth maps, which designate the recommended salvage depths.

The Oelop soil is the third soil in the alluvial soils group. each from the surface to bedrock. 12 feet and one

It was sampled three times,

One location (12-231) showed unsuitably high SARIS at The samples from the other site (12-259) were

(19-55) at 20 inches.

suitable down to 17.5 feet.

Site 19-55 was in the same drainage as the Las Lucas sample In addition to high SAR values, both sites in this Close attention will be given to

that was unsuitable at 31 inches.

drainage have low acid-base potential below nine feet.

the topsoil depth maps, which designate the recommended salvage depths.

Except for the few anomalous horizons and depth increment samples noted above, the soils identified in the Order 1 and 2 surveys are chemically suitable for use as topsoil material; providing the recommended stripping depths on Drawing 853058, Sheets 1 through 15 are closely followed. The Dulce, Zyme, and Travessilla soils are marginally suitable

or unsuitable physically based upon the Wyoming guideline because of their coarse rock fragment percentage. In many cases, the depth of these residual soils and slope steepness

precludes salvage as well.

When topsoil material requirements so demand, Peabody intends to salvage the residual soils unless their depth makes salvage impractical. Mixing with much greater volumes of

material that is physically suitable, which occurs in the topsoil handling process, will ameliorate the adverse characteristic of the residual soils. The benefits of the addition

of small amounts of coarse rock fragments in localized areas in terms of restricting surface runoff and reducing raindrop impact and wind erosion (if rocky material should be deposited on the surface of redistributed topsoil), outweigh the liability of a potential reduction in moisture holding capacity (if it should occur at depth).

Geobotanical studies were conducted on the disturbance areas in support of the topsoil material suitability assessments. The objective of the studies was to determine the

16

Revised 11/21/03

extent and distribution of soils that exhibit the potential for contributing to toxic concentrations of selenium in forage. The studies were justified on the basis of the A comprehensive

existence of selenium accumulator plant species on the disturbance areas. report of the studies may be found in Appendix A.

The geobotanical studies demonstrated that selenium-accumulating plant populations are locally common in certain subhabitats in the study areas. The populations are usually

distributed throughout the study areas, are generally predictable in their areas of occurrence, and are important components of the vegetation in the areas where they occur. The selenium accumulators occurred on the shallow soils associated with wooded ridges and disturbed areas, and were absent from the broad sagebrush valleys and wash terraces where the deeper soils occur.

Based upon the results of selenium analysis in plants and soils at a representative cross section of sites where accumulator plants were found, the soils in which they were found growing are not seleniferous. This conclusion was reached for several reasons. The

primary selenium accumulator species did not contain unusually high concentrations of the element and known secondary accumulator plants sampled at the sites did not contain concentrations that are toxic. Secondary accumulators are known to accumulate toxic Second, the plant available

levels of selenium if present on seleniferous soils. concentrations in the soils at the sites were low.

One soil stratum at one site (Location

29-1) and two strata at another site (Location 22-5 and 22-6) out of 27 sites had plantavailable selenium concentrations greater than 0.1. site (84-14A) exceeded the suspect concentration. shale encountered at a depth of 44 inches. ppm are generally regarded as suspect One additional stratum at another

This stratum was an unconsolidated gray

Plant-available concentration exceeding 0.1 have potential for use in

for soils that

reclamation.

They are not considered unsuitable.

Third, no selenium poisoning of

livestock has been reported in or surrounding the leasehold.

Topsoil Material Suitability Evaluation (2000 and 2003 Soil Surveys)

Topsoil suitability and salvage depth recommendations for the 2000 and 2003 soil survey areas are based on site-specific soils and map unit data. The information is presented in

Appendix A-1 and shown on Drawing 85305C (11 sheets total).

Revised 11/21/03

Overburden Sampling Program - Background

Peabody began an overburden-sampling program at the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines in August of 1977. The objectives of the program have evolved based upon the need for compliance

with the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act and pertinent regulations pursuant to the Act. Since initiation of the program, 143 deep overburden cores, 49 shallow cores,

and 20 highwall cores have been drilled to characterize the geochemistry and physical properties of the overburden on the Black Mesa leasehold. Eighty-six of the deep cores

and all of the shallow and highwall cores are pertinent to this permit application (Table
4).

The remaining cores are located in areas that have been mined out or in areas that

are not projected to be disturbed in the life-of-mine plans.

The procedures used to drill, handle, and describe the overburden cores are presented in Chapter 4. The deep cores were sampled at logical geologic intervals not to exceed ten Strata less than two feet in thickness, the next logical unit where possible.

feet in length or to a major change in lithology. except nonmineable coals, were combined with

Sampling intervals began at ground surface and included the stratum immediately below the lowest mineable coal seam. depth of ten feet. The highwall cores were sampled at two foot intervals to a

The shallow cores were sampled at two foot intervals to a depth of From 1977

thirty feet or to contact with a coal seam greater than 0.5 feet in thickness.

through 1979, drilling supervision and all geologic core descriptions were performed by staff geologists from Peabody's Corporate Office in St. Louis, Missouri. cores were drilled during this time period. From 1980 to the present, Fifty-seven all drilling

supervision and geologic descriptions were performed by geologists or soil scientists from Peabodyfs Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines.

Overburden core locations from 1977 through 1985 were determined using a grid system that is fit to the contour of the outermost coal cropline in a given mining area. Within the

confines of terrain, irregular coal croplines, and variable numbers and thicknesses of the coal seams, the deep holes were spaced approximately 2,000 feet apart. Thus, deep

overburden core coverage in the mining areas is approximately one per 90 acres with the exception of the contiguous J-19, 20, 21, and 23 mining areas (Table 4).

The J-19, 20, 21, and 23 mining areas were some of the last areas to be drilled.

The

drilling intensity was reduced because the stratigraphy and geochemical variability, as indicated by the holes in other areas, was so great that no benefit wou1.d be derived from

18

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 4

Summary of Overburden Sampling Intensity by Mining Area

Mining Area

Area (Acres)

Deep Cores (No.)

Coverage (Acres/Core)

Shallow and Highwall Cores (No.)

J-16

J-19 through 23
5-28

N-6 N- 9 N-10
N-11

N-14 N-99

Revised 11/21/03

drilling at 90-acre centers. not

Also, Peabody's plan for handling selected overburdens does and vertical determination of unsuitable overburdens.

require complete lateral

Rather, the plan is designed to identify zones of near-surface overburden that can be used as topsoil material supplements should toxic or potentially toxic forming spoils that require burial be identified following grading. Sixty-five additional shallow and

highwall cores were drilled in the J-19, 20, 21, and 23 areas, and five additional shallow cores were drilled in the N-10 mining area to supplement the deep overburden core data. Peabody's plan for insuring that unsuitable overburden will not affect plant growth in the postmining landscape is presented in Chapter 22. Twenty-one deep core holes were drilled The OSM-approved drill

in the remaining unmined life-of-mine coal resource areas in 2003.

hole density was two core holes per section (Gavette-OSM June 25, 2003 letter to DunfeePWCC). This density was justified because coal seams in the new areas are identical to recovered so overburdens are expected to be similar to those The locations of the overburden core holes are

those currently being

previously encountered and characterized. shown on Drawings 85613 and 85613A.

Overburden Analytical .Assessment Procedures

Descriptions and references for the analytical procedures used on the overburden samples are presented in Attachment 2. The analytical methods, including field, laboratory, and

quality control procedures for the 2003 sampling episode are those described in Chapter
22, Table 18.

Different parameter suites have been analyzed on different sets of cores (1) whether or not they were shallow, highwall, or deep cores; or (2) relative to the status of negotiations with the regulatory

depending upon:

when they were drilled

authority regarding the necessary parameters needed for characterization. suites used are presented in Table 5.

The different

A summary of suites used on the cores in each The

mining area, and in several cases on individual cores, is presented in Table 6.

majority of the cores drilled prior to 1984 were originally analyzed using Suite 1 only. These cores were reanalyzed in 1985 for additional parameters. The results of the

analyses and associated lithologic descriptions are presented in Appendix B.

An assessment of the deep core data was performed to estimate the characteristics of the regraded spoil and to identify those parameters that must be considered in planning mined soil reconstruction. The assessment was performed at two levels of intensity. First, the

data were inspected to determine the parameters that could realistically contribute to potentially unsuitable spoils and minesoils.

A detailed assessment of the parameters so

20

Revised 11/21/03

L

a

C

u . w

21

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 6

Summary o f t h e Parameters Analyzed on t h e Overburden Cores by Mining Area

Mining Area

Core Type

Parameter S u i t e s ( T a b l e 5 ) and E x c e p t i o n s

deep deep

S u i t e s 1 and 2 on a l l S u i t e s 1 and 2 on a l l S u i t e 4 on Core 26462C o n l y

J-19 t h r o u g h 23

deep

S u i t e 1 e x c e p t N,P,K, Org. Mat. on a l l S u i t e 2 e x c e p t B,

% Moist.,

and

Se, Hg, Zn

S u i t e s 1, 2 and 3 on Cores 24292C and 24589C o n l y S u i t e 7 on Core 30365EO o n l y shallow highwall deep deep S u i t e 6 on a l l S u i t e 5 on a l l S u i t e 1 on a l l S u i t e 1 on a l l e x c e p t Core 30354E0 where S u i t e 7 was used shallow deep S u i t e 6 on a l l S u i t e s 1, 2, 3, 4 e x c e p t N , P , K ,
%

Moist.,

Org. Mat.,

B, and Se o n a l l

deep

S u i t e 1 on Core 20268C o n l y S u i t e 1 and 2 on Core 20257C o n l y

- S u i t e s 1, 2 and 3 e x c e p t B and Se on
Core 20346C o n l y

-

S u i t e s 1, 2, 3 and 4 e x c e p t B and Se on Core 20259C o n l y

- S u i t e s 1, 2 3 and 4 e x c e p t N , P , K ,
% Moist.,

Org. Mat.,

B and Se o n

Cores 26269C and 26271C o n l y 5-2,
5-4,

J-6,

J-9, N-99

deep

-

Suite 7

J-14,

5-15,

N-9,

Revised 1 1 / 2 1 / 0 3

identified was then made.

The diagnostic criteria and suitability limits, except for

selenium, were taken from the Criteria for Evaluation of Overburden and Regraded Spoils in Attachment 3 (Office of Surface Mining Draft Guideline, unpublished). guideline was used for selenium (Volume 11, Appendix A, Page 24). was assessed using criteria presented in Chapter 22, Table 17. The Wyoming DEQ

The 2003 deep core data

The percentage

of the total

core

volume

manifested

by

an unsuitable

parameter was

calculated as part of the detailed assessment. for the 1977 to 1985 core data were: electrical conductivity (SAR) greater than

The parameters and suitability limits used

(11 pH less than 5.5 and pH greater than 8.8; (2)
( 3 ) sodium

(E.C.) greater than 12.0 mmho/cm;

absorption ratio (CaC03

18 or 22, depending upon texture;

(4) acid-base accounts

equivalence based on total sulfur) less than zero; and ( 5 ) clay content greater than 50 percent or both clay and silt content greater than 40 percent. The functional portion of

each core, minus mineable coal and topsoil, down to the lowest mineable seam was used to perform the calculations. For interpretive purposes, parameters with unsuitable levels

representing more than five percent of the total core volume were considered possible contributors to unsuitable or suspect spoils. Levels representing more than 1 5 percent of contributors to unsuitable or suspect

the total core volume were considered probable spoils.

In addition, weighted mean SAR's and negative and positive acid-base accounts

were calculated based upon the thickness of each stratum in a particular core.

The shallow and highwall cores were assessed using the Criteria for Evaluation of Topsoil and Topsoil Substitutes in Attachment 3 (Office of Surface Mining Draft Guideline,

unpublished) except for selenium.

The Wyoming DEQ guideline for plant-available selenium

contained in Volume 11, Appendix A, Page 24 was used for samples analyzed for soluble selenium (highwall cores). The New Mexico guideline for total selenium (greater than 0.5

ppm), that is identical to OSMRE1s criteria for Evaluation of Overburden and Regraded Spoils was utilized to interpret the results of analyses E $ j r total selenium on selecced shallow cores. The New Mexico soil and soil substitute suitability rating guidelines are

presented in Attachment 3.

Overburden Assessment (1977-1985 Core Data)

A cursory inspection of the cores indicates that unsuitable strata, with regard to one or
more parameters, exist in most cores (Appendix B). However, the geochemistry and

stratigraphic sequence of the overburden exhibits such extreme variability that the

23

Revised 11/21/03

lateral and vertical extent of unsuitable or suspect strata cannot be correlated within or between mining areas. The primary chemical attributes that could contribute to unsuitable

spoils and minesoils are elevated SAR's (potential for sodic zones), negative acid-base accounts (potential for acid-forming zones), acid pH values, and suspect selenium These

concentrations (potential for selenium enriched zones) in the N-10 mining area.

strata are typically located at moderate to considerable depth or are associated with the coal seams. The near surface overburden is generally of much better quality.

Inspection of the cores for which trace element analysis is available does not indicate consistent levels of any suspect trace elements, with the possible exception of selenium, which could potentially contribute to phytotoxicity or animal toxicity. However, this

statement must be qualified to the extent that toxicity levels are questionable or do not exist for most of the trace elements and suspect concentrations may or may not have any adverse effects depending on a variety of other factors.

One core in the J-1/N-6 mining area

(Core No. 23165C) had strata that exhibited an

unsuitable boron concentration that was greater than five percent of the total core volume. The percentage was 6 . 2 percent. The boron concentration was 5.7 ppm. None of

the remaining cores in the J-1/N-6 mining area or in any other mining area exhibited percentages exceeding five percent. The Black Mesa overburden will not contribute

phytotoxic concentrations of boron to graded spoils.

The

detailed

assessment of

the

remaining parameters of

concern

in the

Black Mesa

overburden are summarized in Table 7. included for demonstration purposes and

Electrical conductivity and clay content are to aid in the interpretation of not the other

parameters.

The clay content of the Black Mesa

overburden will

contribute to

undesirably heavy minesoils. limits in the majority of cores.

Electrical conductivities are well within the suitable

Soluble selenium concentrations in strata from several of the deep cores on which the analysis was performed exceeded the suspect level of 0.1 ppm that is recommended by the Wyoming DEQ (Table 7). Analysis for plant available forms of selenium are not normally However, it was

recommended for deep overburden because of the reducing environment.

judged to be the appropriate method for the cores on which it was run because the samples have been stored in the laboratory for extended periods of time. Oxidation has

undoubtedly occurred.

All cores applicable to the J-7 mining area had strata that

24

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 7

Evaluation of Overburden Suitability In the Mining ~ r e a s l f ~ Overburden pH E.C. (mmho/cm) Se (ppm) SAR CaC03 equiv. -

Clay Content

Core No. 8 >8.8
% % %

<5.5

>12.0

Xw % >O.l

unsuit.

-

5

8neg. xw(neg.)

-

%(pas.)

% unsuit.

J-7 Mining Area:

15418-C 23154-C 26.3 9.1 0.0 0.12 25.2

1.9

0.0

0.0

.07

6.1

60.3 47.3

19.4 14.5

10.6 0.0

2.7

20.5

0.0

Not Calculated

2.8

5-16 Mining Area:

23146-C

1.5

22.1

Revised 12/01/88

Revised 12/01/88

W

. " ? W
4 w

W

W

m

+

P ? ' ?
4

'

P

I

-

I -

N

Revised 1 2 / 0 1 / 8 8

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 7 (Cont.)
Evaluation of Overburden Suitability Overburden pH E.C. (mmho/cm) In the Mining ~reas''~ Se (ppm) SAR CaC03 equiv. -

Clay Content

m m

\

Core No.
% % %

>0.1
8 unsuit.
%

neg.

-

% >8.8

<5.5

>12.0

w '

Xw (neg.)

Xw (pos.)

%

unsuit.

. N

r i

0

-4

N-11

M i n i n g Area:

6272-C 26364-C 0.0

14.5

N-14 M i n i n g Area:

20257-C
26.2

0.0

0.0

0.07

15.1

36.9

11.8

26.2

8.9

34.7

11.4

l~he percent of core with an unsuitable parameter

=

(depth intervals with unsuitable parameter va1ues)xlOO total core interval (adjusted)* (depth intervals with unsuitable parameter values x parameter value)

2~eightedaverage
(

xw)

=

total core interval (adjusted)* *~djustedtotal core depth (minus probable topsoil and mineable coal depths)

exhibited suspect selenium concentrations which were greater than five percent of the total core volumes. The percentages ranged from 6.1 to

25.2 percent.

Selenium

concentrations ranged from less than 0.01 pprn to 0.98 ppm.

The one core for which

selenium data is available for the N-14 mining area had a percentage of total core volume greater than five percent and a range in selenium concentrations from less than 0.01 pprn to 0.34 ppm. The remaining mine areas showed a similar pattern. Most cores had

percentages greater than five. The 0.98 pprn value at 5-7

Selenium concentrations ranged from very low to 0.81 ppm. Most values exceeding

was the greatest concentration detected.

the suspect level were less than 0.3 ppm.

The results indicate the probability of suspect concentrations of plant-available selenium occurring in regraded spoils. Emphasis must be placed on the term suspect, however,

because the evaluation of the potential for selenium problems, like most other trace elements, is complicated by a host of factors. Concentrations of selenium in plant growth

media that could contribute toxic levels in vegetation depend upon the plant species occurring on a given site, precipitation, the various forms of the element that are Also, the

present and the related physical and chemical characteristics of the minesoil. amount of selenium ingestion by livestock must be considered.

Acute toxicity results from

the ingestion of lethal amounts of plants containing high levels of selenium (several hundred pprn). Acute poisonings are uncommon because the plant species that are capable of Chronic intoxication, whether it be

accumulating these concentrations are not palatable.

blind staggers or alkali disease, requires the consumption of moderate concentrations of selenium (5 to 50 ppm) over a considerable length of time. This would imply that selenium

concentrations in the soil that are sufficiently great to cause toxic concentrations in forage must occur over extensive areas to enable grazing animals to ingest toxic

concentrations.

Because of the lack of definition of the many variables that surround the

selenium issue, it is difficult to accurately assess the potential for unsuitable spoils on the Black Mesa leasehold. Nevertheless, the selenium concentrations in the overburden

are suspect, and will be considered in mined soil reconstruction.

The percent of total core volume and weighted mean SAR's

(Table 7) indicates that the The

potential exists for sodic zones to occur at or near the surface of regraded spoils.

weighted mean values and clay content of the cores indicates that the sodicity problems will be moderate, but should be considered in minesoil reconstruction, except at the N-10 mining area. The core data at this mining area does not indicate any potential for

sodicity problems.

Revised 11/21/03

The percent of total core volumes that have negative CaC03 equivalence (Table 7) indicates that acid or acid-forming spoils can be anticipated in most areas. Eighty-eight percent

of the cores have percentages of negative equivalence that are greater than five, and 57 percent have total percentages greater than 15. The problem of acidity will not be as bad For

as the percentages indicate because of the excess alkalinity in many of the cores.

example, three of the four cores applicable to the 5-7 mining area have percentages greater than five, but the proportion of negative to positive acid-base accounting favors an alkaline environment.

Twenty shallow cores, designated as the highwall cores, were drilled on the J-21 mining area highwall to characterize the near surface overburden. depth of ten feet and sampled at two-foot intervals. in Appendix B. The cores were drilled to a

The laboratory results are presented

The core data was first assessed in terms of the suitable category for Five percent, or one core (Core No. 11EO) was suitable

topsoil and topsoil supplements. throughout.

Marginally suitable or unsuitable material was encountered at the second (Core Nos. 16E0 and 20EO). Marginally

sampling interval in ten percent of the cores

suitable or unsuitable material was encountered at the third sampling interval (below four feet) in fifteen percent of the cores (Core Nos. 15E0, 17EO and 21EO). Marginally

suitable material or unsuitable material was encountered at the first sampling interval (surface) in the remaining 70 percent of the cores. The parameters that failed the

suitable category criteria were texture (sand or clay content) and pH (less than 5.5 or greater than or equal to 8.4).

The highwall cores were then assessed in terms of the marginally suitable category for topsoil and topsoil supplements. Unsuitable material was encountered at the first

sampling interval in ten percent of the cores (Nos. 5E0 and 10EO). were marginally suitable to a depth of two feet.

Cores 13E0 and 16EO

Ten percent were marginally suitable to

four feet (Core Nos. 17EO and 20EO) and another ten percent were marginally suitable to eight feet (Core Nos. 18EO and 21EO). The remaining 60 percent of the cores were

marginally suitable throughout the entire 10-foot increment.

Forty-four additional shallow cores were drilled throughout the contiguous J-19 through 23 mining area to further characterize the near surface overburden (Appendix B). were drilled to a depth of 30 feet or to coal. at the first two-foot sampling interval. The cores

Thirty-one of the cores were not suitable (sand or clay content) and pH The depth of

The texture

(acidic or alkaline) were the predominant parameters that were out of range.

32

Revised 11/21/03

suitable material in the remaining cores ranged between 2 and 14 feet with a mean suitable depth of 5.1 feet. interval. Six of the cores were marginally unsuitable at the first sampling

Negative calcium carbonate equivalence, pH less than 5.5 and texture (clay The depth of

content greater than 50 percent) were the parameters that went out of range.

marginally suitable material in the remaining cores ranged between 2 and 30 feet with a mean depth of 13.4 feet.

Five shallow cores were drilled in the N-10 mining area to aid in the characterization of the near surface overburden (Appendix B ) . to coal. The cores were drilled to a depth of 30 feet or

Three cores were not suitable at the first sampling interval due to pH (Core No. The depth of

26530C), sand content (Core No. 26531C3, and selenium (Core No. 26533C).

suitable material in the remaining two cores ranged between two and four feet with a mean suitable depth of three feet. The depth of marginally suitable material in the five cores

ranged between 0 and 8 feet with a mean depth of 2.8 feet.

The data collected for the highwall and shallow cores, coupled with assessment of the quality of near-surface overburden in the deep cores, indicates that a considerable volume of topsoil supplements is available in each mining area. source of supplemental material if demand so requires. This material is an excellent The assessment of the deep

overburden cores, which identified toxic or potentially toxic strata, indicates that the supplemental material may be needed to bury unsuitable zones of graded spoil.

Overburden Assessment (2003 Core Data)

The purpose of the 2003 overburden study was to augment the existing characterization of the geology in the permit area and proposed future life-of-mine permit areas in sufficient detail to identify acid- and toxic-forming materials and topsoil supplements/substitutes. Overburden analyses were performed by Green Analytical Laboratories, Inc. (GAL) in Duplicate

Durango, Colorado and Energy Laboratories, Inc.

(EL) in Helena, Montana.

analyses were also completed by GAL and EL on about 10 percent of the samples collected. The analytical data for the 21 core holes is contained in Appendix B along with the lithologic descriptions and the data is summarized in Table 8.

The 2003 overburden quality is very similar to the overburdens previously encountered and characterized quality. from mined areas or areas currently being mined and to regraded spoil

A cursory inspection of the cores indicates that unsuitable strata, with regard

33

Revised 11/21/03

W W

N N W

O W N O N P

. . . .

P

I-I-..

;1

0 0

. .

N N

W

W W O O P N

..

N

. .

PCn

P 0) 4 0

P

P 0

0 0

O C n N W

...
O N

P

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

W P W W

. .m. m . ~

m u N 4

w N W 4

w

W

. .

P

C W n P W

m w

. .

N W N P W P m ~ m m

. .v . ~ . w. w . m
I I I I I I

~

w

W W U I N N P P W

o

~

c.wrnm

. . . .

N

r

w W

.

m .

N W W N N N 4 4 O W O 4

......
J W O P

k.'""? ..
~ ~

W W N W C n o w m

I

I

I

I

m m

. . . .

I

I

W
4

0 P W k-

WI-

m
0 0

Revised 11/

to one or more parameters,

exist in all cores

(Appendix B).

The primary

chemical

attributes that will likely contribute to unsuitable spoils and minesoils are elevated SARs, negative acid-base accounts, and alkaline pH values. These strata are typically The near

located at moderate to considerable depth or are associated with the coal seams.

surface overburden is generally of much better quality (Chapter 22, Tables 1 and 2).

All cores exhibited suitable boron levels (Table 8).

Unsuitable total selenium, soluble

selenium, salinity, clay, and acid pH values almost always comprised less than five percent of the total core volume. Exceptions included the salinity at Sites 30366E0 and

30367E0, the soluble selenium at Site 30367E0, the acid pH at Sites 30351E0, 3035430, 30359E0, 30361E0, 30366E0, and 30367E0, and the clay percentage at Sites 30351E0, 30356E0, 30359E0, 30360E0, 30366E0, and 30367EO where the percentage of unsuitable material ranged between 5 and 15 percent. Based on the above data, boron, selenium, salinity, acid pH, This is in

and clay will typically not contribute to unsuitable or suspect spoils.

concert with the existing spoil sampling program from the areas currently being mined and reclaimed.

Unsuitable levels representing more than 15 percent of the total core volume will likely contribute to unsuitable or suspect spoils. The percent of total unsuitable core volume

and weighted mean SARts (Table 8 ) indicate the potential exists for sodic zones to occur at or near the surface of regraded spoils. One hundred percent of the cores have Soil and

unsuitable SAR values comprising more than 15 percent of the total core volume.

overburden materials with unsuitable SAR values often have associated unsuitable alkaline pH values. Sixty percent of the cores have unsuitable alkaline pH values that are greater The percent of total

than five, and 33 percent have total percentages greater than 15.

core volumes that have negative CaC03 equivalence (Table 8 ) indicate acid or acid-forming spoils can he anticipated in most areas. One hundred percent of the cores have

percentages of negative equivalence that are greater than five and 66 percent have total percentages greater than 15. However, the problem of acidity will not be as severe as the

percentages indicate because of the excess alkalinity in most of the cores.

SAR and negative acid-base potential values are the two parameters most often detected as being unsuitable in final graded spoil at existing mining and reclamation areas. Over the

past five years, these parameters have been detected at unsuitable levels in about 10 percent of the total samples collected and analyzed. However, suitable mitigative

Revised 11/21/03

overburden materials are available in sufficient quantities in all existing and proposed mining areas to reclaim these sites wherever unsuitable spoil is detected in regraded spoil based on the volumes of suitable near-surface overburden material that has been identified (Chapter 22, Tables 1 and 2 ) .

Quality Control and Duplicate Samples (2003 Core Data). part of the overburden-sampling program. 10 percent of the total samples.

Quality control is an important

GAL and EL completed duplicate analyses on about
completed to determine the

These analyses were

comparability between

the two

laboratories since both were used

for core analyses. Duplicate data

Duplicate overburden sample data for GAL and EL are presented in Table 9.

between GAL and EL for all parameters is statistically valid, comparable, and correlated with a high degree of significance. Although boron values between labs varied

considerably, a good correlation still existed and no values were determined to be unsuitable. The difference in boron values between labs is likely attributable to

slightly variable laboratory techniques.

Revised 11/21/03

Table 9. Duplicate Core Sample Results for Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines Analyzed by Green Analytical Lab (GAL) in Durango, Colorado and Energy Lab (EL) in Helena, Montana (1) 2003

DATE pHGAL pH-EL EC-GALl EC-EL SARGAL SAR-EL ClayGAC Clay-EL ABP-GAL A B p I L (mmhoslcmt % % (2) (2) (2) 12) (PP~) (PP~) (PP~) (PP~) (1) Abbreviat~ons include EC-electrical conduct~vcty; SAR-sodium adsorption ratro; ABP-acld base potent~al; ABPP-acid base potential pyrit~c; Set-total selenium; Ses-hot water soluble selenium, and Bhws-hot
w d a r enlanhle. ""a",,. hnmn

(2) Units are tons calcium carbonate equivalent per 1000 tons of material.

.,-.",-"."","

Table 9. Duplicate Core Sample Results for Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines Analyzed by Green Analytical Lab (GAL) in Durango, Colorado and Energy Lab (EL) in Helena, Montana (I)
2003

DATE pHGAL pH-EL ECGAL~ EC-EL SARGAL SAR-EL Clay-GAL Clay-EL ABP-GAL ABP-EL ABPP-EL set*& S&-EL SWAL S~S-EL (mmhoslcm) % 9b el (2) (1) Abbreviations include EC-electrical conductivrty;SAR-sod~um adsorption ratio, ABP-acid base potential; ABPP-acid base potential pyrrt~c; Set-total selen~urn:Ses-hot water soluble selenium: and Bhwshot .. water soluble boron.
(2) Units are tons calcium carbonate equivalent per 1000 tons of material.

o

\

cu

4

\ 4 4

Radioactive Materials

Radioactivity is a part of the energy released by certain naturally occurring unstable elements as their nuclei decay to a more stable state. There are only a few such unstable The most

elements occurring in significant concentrations in coal bearing rock strata.

common of these elements is potassium 40, with minor occurrences of uranium 238, uranium
235, and thorium 232. Gamma radiation of various levels and intensities are generated

during some of these decay processes. chemical composition of the rock.

The level of natural gamma radiation depends on the

In a coal bearing rock sequence, an increase in natural

gamma rays usually reflects an increase of potassium 40, concentrated in clay minerals.

Since 1982 Peabody has incorporated the use of calibrated down-hole digital geophysical logging equipment capable of detecting concentrations of radioactive mineralization in the coal and overburden material. To date, approximately 6,000 drill holes, located

throughout Peabody's lease, have been geophysically logged to help delineate coal quantity and quality as well as providing lithologic data on the Wepo formation, the coal bearing formation currently being mined hy Peabody.

The

geophysical

logging

suite

consists

of

high-resolution density,

natural

gamma,

resistivity, and caliper logs.

The gamma ray log, calibrated in counts per second (cps)

is a measurement of the naturally occurring gamma radiation in the rock strata and borehole. Within the Wepo formation on Peabody's lease, the natural gamma log fluctuates

from a low of 1 cps in coals and clean sandstones to highs of 80-120 cps in shales and mudstones. These observations are exhibited on typical geophysical logs presented in The locations of the drill holes whose Logs are presented To place this

Attachment 4 to this chapter.

may be found on a map of the leasehold also contained in Attachment 4.

range in perspective, a lower grade uranium mineralization would require natural gamma log readings in the 5,000 cps range. Geologic interpretation of all calibrated geophysical

logs has provided no evidence of any potential uranium mineralization in the coals or overburden of the Wepo formation within Peabody's lease.

The continued use of advanced geophysical techniques will provide for future evaluation of potentially hazardous radiation occurring in the coal or overburden material. highly unlikely event of detecting such mineralization, the appropriate In the

regulatory

agencies will be notified.

Revised 11/21/03

Literature Cited

Bureau of Indian Affairs. Executive Order Area

Summary Report Soils and Range Inventory of the 1882 (includes map atlas).

(Exclusive of District Six) Arizona

USDI, BIA Branch of Land Operations, Window Rock, Arizona.

1964.

Espey, Huston and Associates. Mines.

Soils Baseline Studies of the Black Mesa and Kayenta 1980.

EH&A Document No. 80187.

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality. Wyoming Wyoming. Department 1984. of Environmental

Guideline No. 1, Topsoil and Overburden. Land Quality Division, Cheyenne,

Quality,

Revised 11/21/03

LIST OF TABLES (CONT.)
Page

Table

14

Sample Adequacy Parameters for Production Samples from the Greasewood and Saltbush Shrublands 52

Table

15

Summary of the Major Vegetation Parameters from Samples Conducted in the Reclaimed Grasslands
58

Table

16

Range and Habitat Characteristics of Species Occurring on the Black Mesa Leasehold
66

Table

17

Known or Suspected Noxious and Poisonous Range Plants which Occur on the Black Mesa Leasehold
75

Table

18

Seasonal Livestock Carrying Capacity Figures for the Plant Communities Occurring on the Leasehold
79

Table

19

Estimated Life of Mine Disturbance Acreages for Native Vegetation Communities and Other Types in Life of Mine Coal Resource Areas (LOMCRA) and Reclamtion Status of Active Pit Coal Resource Areas as of 11/01/03

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 Attachment 2

Vegetation Survey Summary Reports Vegetation Sampling Program Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines

Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 Attachment 6

Ethnobotanical Information 1999 Baseline Vegetation Report, J23 Conveyor Alternatives, Black Mesa Mining Complex 1999 Baseline Vegetation Report, J9 Coal Resource Area and J9 Haul Road Corridor, Black Mesa Mining Complex 2003 Baseline Vegetation Sampling Report, Life of Mine Coal Resource Areas, Black Mesa Mining Complex (Includes N12/N99 North/South Study Area)

iii

Revised 11/21/03

CHAPTER 9

VEGETATION RESOURCES

Introduction

Peabody Coal Company's (PCC) Arizona Division operates two surface coal mines on the Black Mesa, Navajo County, Arizona. The Black Mesa and Kayenta mines are located on contiguous

leases totaling approximately 64,858 acres of Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservation land with an additional grant of easement right of way of 361 acres on Navajo land.

Peabody began an ongoing vegetation monitoring program in 1979. in consultation with the Office of Surface Mining Huston and Associates, Inc. (EHLA).

The program was designed

(OSM); the Navajo Tribe; and Espey,

The major objectives of the program were to develop

baseline vegetation information and to evaluate the progress and success of revegetation.

The initial baseline studies, completed in the fall of 1980, were conducted in the western and northeastern portions of the leasehold and included a two mile buffer area beyond the lease boundary (Figure 1). Quantitative and qualitative vegetation sampling and floristic

surveys were conducted by EH&A during October, 1979, and May, July and September, 1980. Thirteen stands of vegetation were quantitatively sampled including: (1) three stands of

pinyon-juniper woodland in coal resource areas (the N-7/8, N-10 and N-14 mlning areas); ( 2 ) two stands of pinyon-juniper woodland on reference areas (vicinity of the N-7/8 and N-14 mining areas); (3) three stands of sagebrush shrubland on coal resource areas (the 5-7, J1/N-6 and N-14 mining areas); (4) four stands of sagebrush shrubland on reference areas

(vicinity of the J-7, J-1/N-6, N-7/8 and N-14 mining areas; and (5) one stand of greasewood shrubland along the terrace at Moenkopi Wash. In addition, riparian strand, disturbed

areas, aquatic vegetation and plant communities occurring adjacent to the leasehold were described in qualitative terms. application package submitted The results of these studies were presented in a permit to regulatory authorities in January of 1981 (Volume 2,

Appendix 4, 1981-1985 Mining Plan).

Vegetation baseline

studies were

continued

in

1981 by

Peabody biologists

(Figure 1). mining

Additional baseline data was collected in the J-7, J-1/N-6, N-7/8, N-10 and N-14 areas previously sampled by EHLA. mining areas.

Baseline studies were started in the 5-16 and J-28

Ongoing monitoring was continued in the two pinyon-juniper woodland

1

Revised 11/21/03

pI. . .

&-s

............................L ...........

FIGURE 1 B l a c k Mesa L e a s e h o l d a n d V e g e t a t i o n S u r v e y A r e a s

and four sagebrush shrubland reference areas.

The first comprehensive studies of the

reclaimed vegetation were conducted in selected portions of the 5-3, J-7, J-27, J-1/N-6, N1 and N-2 mining areas. The results of these studies were reported to regulatory

authorities in the first annual vegetation and wildlife resources report (Arizona Division, Peabody Coal Company, 1982).

Vegetation baseline studies were completed in the J-16 and J-28 mining areas in the spring of 1982. In the fall of 1982, baseline studies were initiated in the then unpermitted This

southeastern portion of the leasehold referred to as the Mine Plan Modification Area. area included the contiguous J-19 through J-23 mining areas (Figure 1).

Ongoing monitoring

was continued in the reference areas and selected reclaimed portions of the J-7, J-27, J1/N-6, N-1 and N-2 mining areas. With the exception of the data collected in the Mine Plan

Modification Area, the results of these studies were reported in the Vegetation Resources 1982 Report (Arizona Division, Peabody Coal Company, 1983).

Vegetation baseline studies in the J-19 through 5-23 coal resource areas were completed during the spring of 1983. The results of these and the 1982 studies were submitted as
A major

part of a mine plan modification filed with regulatory authorities in July, 1983. ramification of that submittal was that sufficient baseline

studies were completed to

adequately characterize the pre-mining vegetation on the Black Mesa leasehold.

Six reference areas were established in 1979 and 1980 for use as revegetation standards.

success

Two were located in the pinyon-juniper woodland adjacent to the N-7/8 and N-14 Four were located in the sagebrush shrubland adjacent to the N-7/8, The reference area at the N-7/8 area included N-7/8 J-1/N-6 (140.8 (45.4

coal resource areas.

N-14, J-1/N-6 and 5-7 coal resource areas. both community types. acres), N-14 acres)

The size of the reference areas were as follows: (230.2 acres), N-14 Within sagebrush (31.7 acres),

pinyon-juniper

and J-7

(91.1 acres).

each reference areas, 0.1 acre exclosures were

established to monitor livestock grazing effects.

The 0.1 acre exclosures were expanded in 1982 such that each exceeded two acres in size. These expanded exclosures became the permanent reference areas and sampling was

discontinued in the larger unfenced areas. Stipulation #26 attached to Permit AZ-0001.

This measure was taken in response to Special At the same time, the J-1/N-6 reference area Sampling in the two

was redesignated as a back-up area and sampling was discontinued.

3

Revised 11/21/03

pinyon-juniper reference areas was discontinued following the end of the 1982 field season. This measure was taken based upon negotiations with regulatory authorities regarding the suitability of the woodland as a standard for revegetation success. The net result was

that revegetation success standards would be based upon the three remaining sagebrush shrubland reference areas. Each would represent the premining vegetation in a specific

region of the leasehold unless further studies identified new plant communities.

Ongoing monitoring of the vegetation in the reference areas and selected reclaimed units was continued in 1983 and 1984. tive annual resources reports The results of these studies were reported in the respec(Arizona Division, Peabody Coal Company, 1984 and 1985).

Since 1984, annual spring and fall monitoring of reclaimed areas and periodic spring and fall monitoring of reference areas has been conducted at the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines. The results of these monitoring and sampling efforts are included in annual reports

submitted to the regulatory authority.

The objective of this chapter is to provide vegetation maps, detailed descriptions of the plant communities, and all available data to better characterize and define the spatial and temporal variability of the vegetation resources within and surrounding the Black Mesa leasehold. collected This since necessitates 1979. The consolidation information of has vegetation been information reported that to has been

variously

regulatory

authorities in mining permit applications and annual reports designed to review the results of annual monitoring activities. as Attachment 1 to this chapter. Detailed vegetation survey summary reports are included Vegetation data summaries that were presented in annual

vegetation reports submitted to regulatory authorities are not presented in detail in this chapter but may be referenced. Additionally, vegetation studies were conducted in the 5-23

transportation corridors and the J-9 Coal Resource Area in 1999/2000 and the remaining Black Mesa leasehold life of mine coal resource areas (LOMCRA) in 2003. These latter

studies can be found in Attachments 4, 5, and 6 respectively.

The following sections present:

(1) a general description of the study area and review of

relevant literature; (2) a description of the vegetation sampling methods; and (3) results and discussion of the vegetation studies. Appropriate sections and attachments address the

significance of the pre-disturbance vegetation, important plant species, impact analysis, recommendations activities. for feasible mitigation and enhancement and continuing monitoring

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 18

Seasonal Livestock Carrying Capacity Figures for the Plant Communities Occurring on the ~easeholdl

Vegetation Community

Season

Livestock Carrying Capacity (ac. /AUM)

Pinyon-Juniper Woodland

Spring Fall

119.0 189.2 10.5

+

95.2 (Confidence Limit: t0.05(2), 4 229.4 (as above) 1.7 (Confidence Limit: t0.05(2), 8
=

=

2.776)

+

Sagebrush Shrubland

Spring Fall

+

2.306)

13.0 f 7.7 (as above) 9.6 5.7 2.5 4.2 4.2 (n=l) (n (n
= =

Greasewood Shrubland Saltbush Shrubland

Spring Spring Fall

3: s 2)

=

2.01)

Reclaimed Land

3

Spring Fall

-

Total usable forage is derived from Proper Use Factors for sheep (Attachment 2) . Livestock carrying capacity is expressed as acres required to support one animal unit for one month (Attachment 2). 3 Based on averaged historic reclaimed area monitoring data.

Revised 11/21/03

Impact Analysis

The scope of this analysis is limited to direct and indirect impacts on the biotic components of vegetation and wildlife. The approximate remaining acreages of each vegetation community to be

disturbed by mining activities on the Black Mesa leasehold are shown in Table 19.

Approximately 21,954 acres will be disturbed or redisturbed during the remaining life of mining activities on the leasehold. of pinyon-juniper woodland, The breakdown by native vegetation community type is 14,171 acres 5848 acres of sagebrush shrubland and 142 acres of saltbush An

shrubland, 28 acres of greasewood shrubland, and 3 acres

of tamarix

riparian strand.

additional 1762 acres of land disturbed prior to 2003 will be redisturbed, including an estimated 645 acres of reclaimed land in the J-1, J-3, N-2, N-6, N-10, and N-11 areas.

The loss of wildlife habitat may have varied impacts on wildlife populations. direct or indirect. breeding habitat.

The impacts may be

Removal of the vegetation will result in the direct loss of food, cover and Noise and related impacts associated with concentrated industrial activities in surrounding areas. Disturbance of the land surface and

will disturb sensitive wildlife

subsurface creates the potential for impacting surface and ground water quality and quantity, and may affect natural physical shelters.

Mobile wildlife species will not be as severely influenced by the disturbance as less mobile small mammals, strongly territorial birds, reptiles and amphibians. be expected to be extirpated in the disturbance area. The restricted species can

The larger and more mobile species will be

displaced into surrounding areas, temporarily creating increased competition for the available resources. If the surrounding areas are at or near carrying capacity, populations will be Displaced species which have the capacity to

stressed until a new equilibrium is reached.

exploit the habitat created by reclamation activities will repopulate developing reclaimed areas, particularly those species adapted to grass/shrubland habitats.

Overall,

the

fauna

in

the

lease

area

must

be

described

as

relatively

sparse;

apparently

attributable to habitat availability, quality, and condition.

The areas that will be disturbed

exhibit less value to wildlife in their present state than what would be expected under more pristine conditions. There are extensive tracts of the plant communities throughout the

southwestern United States, and since few, if any, vertebrates are wholly dependent upon them, the impact or manipulation of a small percentage can be viewed as negligible. or habitats of high quality will be disturbed. 80 Revised 11/21/03 No unique habitats

m

.4 CI -4
.rl

w
?

U U

m

2 U
0 4
P
X

z

a
W W

a, U U a ,

m

w
U

R

w

m
E
C
Ti

X

C

3

a
rl

m

m

a
U
W

w

a,

U

' ! t

m

4 U

X

2
1 U

The entire additional life-of-mine vegetation disturbance will result in the temporary loss of approximately 20,837 acres of native and reclaimed rangeland. On the basis of the carrying

capacity figures presented in the previous section, the remaining vegetation disturbance will result in the potential loss of approximately 609 animal unit months (AUMs) of grazing.

Revegetation and release of successfully reclaimed lands will compensate for the acreage loss during the life-of-mine. As of 11/01/03, 13,063 pre- and postlaw acres have been re,claimed at Based on an average reclaimed land stocking rate of 4.2

the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines.

ac/AUM, there are approximately 3,110 AUMs of grazing available in a normal precipitation year.

The

list of plant

species resulting from comprehensive floristic

surveys conducted on and

adjacent to the Black Mesa leasehold is presented in Table 1.

The list includes 278 species,

The importance of some of these species as cultural resources of the Navajo and Hopi (medicines, food, building materials, tools, ceremonial items, etc.) has been previously discussed.

Culturally significant plants are identified in plant lists that can be found in Attachment 3. Ninety-nine species, genera, or families are listed in the ethnobotanical information compiled by the Navajo Health Authority (79 listed species or genera plus an additional 20 species, genera, or families referenced in the narrative). A supplemental list, prepared by Peabody (Attachment

3), lists 19 additional species or genera that are known to have or are suspected to have ethnobotanical significance. See also Chapter 23 and Appendix B to Chapter 23 for additional

discussion regarding culturally significant plants.

Appendix

3

contains

118

species,

genera,

or

families

of

vascular

plants

that

are

of

ethnobotanical importance.

Several of these species, genera, and families need not be considered The result is a total of 77

in an impact analysis for reasons given in the following paragraphs.

species or genera, or approximately 28 percent of the plants found in the floristic surveys which could potentially be impacted by surface mining activities.

It is extremely unlikely that several of the species or genera contained in Attachment 3 will be impacted by surface mining activities on the basis that their regional distribution does not encompass the disturbance areas or they were not present in the comprehensive floristic surveys These species or genera may include: Mirabilis oxybaphoides Melilotus indica Salix laevigata (S. bonplandiana) Lupinus kingii Gaura coccinea Tribulus terrestris Eriogonum rotundifolium Marnrnillaria spp. Chenopodium

album

Senecio multicapitatus Echinocereus spp.

84

Revised 11/21/03

Several genera or species contained in Attachment 3 are not of concern in the analysis of impacts because no ethnobotanical uses are indicated or listed, or they are only mentioned narrative in disparaging terms. Symphoricarpus spp. Salsola kali -(=

in the

They are: Tamarix pentandra Opuntia phaecantha Echinocereus triglochidiates Sitanion hystrix Agropyron smithii

S. iberica)

Atriplex nuttallii Calochortus nuttallii Oxytropis spp.

Two species contained in Attachment 3 are not of concern in the analysis of impacts because the scientific names cannot be traced to any known synonyms in the Taxonomy of Arizona (Kearney and Peebles 1960; Lehr 1978). These species are Silene douglasii and Artemisia trifida.

Several species which occur on the leasehold are not of concern although the genera or one family to which they belong are listed as significant in Attachment 3. This assessment is based on

notations in the literature which mention ethnobotanical uses of certain species in the genera or family, but do not include the species found on the leasehold (Kearney and Peebles 1960). include (species represented on the leasehold are in parenthesis): Labiatae (Hedeoma drummondii; Moldavica parviflora) Asclepias spp. (A. asperula) Crypthantha spp. (C. bakeri; C. flavus) Panicum spp. ( . capillare) P These

It is highly unlikely that several of the species or genera contained in Attachment 3 will be impacted by surface mining activities because they are associated primarily or exclusively with plant communities that will not be disturbed. These plants include (plant communities in which

they occur are in parenthesis and correspond to the community codes in Table 1): Berberis repens (MC) Pinus ponderosa (MC) Pseudotsuga taxifolia
(=

Quercus gambelii (MCI Ribes cereum -menziesii; MC) (MC)

Typha spp. (A) Scirpus acutus (A)

Purshia tridentata (MC) Populus tremuloides (MC) Populus freemontii (TA)

-demissa Prunus -

(=

virginiana; DL)

- mays (cultivated) Zea

The impact of surface mining on the majority of the remaining 77 species or genera of concern can be viewed as negligible. The rationale for this assessment is that these species and genera are

85

Revised 11/21/03

of such common local and/or regional occurrence that the disturbance of the specifled acreages on which they occur will not substantially affect the supply Reports referenced or included herein). (see the Vegetation Survey Summary

In some cases, the abundance of a species lost to the and/or plantings used for for

mining disturbance is offset by its inclusion in the seed mixes revegetation purposes (see Chapter 2 3 ) ,

its use in revegetation trials with provisions

inclusion in the revegetation plan if successful, or its noted ability to reinvade the reclaimed lands. These species and genera include (asterisked species have or are being used in the

revegetation seed mixes and/or plantings): Chrysothamnus spp.*
C. - nauseosus

Opuntia spp.
0.

*
(=

whipplei

Aster leuceline

Leuceline ericoides)

Lappula redowski Amaranthus spp. Pinus edulis* --

Artemisia tridentata* Senecio spp. S. - longilobus
(=

& douglasii var. longilobus)

Plantago purshii Gilia - ( = Ipomopsis) aggregata Sporobolus cryptandrus* S. airoides* Oryzopsis hymenoides* Munroa squarrosa Hilaria jamesii* Brornus tectorum Boutelona gracilis* Stipa comata* Juniperus spp.* Lesquerella intermedia* Phorandendron spp.

Gutierrezia sarothrae Sarcobatus vermiculatus Chenopodium spp. Atriplex confertifolia*
A.

canescens*

Medicago falcata* Eriogonum spp.* Cowania mexicana* Penstemon barbatus* Lycium pallidum* Cleome serrulata* Sphaeralcea coccinea* Allium deserticola Penstemon eatoni* Yucca spp.
Y. angustissima*
(=

macropetalum)

Cymopterus glomerata Rhus trilobata* Lupinus spp. Descurainia spp. Ephedra viridis* Oxytropis lambertii Quercus gambelil*

(=

purpereus)

Y. baccata* -Hymenoxys acaulis* Suaeda torreyana Thelesperma spp.*

The impact of surface mining activities on the remaining 28 species or genera of ethnobotanical

86

Revised 11/21/03

concern

is somewhat difficult

to assess.

Impacts could

range

from slight

to

substantial

depending upon:

1) the local supply and demand for a given species; 2) the proximity of

substantial populations of a given species surrounding the leasehold that could not be quantified due to the scope of the vegetation baseline studies; 3 ) the willingness of residents to travel to obtain materials; 4) the emphasis placed on ethnobotanical plant materials in view of cultural changes occurring on the reservation; 5 ) substitution of functionally similar species when one is in short supply; and
6) the

success of mitigation measures

developed

for the resource.

A

discussion of mitigation for the loss of these cultural resources is included in the following section.

Mitigation, ~nhancementand Monitoring

Direct and indirect measures for protecting vegetation and wildlife values with regard to the impact mechanisms discussed in the previous section are incorporated into all pertinent aspects of the permit application package. These measures include procedures for identifying, reducing

and/or preventing air and surface or groundwater contamination, vegetation and soil loss, solid waste contamination, vegetation and soil loss, solid waste contamination, range and coal fires and noise. These activities are the best currently available practices for protecting wildlife

and vegetation values.

Peabody Western Coal Company has stressed the importance of an effective revegetation plan to minimize the impact to wildlife from the land surface disturbances. outlined in Chapter 23. The revegetation plan is

The plan is designed to optimize revegetation for the postmining land

uses of livestock grazing and wildlife habitat (refer to Chapter 14 for a complete discussion of Land Use). Proposed habitat protection and enhancement procedures which are designed to mitigate

unavoidable disturbances are also incorporated into the plan.

In order to better understand

the effects of surface mining

on the biota within the lease

boundary and to evaluate the effectiveness of enhancement procedures, the Arizona Division has instituted an annual biologic monitoring program. basis and presented to the regulatory authority Biological data is collected during the second quarter on an annual following the

completion of the annual studies.

The methods for collecting the data follow those used to

collect the current baseline information.

Possible impacts to specified ethnobotanical resources were identified in the previous section.

87

Revised 11/21/03

A portion of these impacts will be mitigated through the use of selected culturally significant species in the revegetation seed mixes and plantings (Chapter 23). These species were selected

for use in the revegetation program because of a high likelihood of successful establishment, compatibility with the postmining land use, benefits to wildlife, and cultural benefits. following species are included in seeding and planting mixes and have been The

successfully

established to varying degrees in reclaimed areas : Bouteloua gracilis (Blue Grama) Hilaria jarnesii (Galleta) Sporobolus cryptandrus (Sand Dropseed) Sporobolus airoides (Alkali Sacaton) Sphaeralcea ambigua ( ~ e s e r t Globemallow) Agropyron smithii (Western Wheatgrass) Linum lewisii -- (Lewis Flax) Medicago falcata (Alfalfa-prostrate) Cleome serrulata (Rocky Mt. Bee Plant) Oryzopsis hymenoides (Indian Ricegrass) Atriplex canescens (Fourwing Saltbush) Atriplex confertifolia (Shadscale) Eurotia- lanata (Winterfat) Calochortus nutallii (Sego Lily) Eriogonum alatum (Tall Wildbuckwheat) Eriogonum umbellatum (Sulfur Wildbuckwheat) Gaillardia pinnatifida (Blanketflower) Grindelia aphanactis (Rayless Gurnweed) Helianthus annuus (Annual Sunflower) Hymenoxys acaulis (Stemless Bitterweed) Chrysothamnus nauseosus (Rubber Rabbitbrush) Artemisia tridentata (Big Sagebrush) Juniperus osteosperma (Utah Juniper) Astragalus calycosus v. scapiosus (Torrey Milkvetch) Pinus edulis -- (Colorado Pinyon) Astragalus wingatanus (Ft. Wingate Milkvetch) Cowania mexicana (Cliffrose) Castilleja chromosa (Desert Paintbrush) Castilleja linariaefolia (Wyoming Paintbrush) Cryptantha flavoculata (Roughened Cryptantha) Happlopappus armerioides (Thrifty Goldenweed) Linum lewisii -- (Blue Flax) Lithospermum mult~florum (Manyflower grornwell) Mirabilis multiflora (Colorado Four O'clock) Sphaeralcea ambigua (Desert Globemallow) Sphaeralcea parvifolia (Littleleaf Globemallow) Thelesperma megapotamicum (Indian Tea Greenthread) Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus (Rabbitbrush) Fendlera rupicola (Cliff Fendlerbush) Fallugia paradoxa (Apache Plume)

Hymenoxys richardsonii (Colorado Rubberweed) Lycium pallidum (Wolfberry) Lesquerella intermedia (Bladderpod) Penstemon barbatus (Scarlet Bugler) Pensternon eatonii (Firecracker Penstemon) Penstemon linarioides (Mat Penstemon) Petalostemon candidum (White Prairieclover) Artemisia frigida (Fringed Sage) Ehedra viridis -- (Green Mormon Tea) Quercus gambelii (Gambel Oak) Rhus trilobata (Skunkbush Sumac) Shepherdia rotundifolia (Roundleaf Buffaloberry) Yucca angustissima (Narrowleaf Yucca) Yucca -baccata (Bananaleaf Yucca) Cercocarpus montanus (Mountain Mahogany) Populus fremontii (Fremont Cottonwood)

Additional mitigation for the impacts on ethnobotanical resources will be partially accomplished

88

Revised 11/21/03

by the direct respreading of topsoil materials ("live" topsoiling) and the natural reinvasion of the reclaimed areas by species native to the leasehold. growth materials as often as is feasible (Chapter 22). Peabody intends to direct haul plant Care is taken to redistribute surface

lifts back on the surface of regraded spoils to conserve the seed bank that exists near the surface of the natural soils. This practice and the probable reinvasion of certain species is Species

contributing to the reintroduction of species which are or are not intentionally seeded. of ethnobotanical significance that have occurred in quantitative vegetation reclaimed areas or were noted as incidentals include: Chrysothamnus nauseosus Luecelene ericoides Artemisia tridentata Senecio douglasii var. longilobus Gutierrizia sarothrae Sarcobatus vermiculatus Circium vulgare Echinochloa crusgalli Sporobolus airoides Plantago purshii Sphaeralcea coccinea Opuntia spp. Bromus tectorum Descurainia spp. Setaria viridis -Amaranthus spp. Helianthus petiolaris Munroa squarrosa Lupinus brevicaulis Allium macropetalum

samples in the

Several additional ethnobotanically significant species have been or will be used in revegetation trials (Chapter 23). For example, successful plantings of barnyard grass (Echinochloa

crusgalli), Fremont cottonwood internally draining ponds.

(Populus fremontii), and Typha have been made around approved

In addition, the Revegetation Plan contains provisions to screen the Chrysothamnus spp., Sarcobatus vermiculatus,

following ethnobotanically significant species:

Ephedra viridis, Lycium pallidum, Purshia tridentata, Tamarix pentandra, Berberis repens, Quercus gambelli, Eriogonum spp., and Symphoricarpus spp. These trials will be continued depending upon Provisions are included in

the availability of commercial sources of improved plant materials.

the revegetation trials to incorporate successfully screened species into the revegetation plan either for general or site-specific use.

Certain important factors preclude the mitigation

for certain culturally

significant plants. For example, These

First, a large number of species are not adapted to the reclaimed environment.

several plants that occur in the pinyon-juniper woodland require shallow, rocky soils.

conditions are typically not present on reclaimed sites by virtue of the reclamation methods employed. Second, commercial sources of improved plant materials are lacking for most of the

89

Revised 11/21/03

culturally significant plants discussed herein. morphological problems which have precluded

Many undoubtedly possess difficult dormancy or their selection for improvement or development.

Third, several of the culturally significant plants that have been discussed are undesirable for use in the revegetation process because of direct conflicts with postmining land uses. this last category include weeds pinnata; Castilleja chromosa). (e.g., Cirsium spp.) and poisonous plants
(e.g.,

Plants in Stanleya

Finally, information regarding the degree of utilization (if any)

and the specific species used by residents on the leasehold has not been made available to Peabody.

Literature Cited

Arizona Division, PCC. Mines.

Vegetation and Wildlife Resources 1981 Report:

Black Mesa and Kayenta

Report prepared for: 1982.

USDI, Office of Surface Mining, Western Technical Center, Denver,

Colorado.

Arizona Division, PCC. Report prepared 1983. for:

Vegetation USDI, Office

Resources 1982 Report:

Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines. Technical Center, Denver,

of Surface Mining, Western

Colorado.

Arizona Division, PCC. Mines.

Vegetation and Wildlife Resources 1983 Report:

Black Mesa and Kayenta

Report prepared for: 1984.

USDI, Office of Surface Mining, Western Technical Center, Denver,

Colorado.

Arizona Division, PCC. Mines.

Vegetation and Wildlife Resources 1984 Report:

Black Mesa and Kayenta

Report prepared for: 1985.

USDI, Office of Surface Mining, Western Technical Center, Denver,

Colorado.

Beath,

O.A.,

Gilbert,

C.S. and

Eppson

H.F.

"The Use

of

Indicator

Plants

in

Locating

Seleniferous Areas in Western United States," Part 111. Botany 27:564-573. 1940.

Further studies.

American Journal of

Beetle, A.A.

"A Study of Sagebrush:

The Section Tridentatae of Artemisia." Bulletin No. 36, pp. 1-83. 1960.

University

of

Wyoming Agriculture Experimental Station

Brown, D.E.

"Great Basin Conlfer Woodland".

In Biotic Communities of the American Southwest

-

United States and Mexico.

Ed. D.E. Brown, Desert Plants (special issue).

University Arizona. 1982.

Press for the Boyce Thompson Southwestern Arboretum, Tucson, 4(1-4) pp. 52-57. 90

Revised 11/21/03

Brown, J.G. and J.H. Eychaner.

1988.

Simulation of five groundwater withdrawal projections U.S. Geological Survey

for the Black Mesa area, Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations, Arizona: Water Resources Investigations Report 88-4000, 51 p.

Bureau of Indian Affairs. Area

Summary Report Soils and Range Inventory of the 1882 Executive Order (includes map atlas).

(Exclusive of District Six) Arizona 1964.

w,

BIA Branch of Land

Operations, Window Rock, Arizona.

Bureau of Indian Affairs. (un-numbered). 1978.

Range Survey of Black Mesa Peabody Coal Company Leases.

USDI, BIA - -

Clary, W.P.

"Present and Future Multiple A Symposium.

Use

Demands

on the Pinyon-Juniper Type". 1975.

In

The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem:

Utah State University, Logan, pp. 19-24.

Darling, M.S.

Structure and Productivity of a Pinyon-Juniper Woodland in Northern Arizona. 1966.

Ph.D. Dissertation, Duke University, Durham, N.C.

Dayton, W.A.

"Important Western Browse Plants."

USDA Misc. Publication No. 101, 1931

Dayton, W.A.

"Notes on Western Range Forbs: 1961.

Equisetaceae Through Fumariaceae."

USDA Forest

Service Agricultural Handbook.

Green, B.B.

Regional Studies Program - Biological Aspects of Surface Coal Mine Reclamation, Argonne National Lab, Argonne, Illinois. 1976.

Black Mesa and San Juan Basin.

Green, B.B. and J.R. LeFevers. Illinois. 1975.

Biomass Study - Black Mesa.

Argonne National Lab, Argonne,

Hicks,

O.N.

"Vegetation."

In

Regional

Hydrogeology

of

the

Navajo

and

Hopi

Indian

Reservations, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah.

Geological Survey Professional Paper 521-A. 1969.

House, D.E. "Recovery Plan for Navajo Sedge Publication No. 90/8980166.

(Carex specuicola) J.T. Howell".

USFWS Misc.

Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1987.

Humphrey, R.R.

Arizona Range Grasses.

University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

1970.

91

Revised 11/21/03

Jameson, D.A., Williams, J. A. and E.W. Wilton. Arizona." Ecology 43(3):403-410. 1962.

"Vegetation and Soils of Fishtail Mesa,

Johnson,

C.M.

"Pinyon-Juniper

Forests:

Asset

or

Liability".

In 1975.

The

Pinyon-Juniper

Ecosystems:

A Symposium.

Utah State University, Logan, pp. 121-124.

Judd, B.I.

"Principle Forage Plants of Southwestern Ranges." 1962.

USDA, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Forest and Range Experimental Station Paper No. 69.

Kearney, T.H. and Peebles, R.H. Berkeley. 1960.

Arizona Flora 2nd ed.

The University of California Press,

Kingsbury, J.M. Cliffs, N.J.

Poisonous Plants of the United States and Canada.

Prentice-Hall, Englewood

1964.

Kuchler, A.W.

Potential Natural Vegetation of the Conterminous United States. 1964.

American Geog.

Society. Special Publication No. 36.

Layhe, R., et al. Season.

The Black Mesa Archaeological Project: of Anthropology, 1976. Archaeol. Serv.

A Preliminary Report for the Rep. No. 48, Southern

17 95

Department

Illinois

University, Carbondale.

LeBaron, A.

Estimating

Profits From Sales of Pinyon-Juniper Products. 1968

Utah Agricultural

Experimental Station Resource Series 43.

Lehr, J.H.

A Catalogue of the Flora of Arizona.

Northland Press, Flagstaff, Arizona.

1978.

Long, S.G.

Characteristics of Plants Used in Western Reclamation. 1978.

Environmental Research and

Technology, Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado.

Lowe, C.H.

The Vertebrates of Arizona.

University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

1964

Minckley, W.L. and Brown, D.E. Southwest
-

"Wetlands", Part 6.

In Biotic Communities of the American Desert Plants. (special issue).

.

United States and Mexico.

Ed. D. E. Brown.

University of Arizona Press for the Boyce Thompson Southwestern Arboretum, Tucson, 4(1-4), pp. 223-287. 1982. 92 Revised 11/21/03

Papadopulos, S.S. and Associates, Inc.

1993.

Navajo Aquifer Water Study Final Report.

Report

prepared for the Hopi Tribe, the Navajo Nation, and Peabody Western Coal Company.

Parker, K.F. 1972.

An Illustrated Guide to Arizona Weeds.

University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Parker, K.G.

Some Important Utah Range Plants.

Cooperative Extension Service, Utah State

University, Logan.

Plummer, A.P., Christensen and S.B. Monsen.

Restoring Big Game Range in Utah. 1968.

Utah Division

of Fish and Game, Utah Publication No. 68-3, Salt Lake City.

Rand, P.M.

Factors Related to the Distribution of Ponderosa Pine and Pinyon Pines at Grand Ph.D. dissertation, Duke University, Durham, N.C. 1965.

Canyon, Arizona."

Sampson, A.W.

Native American Forage Plants.

John Wiley

&

Sons, Inc., New York.

1924

Schmutz, E.M., Freeman, B.M. and R.E. Reed. of Arizona Press, Tucson. 1968.

Livestock Poisoning Plants of Arizona.

University

Schmutz, E.M., Michaels, C.C. and B.I. Judd. Grand Canyon, Arizona."

"Boysag Point, A Relect Area on the North Rim of 20(6):363-369. 1967.

Journal of Range Manaqement.

Stoddard, L.A., and Smith, A.D.

Range Management.

McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. 1955

Thornburg, Regions."

A.A.

"Plant Materials

for Use

on

Surface-Mined

Lands 1982.

in Arid

and

Semi-arid

USDA, Soil Conservation Service, Technical Paper 157.

Turner, R.M.

"Great Basin Desertscrub."

In Biotic Communities of the American (special issue).

Southwest

United States and Mexico.

Ed. D. E. Brown, Desert Plants

University of 1982.

Arizona Press for the Boyce Thompson Southwestern Arboretum, Tucson, 4(1-4):145-155.

USDA, Forest Service. 1937.

Range Plant Handbook.

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Revised 11/21/03

USDI, Fish and Wildlife Service. 17.12 (Special Reprint).

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. 50CFR17.11 and 1992.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 20240.

Vallentine, J.F. Utah. 1971.

Range Developments and Improvements.

Brigham Young University Press, Provo,

Van De-Puy, M.

Reference Area Selection and Spring Sampling Results. n.p. 1978.

Preliminary Report to

Peabody Coal Company:

Vories, K.C. and Sims, P.L.

"The Plant Information Network"; Vol. 1. 1977.

A Users Guide.

FWS/OBS-

77/38, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Wasser, C.H. the West.

Ecoloqy and Culture of Selected Species Useful in Revegetating Disturbed Lands in 1982.

FWS/OBS-82/56, Fort Collins, Colorado.

West, N.E.

"Basic Synecological Relationships of Sagebrush-Dominated Lands in the Great Basin In The Sagebrush Ecosystem:
A Symposium.

and the Colorado Plateau." Logan, pp. 33-41. 1979.

Utah State University,

West, N.E. Rea, K.H. and R.J. Tuasch. Woodlands." 41-52. 1975.

"Basic Synecological Relationships in Juniper-Pinyon A Symposium. Utah State University, Logan, pp.

In The Pinyon-Juniper Ecosystem:

Woodbury, A.M. 28:113-126.

"Distribution of Pigmy Conifers in Utah and Northeastern Arizona."

Ecology

1947.

Revised 11/21/03

Attachment 4

1999 Baseline Vegetation Report J23 Conveyor Alternatives Black Mesa Mining Complex

1999 Baseline Vegetation Report J23 Conveyor Alternatives Black Mesa Mining Complex

September 2000

Prepared by:

ESCO Associates Inc. P.O. Box 18775 Boulder, Colorado 80308 and Peabody Western Coal Company Black Mesa Mine P.O. Box 650 Kayenta, AZ 86033

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species .............................................................. 1 Navajo Endangered Species List (NESL)..................................................................... 2 METHODS...................................................................................................................... 2 Sensitive Plant SurveysISpecies Lists ........................................................................ 2 Plant Species Listing........................................................................................... 3 Assessment of Comparability of Project Area Vegetation to Permit Area Vegetation ..... 3 RESULTSIDISCUSSION................................................................................................4 Rare Plants ....................................................................................................................4 USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species Included in Survey ................................4 Navajo Endangered Species (NDFW 1997 and NDFW 2000) Included in Survey..........5 Community Comparability .............................................................................................. 7 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................
8

LITERATURE CITED ...................................................................................................... 9

LlST OF APPENDlClES Appendix 1 Species Tables Table
1. 2. 3. Plant Species Listed by USFWS and NDFW Sought During Surveys of J23 Conveyor Alternatives, Fall 1999 and Spring 2000 Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities (Fall 1999) Species Present In Corridor Alternative (Spring 2000)

-

Appendix 2 Representative Photos of Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities Appendix 3 - Field Guide to Target Species in the 523 Project Area LlST OF MAPS
Drawing No. 85320D J23 Vegetation Project Area and Plant Community Distribution Map.

-

INTRODUCTION In October 1999 ESCO Associates Inc. (ESCO) was directed by Peabody Western Coal

Company (PWCC) to conduct a baseline vegetation study of the J23 Conveyor Alternative Routes (Project Area). The Project Area lies in the southcentral portion of the existing Black Mesa Mining Complex leasehold (leasehold) in northeastern Arizona. The vegetation resources in the Project Area are similar to those described in previous baseline studies conducted in and adjacent to the leasehold (Peabody Coal Company, 1985). They consist of a mosaic of sagebrush and pinyon-juniper vegetation communities at approximately 6800 ft. elevation. Study objectives included a sensitive plant survey, documentation of all plant species encountered, verification of previous vegetation community mapping, and verification of the similarity of the vegetation in the Project Area to the vegetation documented in previous studies using the established sagebrush and pinyon-juniper reference areas. The Project Area was surveyed in October 1999 as well as in May 2000 to cover phenologic variability of target species. Both rare species identified by the U.S. federal government under provsions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and those similarly identified by the Navajo Nation pusuant to Title 178507 of Navajo Nation Code of the Navajo Nation Councils Resource Committee (Resolution RCF-

USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species

The federal definition of an endangered species is any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range (other than a species of the Class lnsecta as determined by the Secretary to constitute a pest whose protection under the provisions of The Endangered Species Act of 1973 would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man). The federal definition of a threatened species is any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range, as determined by the Secretary.

Navaio Endanaered Species List (NESL1

The following definitions are taken from the Navajo Endangered Species List ((NESL) issued by the Navajo Nation Department of Fish and Wildlife-NDFW 1997and NDFW 2000). Group 1 (GI): "Extirpated" (i.e. extinct within a part of a species range) - Those species or subspecies that no longer occur on the Navajo Nation. Group 2 (G2): "Endangered" - Any species or subspecies which is in danger of being eliminated from all or a significant portion of its range on the Navajo Nation. Group 3 (G3): "Threatened" - Any species or subspecies which is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future, throughout all or a significant portion of its range on the Navajo Nation. Group 4 (G4): "Candidate" - Any species or subspecies for which the Navajo Fish & Wildlife Department does not currently have sufficient information to support their listing as G2 or G3 but has reason to consider them. The NDFW is actively seeking information to determine if they warrant inclusion in a different group or removal from the list. They are not protected under Tribal Code but should be considered in project planning.

METHODS

Sensitive Plant SurveyslSpecies Lists

The list of sensitive plants searched for during the field survey was compiled from United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listings as well as those provided by NDFW (1997). Plants listed as "threatened" or "endangered" by USFWS under the Endangered Species Act, as well as those listed by NDFW in Groups one through four were included in the survey (Table 1). Because both the NDFW and the USFWS Region 2 lists included species with habitat requirements not found in the Project Area as well as species known only from disjunct geographic areas, a literature review was conducted to identify species with a reasonable probability of occurrence. McDougal (1973) as well as Atwood et. al. (1991), Cronquist et. al. (1977), Benson (1969), Bureau of Land Management (1995), and Spackman et. al. (1997) were

used for species-specific ecological information. These references were also used to construct a site-specific field guide (Appendix 3). Subsequent to the field surveys, an amended list of endangered species was produced by the Navajo Nation (NDFW, 2000). Species from the expanded list are noted. Using maps provided by PWCC and plotted over a photographic base with Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) waypoints (Drawing I ) , ESCO personnel walked the entire length of the Project Area. During this pedestrian survey, investigators, walking three or four abreast, searched for evidence of the species listed in Table 1. The teams proceeded along the disturbance area following a zigzag pattern and noted all species encountered. Separate species lists were generated for the sagebrush and pinyon-juniper communities during the fall 1999 survey (Table 2). During the spring 2000 surveys, species lists were compiled (Table 3). Hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) units were used to ensure the teams maintained proper location and bearing throughout the survey. Would any species of concern have been identified, these units would also have been important in accurately mapping plant species' locations.
Plant Species Listing

Scientific names follow McDougall (1973) where applicable. In cases where scientific names were not found here, nomenclature used by the listing agency (USFWS and NDFW) were used; common names cited may be found in Beetle (1970), Nickerson et. al. (1976), or Soil Conservation Service (1979).
Assessment of Comparabilitv of Proiect Area Veqetation to Permit Area Veqetation

During the course of the survey, the team leader assessed the comparability of the sagebrush and pinyon-juniper community types to those types within the present Black Mesa permit areas and especially the existing reference areas. This was done via qualitative consideration of total vegetation cover, species composition, slope and aspect (exposure), as well as variation of soil depth and texture. The plant communities of the Project Area had been mapped previously, but given the new photobase used to place community delineation lines, boundaries were checked and realigned slightly (Drawing 1).

Rare Plants

Of the ten species identified in Table 1, none were found in the Project Area; although certain species could reasonably be expected to occur based on previous site collection information. None of the rare species identified in Table 1 were encountered. Narrowly defined habitats such as hanging garden seeps or limestone outcrops that are required by some of these plants were likewise not found.
USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species Included in Survey

Sentry milkvetch (Astragalus cremnophylax var. cremnophylax), Mancos milkvetch (Astragalus humillimus), giant claret cup hedgehog (Echinocereus trigloghidiatus var. arizonica), and Brady's pincushion cactus (Pediocactus brady~] listed as endangered under the Endangered are Species Act (ESA). None of the species were observed in the Project Area, and would not be expected to occur based on habitat requirements.
Sentry milkvetch, known only from the type locality near the south rim of the Grand Canyon at

approximately 7000 ft. elevation, grows on limestone pavement. No limestone derived substrate occurs in the Project Area.
Mancos milkvetch occurs in cracks of Point Lookout Sandstone of the Mesa Verde Group

between 5000 and 6500 ft. No such formations occur in the Project Area.
Giant claret-cup hedgehog, known from oak woodland and chaparral communities in southern

Arizona near the border of Gila and Pinal counties, was not encountered. The closely related Mojave claret-cup (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. mojavensis) was fairly common throughout the pinyon-juniper community.
Brady's pincushion cactus, known only from the type locality in Marble Canyon at

approximately 4000 ft., was not observed. No other Pediocactus species were observed.

Navajo sedge (Carex specuicola) is threatened and grows exclusively in "hanging gardens"
(densely vegetated seeps found in rock outcrops in the Southwestern deserts). No such environments occur in the Project Area.

Navajo Endanqered Species (NDFW 1997 and NDFW 2000) Included in Survey
Group G I No plants from this group were considered as having a potential for occurrences in the Project Area. Group G2

Parish's alkali grass (Puccinellia parishi11grows in alkaline seeps or flats in drainage bottoms.
No such vegetated areas were encountered during the survey. One small, bare, moist area with white crusting indicative of an alkaline environment was observed on a shale outcrop. Group G3

Cutler's milkvetch (Astragalus preussii var. cutleri), an endemic of San Juan county, Utah,
occurs in desert shrub communities at approximately 3800 ft., considerably below the elevation of the Project Area. Nonetheless, it was deemed that this species could potentially be present in the Project Area for purposes of this survey. Four other milkvetches were observed during the survey (A. wingatanus, A. calycosus, A. praelongus, and A. crassicarpus).

Fickeison plains cactus (Pediocactus peevlesianus var. fickeisoniae) is known from northern
Coconino and Mojave counties and was deemed to have some possibility of occurrence in the Project Area. Group G4

Desert columbine (Aquilegia desertorurn) occurs at elevations from 6800 to 8000 ft and is
known only from the northern Arizona counties of Coconino and Navajo. No columbines were observed. Although the Project Area is somewhat below this plant's elevational range, it was deemed to have some possibility of occurrence in the Project Area.

Naturita milkvetch (Astragalus naturitenses) is known from southwestern Colorado and
McKinley County, New Mexico. It occurs on sandstone ledges in the pinyon-juniper community

and along canyon rimrock between 5400 and 6200 ft. of elevation. This species is spring flowering and was deemed to have some possibility of occurrence in the Project Area.

Navaio Endanqered Species List (NDFW, 2000) Additional Species Considered
The following species are additional species present in the expanded Navajo Endangered Species List (NDFW, 2000) that were considered after the field surveys had been completed.

Acoma Fleabane (Erigeron acomanus) is found on sandy slopes beneath cliffs of Entrada
sandstone in McKinley County, New Mexico. Entrada sandstone is not present in the Project Area which is also a substantial distance from its occurrence in New Mexico.

Alcove Bog-Orchid (Platanthera zothecina) is found in seeps associated with hanging gardens
and moist stream sites in Northern Arizona, Utah, and Colorado. No hanging garden habitats occur within the Project Area.

Alcove Rock Daisy (Perityle specuicola) is found in Hanging Gardens in Grand and San Juan
Counties, Utah at elevations between 3,690 and 4,000 ft. The Project Area is more than 2,000 feet higher and no hanging garden habitats area present, so its occurrence there is thought extremely unlikely.

Bluff Phacelia (Phacelia indecora) is known to occur in salt desert scrub vegetation at 4,490 ft.
in San Juan County, Utah. The difference in elevations of the Project Area and vegetation along with the wide geographic separation make this plant extremely unlikely in the Project Area.

Gooding's Onion (Allium goodingii), occurs in neighboring Apache County, but at much higher
elevation (9,000 to 9,500 ft).

Navajo Bladderpod (Lesquerella navajoensis) is known to occur near Thoreau, New Mexico on
Todilto limestone. The dissmilar geology and great distance from the Project Area make this species extremely unlikely to occur in the Project Area.

Navajo Mountain Penstemon (Penstemon navajoa) occurs in San Juan County, Utah at
elevations between 8,200 and 10,370 ft. amdist ponderosa pine, aspen, and Douglas-fir forests. In addition to occuring at substantially higher elevations than occur in the Project Area, the moisture conditions implicit in the listed vegetation types are not duplicated anywhere in the Project Area.

Mesa Verde Cactus (Sclerocactus mesa-verdae) is found in salt desert scrub communities in
the Fruitland and Mancos shale formation in San Juan County, New Mexico and Montezuma County, Colorado. The geology of the Project Area does not include such materials and the vegetation is not salt desert scrub, so the occurrence of this species was deemed extremely unlikely.
San Juan Milkweed (Asclepias sanjuanensis) is known to occur in Great Basin Grasslands and

Pinyon Juniper Woodlands between 5,000 and 6,000 ft. It is very similar (if not synonymous) to A. ruthiae, a species previously studied in Utah by the surveyor. None were found during field searches in the Project Area.

Tuba City Milkvetch (Astragalus sophoroides) occurs in eastern Cocconino County, Arizona
between Cameron and The Gap. Information available from the herbarium of Northern Arizona University indicates that the potential distribution of the species is from Leupp to Cameron along the Little Colorado River and then north to The Gap across the Painted Desert. Although the lower reaches of Moenkopi Wash are included in this area, the upper reaches present in the Project Area are more than 30 miles east and approximately 2,000 feet higher than its known occurrences.

Community Comparability For purposes of assessing the similarity of the Project Area vegetation to that described in
previous studies, the sagebrush and pinyon-juniper communities found within the Project Area were determined to be comparable to reference areas previously established at the Black Mesa Mining Complex (J7RASAGE, N7/8RASAGE, N7/8RAPJUN1N14RASAGE, and N14RAPJUN). While no quantitative cover data were collected during the assessment of comparability, it is ESCO1sopinion, based on ocular estimate, that total vegetation cover in the Project Area approximates that measured in the reference areas in 1999 and that vegetation is representative of regional sagebrush and pinyon-juniper communities in the existing permit

Total vegetation cover averaged 33.2 percent in the J7, N718, and N14 sagebrush reference areas. Total vegetation cover, including canopy cover, in the N718 and N14 pinyon-juniper reference areas averaged 31.8 percent; 12.7 percent was the average vegetation cover excluding canopy cover (ESCO 2000). During fall 1999 monitoring of the reference areas, 113 species were observed; 112 species were found in the Project Area (Table 2). While individual life forms' species composition varied somewhat between the Project Area and the reference areas, they were quite similar overall. Soils of the Project Area were generally shallow, sandy, and rocky (coarse fragments greater than 10 percent) in the pinyon-juniper community, and relatively deep, finer-grained, and less rocky (coarse fragments approximately 10 percent or less) in the sagebrush community. The pinyon-juniper soils are derived primarily from sandstone, while those in the sagebrush community are derived from a mixture of sandstone and shale-derived alluvium, colluvium and loess. A similar situation is present in the reference areas as well as the regional vegetation in the existing permit area.

CONCLUSION None of the listed species were observed in the Project Area during either the October 1999 or the May 2000 surveys. Of the narrow habitat requirements associated with any of the listed species; none were found (i.e. hanging gardens or specific geologic strata). The sagebrush and pinyon-juniper communities found in the Project Area are comparable in total vegetation cover, species composition, slope, aspect, and soil type, depth and texture to those of the existing permit area and region. The existing reference areas will provide an adequate standard against which reclamationlrevegetation success can be evaluated.

LITERATURE CITED
Atwood, D.M., J. Holland, R. Bolander, B. Franklin, D.E. House, L. Armstrong, K. Thorne, and L. England. 1991. Utah Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant Field Guide. U.S. Forest Service lntermountain region, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Utah Natural Heritage Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency, Navajo Nation, and Skull Valley Goshute Tribe. Beetle, A.A. 1970. Recommended Plant Names. Univ. Wyo. Agr. Expt. Stn. Res. Journal 31, Laramie. Benson, L.B. 1969. The cacti of Arizona. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ. 218 p. Bureau of Land Management. 1995. Endangered, Threatened and Sensitive Plant Field Guide, Farmington District, New Mexico. Prepared by Ecosphere Environmental Services, Inc., Farmington, NM. Cronquist, A., A.H. Holmgren, N.J. Holmgren, J.L. Reval and P.K. Holmgren. 1977. lntermountain Flora Vascular Plants of the lntermountain West, U.S.A.: Vol. 6. York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. ESCO Associates Inc. 2000. 1999 Annual Vegetation Monitoring Report, Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines. Prepared for Peabody Western Coal Company, Flagstaff, AZ. McDougal, W.B. 1973. Seed Plants of Northern Arizona. The Museum of Northern Arizona. Flagstaff. 594 p. Navajo Nation Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1997. Navajo Endangered Species List. Produced under authority of 17NNCs507. Navajo Nation Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2000. Navajo Endangered Species List. Produced under authority of 17NNCs507. Nickerson, M.F., G.E. Brink, and C. Feddema. 1976. Principal Range Plants of the New

Central and Southern Rocky Mountains: Names and Symbols. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rept. RM-20. Peabody Coal Company. 1985. Mining and Reclamation Plan - Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines. Prepared for USDOI, Office of Surface Mining. Denver, Colorado. SCS U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1979. Common Plant Names list and Scientific Plant Names List. Exhibit 407.1 (a)(6), National Soils Handbook Part It, USDA, Washington, D.C. Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado Rare Plant Field Guide. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program.

APPENDIX 1 Species Tables

Table . . Plant Species Listed by USFWS and NDFW Sought During Surve) _ ~f J23 Conveyor Alternatives, Fall 1999 and Spring 2000, Black Me- Aine Complex, PWCC

Scientific Name
Native Perennial Forbs desert columbine Aquilegia desertorum Astragalus cremnophylax var. cremnophylax sentry milkvetch Astragalus humillimus Mancos milkvetch Naturia milkvetch Astragalus naturitensis Astragalus preussii var. cutleri Cutler's milkvetch Native Perennial Cool-Season Grass and Grass-like Plants Navajo sedge Carex specuicola Parish's alkali arass Puccinellia ~ a r i s h i i Succulents Echinocereus triglochidiatus var.arizonica giant claret-cup hedgehog Pediocactus peeblesianus var. fickeisoniae Fickeison plains cactus Pediocacuts bradyi Brady's pincushion cactus
-

Common Name

Status

G4 Endangered Endangered G4 G3

Threatened G2 Endangered G3 Endangered

Table 2. Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
Scientific Name Synonym amaranth pigweed MACHAERANTHERA CANESCENS hoary tansyaster Fremont aoosefoot raaleaf aoosefoot narrowleaf aoosefoot wavyleaf thistle Rocky Mountain bee plant pinnate tansy-mustard fetid marigold
--

-

Page 1 of 5

Fall 1999

Common Name

I
I
X

Pinyon-juniper Sagebrusi-

NATIVE ANNUAL 8 BIENNIAL FORBS Amaranthus retroflexus
Aster canescens Chenooodiurn fremontii Chenooodium araveolens Cheno~odium e ~ t o ~ h v ~ u m l Cirsium undulatum Cleome serrulata Descurainia pinnata Dyssodia papposa Erioaonum cernuum Erioaonum rotundifolium lpomopsis aggregata Mentzelia nuda Portulaca oleracea Townsendia incana NUTTALLIA NUDA

I
X

I

X X

I I

I

X

I
X X X

x
X

noddina e r i o a o n u y l wild buckwheat skyrocket gilia blazing star common purslane townsendia X

1

x
X X

1

X

INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS
Carduus nutans ssp. macrolepis Chenopodium album Conrinaia orientalis Erodium cicutarium Euphorbia sp. Furnaria occidentalis Melilotus officinalis Salsola iberica Sisvmbrium altissimum musk thistle common larnbsquarters hares ear mustard filaree spurge fumatory yellow sweetclover russian thistle tumble mustard X X X X

I

X X X X

I

X X

X

X

NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Munroa squarrosa INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES
Bromus tectorum

false buffalograss

cheatgrass

I
I

X

I
I

1
~ 0 1 1 e u a q olai~e3s 16

x

1

x

I

eau13303ea31e~aeuds

Table 2. Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
Scientific Name INTRODUCED PERENNIAL FORBS Lathyrus eucosmus Marrubium vulgare NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool season) Agropyron smithii Agropyron trachycaulum Carex geophila Owopsis hymenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion longifolium Stipa columbiana Stipa comata INTRODUCED PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool season) Bromus inermis NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm season) Aristida fendleriana Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii Muhlenbergia pungens Sporobolus cryptandrus NATIVE SUBSHRUBS A. PURPUREA VAR. LONGISETA Fendler's three-awn blue grama galleta sandhill muhly sand dropseed X X X smooth brorne SITANION HYSTRIX ground sedge indian ricearass mutton grass bottlebrush squirreltail Columbia needlegrass needle-and-thread grass western wheatgrass slender wheatgrass X
X
X

- Fall 1999
I

Page 3 of 5

Synonym

Common Name

bush peavine horehound

I
I

I
X
X

Pinyon-juniper Sagebrush

I

I
X

I
I
X X

I

X X
-

X X

I
X

I
I

I I
I
X X
X

I
X

I

I
dwarf rabbitbrush greene rabbitbrush mountain joint-fir buckwheat slenderbush wild buckwheat X X
X

I
X X

I

Chrysothamnus depressus Chrysothamnus greenei Ephedra viridis Eriogonum corymbosum Eriogonum microthecum

Table 2. Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
Scientific Name Synonym Common Name NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrvsothamnus nauseosus Chrvsothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Forestiera neomexicana Lycium pallidum Purshia tridentata Rhus trilobata Tetradymia canescens Yucca glauca INTRODUCED SHRUBS Tamarix ~entandra NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus nambelii BRYOPHYTES Moss spp. LICHENS Parmelia chlorocroa Usnea spp. SUCCULENTS Cow~hantha vivi~ara Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. mojavensis Opuntia fragilis var. fragilis ~ u r ~ballcactus le
-

Sagebrush

Fall 1999

big sagebrush four-wing saltbush shadscale saltbush rubber rabbitbrush stickv-leaved rabbitbrush PURSHIA STANSBURIANA desert olive rabbitthorn antelope bitterbrush souawbush gray feltthorn small soapweed X X cliff rose
I

X X X X X X

I I

X X X X

I

I

X X

saltcedar

I
Utah juniper Colorado pinyon Gambel oak

X

X X X

X X

unidentified moss

I
Xanthoparmelia chlorocroa lichen usnea lichen

X

X

I
X

X

X mojave claret-cup cactus little pricklypear X X X

Table 2. Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
Scientific Name Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Oountia oolvacantha whi~ole cholla Sclerocactus whipplei ECHINOCACTUS WHlPPLEl whipple's fishook whitespine pricklypear thickroot pricklypear Synonym Common Name Pinyonjuniper X X
X

- Fall 1999

Page 5 of 5

I
X

Sagebrush

I
X

lai ins Dricklvoear

I

1

x

1

Orobanche fasciculata Phoradendron juniperinum
MUSHROOMS

purple broomrape juniper mistletoe X

X

Mushroom spp.

unidentified mushrooms

X

X

Table 3. Species Present i n Corridor Alternatives, Black Mesa Complex, PWCC, AZ Spring 2000 Scientific Name Common Name Synonym

I
Route I

Page 2 of 6

I

Route 2

I

Route 3

INTRODUCED PERENNIAL FORBS Marrubium vulgare Nepeta cataria Verbena bracteata

HOREHOUND COMMON CATMIP VERVAIN

X

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida fendleriana A. PURPUREA VAR. LONGISETA Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii Muhlenbergia pungens Muhlenbergia torreyi Sporobolus airoides NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Artemisia frigida Ceratoides lanata

FENDLER'S THREE-AWN BLUE GRAMA GALLETA SANDHILL MUHLY RING MUHLY ALKALI SACATON

X X X

X X

X

FRINGED SAGEWORT WINTERFAT

X X

X

X

Table 3. Species Present i n C o r r i d o r Alternatives, B l a c k Mesa Complex, PWCC, AZ Spring 2000 Sc~entific Name NATIVE SUBSHRUBS (cont.) Chrysothamnus depressus Chrysothamnus greenei Ephedra viridis Eriogonum corymbosum Eriogonurn microthecum Gutierrezia sarothrae Senecio douglasii var. longilobus DWARF RABBITBRUSH GREENE RABBITBRUSH MOUNTAIN JOINT-FIR BUCKWHEAT SLENDERBUSH WILD BUCKWHEAT BROOM SNAKEWEED THREADLEAF GROUNDSEL BLACK SAGEBRUSH BIG SAGEBRUSH FOUR-WING SALTBUSH SHADSCALE SALTBUSH RUBBER RABBITBRUSH PARRY RABBITBRUSH BLACKBRUSH CLIFF ROSE RABBITTHORN ANTELOPE BITTERBRUSH GRAY FELTHORN SPANISH BAYONET SMALL SOAPWEED SALTCEDAR NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia arbuscula ssp. nova Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysothamnus parryi Coleogyne ramosissima Cowania mexicana Lycium pallidurn Purshia tridentata Tetradyrnia canescens Yucca angustissirna Yucca glauca PURSHIA STANSBURIANA INTRODUCED SHRUBS Tamarix pentandra NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus garnbelii LICHEN Cladonia sp. Parmelia chlorocroa Usnea spp. Synonym Common Name Route 1 Route 2

X X X X
X

Page 3 of 6

Route 3

X

X

X

X X X

X

X
X X

X X
X

X

I
UTAH JUNIPER COLORADO PINYON GAMBEL OAK

I
X X X
CLADONIA LICHEN LICHEN UNIDENTIFIED USNEA LICHEN

I
X X

I

X

XANTHOPARMELIA CHLOROCROA

X
PURPLE BALLCACTUS MOJAVE CLARET-CUP THICKROOT PRICKLYPEAR PRICKLYPEAR WHIPPLE CHOLLA BARREL CACTUS WHIPPLE'S FISHOOK JUNIPER MISTLETOE

SUCCULENT Coryphantha vivipara Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. rnojavensis Opuntia rnacrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Opuntia whipplei Sclerocactus parviflorus Sclerocactus whipplei ECHINOCACTUS WHlPPLEl EPIPHYTE(PARAS1TE) . Phoradendron juniperinum

X
X

X

X

X X

Table 3. Species Present in Corridor Alternatives, Black Mesa Complex, PWCC, AZ Scientific Name NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Amaranthus graecizans Aster canescens MACHAERANTHERACANESCENS Chaenactis stevioides Chenopodium glaucum Cirsium undulatum Descurainia pinnata Eriogonum rotundifolium lpomopsis aggregata Lappula redowskii Lupinus brevicaulus Mentzelia albicaulis Phacelia crenulata Polygonum ramosissimum Portulaca oleracea PROSTRATE PIGWEED HOARYTANSYASTER ESTEVE PINCUSHION GOOSEFOOT WAVYLEAF THISTLE PINNATE TANSY-MUSTARD WILD BUCKWHEAT SKYROCKET GlLlA BLUEBUR STICKSEED SHORTSTEM LUPINE BLAZINGSTAR PHACELIA BUSHY KNOTWEED COMMON PURSLANE
TOWNSENDIA Townsendia incana

- Spring 2000

Page 4 of 6

Synonym

Common Name

I Route 4 I Route 5 I Route 6 I Route 7 I
X

X X

X X X X

X

X

X X

X X X

X X X
X

X

INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chenopodium album Conringia orientalis Erodium cicutarium Euphorbia sp. Kochia scoparia Salsola iberica Tragopogon dubius INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Bromus tectorum NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Arabis perennans Asclepias involucrata ASCLEPIAS MACROSPERMA Astragalus calycosus var. scapiosus Astragalus crassicarpus Astragalus praelongus Astragalus purshii Astragalus wingatanus Brickellia brachyphylla Calochortus kennedyi Cryptantha flava Cryptantha flavoculata Cymopterus purpureus Eriogonum alatum Eriogonum umbellatum Euphorbia fendleri

COMMON LAMBSQUARTER HARES EAR MUSTARD FILAREE SPURGE FIREWEED SUMMERCYPRESS RUSSIAN THISTLE GOAT'S BEARD CHEATGRASS ROCK CRESS EASTWOOD MILKWEED TORREY MILKVETCH GROUND-PLUM STINKING MILKVETCH PURSH MILKVETCH FORT WINGATE MILKVETCH BRICKELL BUSH DESERT MARIPOSA LILY YELLOW CRYPTANTHA CRYPTANTHA PURPLE WAFER-PARSNIP WINGED ERIOGONUM SULFUR WILD BUCKWHEAT FENDLER SPURGE

X

X

X X X

X X X X

X

X X

X

X X X

X X X

X X
X X

X

X

X

. Table 3. Species Present in Corridor Alternatives, Black Mesa Complex, PWCC, A Z Spring 2000

-

Page 5 of 6

INTRODUCED PERENNIAL FORBS Marrubium vulgare Nepeta cataria Verbena bracteata

HOREHOUND COMMON CATMIP VERVAIN

X

X

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida fendleriana A. PURPUREA VAR. LONGISETA Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii Muhlenbergia pungens Muhlenbergia torreyi Sporobolus airoides NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Arternisia frigida Ceratoides lanata

FENDLER'S THREE-AWN BLUE GRAMA GALLETA SANDHILL MUHLY RING MUHLY ALKALI SACATON

X X X

X X

X X X

X X X X

X

FRINGED SAGEWORT WINTERFAT

X

X

Table 3. Species Present in Corridor Alternatives, B l a c k Mesa Complex, PWCC, AZ S p r i n g 2000 Scientific Name Synonym Common Name

I
Route 4

Page 6 of 6

I
X

Route 5

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS (cont.) Chrysotharnnus depressus Chrysotharnnus greenei Ephedra viridis Eriogonurn coryrnbosurn Eriogonurn rnicrothecurn Gutierrezia sarothrae Senecio douglasii var. longilobus DWARF RABBITBRUSH GREENE RABBITBRUSH MOUNTAIN JOINT-FIR BUCKWHEAT SLENDERBUSH WILD BUCKWHEAT BROOM SNAKEWEED THREADLEAF GROUNDSEL

I
X X

Route 6

I

Route 7

I

X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X

INTRODUCED SHRUBS Tarnarix pentandra NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis Quercus garnbelii
~ ~ ~ p

SALTCEDAR

X

X

X

I
UTAH JUNIPER COLORADO PINYON GAMBEL OAK X

I
X X

I

I

I

X X

X X

LICHEN Cladonia sp. Parrnelia chlorocroa Usnea spp.

XANTHOPARMELIA CHLOROCROA

CLADONIA LICHEN LICHEN UNIDENTIFIED USNEA LICHEN PURPLE BALLCACTUS MOJAVE CLARET-CUP THICKROOT PRICKLYPEAR PRICKLYPEAR WHIPPLE CHOLLA BARREL CACTUS WHIPPLE'S FISHOOK JUNIPER MISTLETOE

X X X
X X

SUCCULENT Coryphantha vivipara Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. rnojavensis Opuntia rnacrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Opuntia whipplei Sclerocactus parviflorus Sclerocactus whipplei ECHINOCACTUS WHlPPLEl EPIPHYTE(PARAS1TE) Phoradendron juniperinurn

X X
X X

X X

X

X X

X X X X

X

APPENDIX 2 Representative Photos of Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities

APPENDIX 3 Field Guide to Target Species in the J9 Study Area

Diitirzguishing Chamter4Mics: -Ill scanted annual.. -Stems 2-1 4 cfn fall. -5-11 leaflets, 7-12 mm wide. -Racemes 3-1 7 flowered. -Fru~d - 7 m r ~ 2 stipitate. - Monocarpic. -Lary& 12-20x 7-12mm.

Rower Color: pale white with fafttt btuebnge flowring Period: latcs March to early June
Habitat: Warm dwert shrub community. 'I .7Wto 6.000 fl. Grand County. Utah

Rower Color: Flowedng Period: late June-July
Hsrhla?: Knwn only from cal!ectim near &iscr~ption House, Geaconina C-~unty, Arinusla and San Juan Cot~llfy,Utah. R~stridd PIavajo Sandstone se~ps-springs, to pmk@s, hanging gardens, or renging from alrnwt inacc&ssiblcP &8w dlff.faces to accwibk aimve% tram 5,72 8-5,960 f e d In el@vat ion.

tl Irnd Arimna Cmtral NoflMwl~c~ III Arlmfio &m w m m w w a r ~ n n~r& $ s u & and p t W m rem. eaefrnr as & rntk

KEY TO W E SFEGrES

5, CefitmE $pint% nmn (or wral: wary pr$ctbl& ie~king se?;\F&W tradbt spitws
>

*

q

,if?

3, Srjpafold pcsrbnth patta*'&dC~-fhy@ar@ ssrnfas on the supetisr I f o d t~ b@@+ &@~ dnub& toolheti or st?ort-fftiibr&tiq-%3r and often undutale; seed b!a& %ff&a I/& Inch long; p~tetaid p~fianih @Inkand &tile. white, rnmgertta, ar y&I!o~:,$rsals-~hot mafa than % inch in dimla; WtW stwdet, no! more than 11% fnrah lh. d l a w

2; Prr&I~~atYIo&Br%dyi, 3 81 page A Oentrsl s p k b fladiale and hairlike, bandIng ox cOrvlng irregularly at straight; unliormly ~o~orntl, wclHltlt or ashy gray, rurc-

$@aj

atl ?her S U C ~ ~ C W .

a Cantral

ate;.

splrreir none fsment, rf~id. W l y ~

5
5, Centml spinm p r m & {@~&pt .jWtath

with pink middles or

~Atbr&tn~k,."fi'SQ ta ihoh in Qiarneler. nib planls ar the f o ~ a ~ & ~ e & ~ p ~ r u l a t 4, P&Iao!scWs Silerk page 163 ing on adult stems), &ff@l$htt, to _B or 5 2. SU&W at the spine,and the ilssuo bcneaH1 I l [or In young plank as k wm .a) par 3 . sfiMgy-fibrqus; sep$lold psrbnlh parts and areale; ovary wlth a few s c a l ~ ; radial the eoslas at the s v ~when presant. scari, %pinetiaimbat stdght, SprslCikfg irregous-n9$@&, never IlmbrUn utarly, % !lo % ot % I61 Ions ~ t e m ~ n1 1 10 5 or 6 inches tong. 1 ta 4or firffich~ 5. f%&i(xi~olus Bi+b/mlanos, page 184 In dhnwtBr; wirlos of we T, 3 ~ A a s ' $ t r o n & k IWBI fimw broar1at

*'* we

Rower Color: Flowering Period

yellow, fruit green becorning brom
April

Flower Color: yellow ta yelfowish-green, sometimes pate or white with a pink or green mid-rib. Flowering PWi0d:

7hEIL.E 51. CHARACTERS OF THE VARI.lrrPlE8 8F PEDtOOAWUS PI%%LESlAP1UB

Drawing No. 85320D J23 Vegetation Project Area and Plant Community Distribution Map.

Attachment 5 1999 Baseline Vegetation Report
J 9 Coal Resource Area and J9 Haul Road Corridor

Black Mesa Mining Complex

1999 Baseline Vegetation Report J9 Coal Resource Area and J9 Haul Road Corridor Black Mesa Mining Complex

September 2000

Prepared by:

ESCO Associates Inc. P.O. Box 18775 Boulder, Colorado 80308
and

Peabody Western Coal Company Black Mesa Mine P.O. Box 650 Kayenta, AZ 86033

TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 METHODS ...................................................................................................................... 2 Sensitive Plant SurveyslSpecies Lists .......................................................................... 2 Plant Species Listing .................................................................................................... 3 Assessment of Comparability of Project Area Vegetation to Permit Area Vegetation.. ..3 RESULTSIDISCUSSION ................................................................................................ 4 Rare Plants................................................................................................................... 4 USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species .......................................................... 4 Navajo Endangered Species List................................................................................6 Community Comparability............................................................................................. 7 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 8 LITERATURE CITED ...................................................................................................... 9

LlST OF APPENDlClES Appendix 1 Species Tables Table 1.
2. Plant Species Listed by USFWS and NDFW Species Present in J9 Coal Resource Area and Haul Road Corridor

-

Appendix 2 Representative Photos of Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities Appendix 3 - Field Guide to Target Species in the J9 Study Area LlST OF MAPS
Drawing No. 85320C J9 Vegetation Study Area and Plant Community Distribution Map.

-

INTRODUCTION In October 1999 ESCO Associates Inc. (ESCO) was directed by Peabody Western Coal
Company (PWCC) to conduct a baseline vegetation study of the J-9 Coal Resource Area and Haul Road Corridor (Project Area). The Project Area lies in the southwestern portion of the existing Black Mesa Mining Complex leasehold in northeastern Arizona. The vegetation resources in the Project Area are similar to those described in previous baseline studies conducted in and adjacent to the Black Mesa leasehold (Peabody Coal Company, 1985). They consist of a mosaic of sagebrush and pinyon-juniper vegetation communities at approximately 6400 f l . elevation. Study objectives included a sensitive plant survey, documentation of all plant species encountered, verification of previous vegetation community mapping, and verification of the similarity of the vegetation in the Project Area to the vegetation documented in previous studies using the established sagebrush and pinyon-juniper reference areas. The Project Area was surveyed in October 1999 as well as in May 2000 to cover phenologic variability of target species. Both rare species identified by the U.S. federal government under provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and those similarly identified by the Navajo Nation pursuant to Title 175507 of Navajo Nation Code of the Navajo Nation Council's Resource Committee (Resolution RCF014-91, 1991).

USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species

The federal definition of an endangered species is any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range (other than a species of the Class lnsecta as determined by the Secretary to constitute a pest whose protection under the provisions of The Endangered Species Act of 1973 would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man). The federal definition of a threatened species is any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range, as determined by the Secretary.

Navaio Endanqered Species List
The following definitions are taken from the Navajo Endangered Species List (NDFW 1997). Group 1 (GI): "Extirpated" (i.e. extinct within a part of a species range) - Those species or subspecies that no longer occur on the Navajo Nation. Group 2 (G2): "Endangered" - Any species or subspecies which is in danger of being eliminated from all or a significant portion of its range on the Navajo Nation. Group 3 (G3): "~hreatened" Any species or subspecies which is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future, throughout all or a significant portion of its range on theNavajo Nation. Group 4 (G4): "Candidate" - Any species or subspecies for which the Navajo Department of Fish &Wildlife does not currently have sufficient information to support their listing as G2 or G3 but has reason to consider them. The NDFW is actively seeking information to determine if they warrant inclusion in a different group or removal from the list. They are not protected under Tribal Code but should be considered in project planning.

METHODS Sensitive Plant SurvevslSpecies Lists
The list of sensitive plants searched for during the field survey was compiled using United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listings as well as those provided by NDFW (1997). Plants listed as "threatened" or "endangered" by USFWS under the Endangered Species Act, as well as those listed by NDFW in Groups one through four were included in the survey (Table 1). Because both the NDFW and the USFWS Region 2 lists included species with habitat requirements not found in the Project Area as well as species known only from disjunct geographic areas, a literature review was conducted to identify species with a reasonable probability of occurrence. McDougal (1973) as well as Atwood et. al. (1991), Cronquist et. al. (1977), Benson (1969), Bureau of Land Management (1993, and Spackman et. al. (1 997) were used for species-specific ecological information. These references were also used to construct

a site-specific field guide (Appendix 3). Subsequent to the field surveys, an amended list of endangered species was provided by the Navajo Nation (NDFW 2000). Additional species from this list were also reviewed for potential occurrence in the study area and are separately discussed below. Using maps provided by PWCC and plotted over a photographic base with Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) waypoints (Drawing I ) , ESCO personnel walked the entire length of the proposed disturbance area. During this pedestrian survey, investigators, walking three or four abreast, searched for evidence of the species listed in Table 1. The teams proceeded along the disturbance area following a zigzag pattern and noted all species encountered. Separate species lists were generated for the sagebrush and pinyon-juniper communities during the fall 1999 survey (Table 2). During the spring 2000 surveys, species lists were compiled for the J9 Study Area (Table 3). Hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) units were used to ensure the teams maintained proper location and bearing throughout the survey. Would any species of concern have been identified, these units would also have been important in accurately mapping plant species' locations. Plant Species Listing Scientific names follow McDougall (1973) where applicable. In cases where scientific names were not found here, nomenclature used by the listing agency (USFWS and NDFW) were used; common names cited may be found in Beetle (1970), Nickerson et. al. (1976), or Soil Conservation Service (1979).
Assessment of Comparability of Project Area Vegetation to Permit Area Veqetation

During the course of the survey, the team leader assessed the comparability of the sagebrush and pinyon-juniper community types to those types within the present Black Mesa permit areas and especially the existing reference areas. This was done via qualitative consideration of total vegetation cover, species composition, slope and aspect (exposure), as well as variation of soil depth and texture. The plant communities of the project area had been mapped previously, but given the new photobase used to place community delineation lines, boundaries were checked and realigned slightly (Drawing 1).

Rare Plants
Of the ten species identified in Table 1, none were found in the Project Area; although certain species could reasonably be expected to occur based on previous site collection information. None of the rare species identified in Table 1 were encountered. Narrowly defined habitats such as hanging garden seeps or limestone outcrops that are required by some of these plants were likewise not found.

USFWS Threatened and Endanqered Species Included in Survey
Sentry milkvetch (Astragalus cremnophylax var. cremnophylax), Mancos milkvetch (Astragalus humillimus), giant claret cup hedgehog (Echinocereus trigloghidiatus var. arizonica), and Brady's pincushion cactus (Pediocactus bradyi) are listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). None of the species were observed in the Project Area, and would not be expected to occur based on habitat requirements.

Sentry milkvetch, known only from the type locality near the south rim of the Grand Canyon at
approximately 7000 ft. elevation, grows on limestone pavement. No limestone derived substrate occurs in the Project Area.

Mancos milkvetch occurs in cracks of Point Lookout Sandstone of the Mesa Verde Group
between 5000 and 6500 ft. No such formations occur in the Project Area.

Giant claret-cup hedgehog, known from oak woodland and chaparral communities in southern
Arizona near the border of Gila and Pinal counties, was not encountered. The closely related Mojave claret-cup (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. mojavensis) was fairly common throughout the pinyon-juniper community.

Brady's pincushion cactus, known only from the type locality in Marble Canyon at
approximately 4000 ft., was not observed. No other Pediocactus species were observed.

Navajo sedge (Carex specuicola) is threatened and grows exclusively in "hanging gardens"
(densely vegetated seeps found in rock outcrops in the Southwestern deserts). No such environments occur in the Project Area.

Navajo Endangered Species (NDFW 1997) Included in the Field Survev
Group G I No plants from this group were considered as having a potential for occurrence in the Project Area. Group G2

Parish's alkali grass (Puccinellia parishii) grows in alkaline seeps or flats in drainage bottoms.
No such vegetated areas were encountered during the survey. One small, bare, moist area with white crusting indicative of an alkaline environment was observed on a shale outcrop. Group G3

Cutler's milkvetch (Astragalus preussii var. cutler/], an endemic of San Juan county, Utah,
occurs in desert shrub communities at approximately 3800 ft., considerably below the elevation of the study area. Nonetheless, it was deemed that this species could potentially be present in the study area for purposes of this survey. Four other milkvetches were observed during the survey (A. wingatanus, A. calycosus, A. praelongus, and A. crassicarpus).

Fickeison plains cactus (Pediocactus peevlesianus var. fickeisoniae) is known from northern
Coconino and Mojave counties and was deemed to have some possibility of occurrence in the Project Area.

Group G4

Desert columbine (Aquilegia desertorurn) occurs at elevations from 6800 to 8000 ft and is
known only from the northern Arizona counties of Coconino and Navajo. No columbines were observed. Although the Project Area is somewhat below this plant's elevational range, it was deemed to have some possibility of occurrence in the Project Area.

Naturita milkvetch (Astragalus naturitenses) is known from southwestern Colorado and
McKinley County, New Mexico. It occurs on sandstone ledges in the pinyon-juniper community and along canyon rimrock between 5400 and 6200 ft. of elevation. This species is spring flowering and was deemed to have some possibility of occurrence in the Project Area.

Navaio Endanqered Species List (NDFW 2000) Additional Species Considered
The following species are additional species present in the expanded Navajo Endangered Species List (NDFW 2000) that were considered after the field surveys had been completed.

Acoma Fleabane (Erigeron acomanus) is found on sandy slopes beneath cliffs of Entrada
sandstone in McKinley County, New Mexico. Entrada sandstone is not present in the Project Area which is also a substantial distance from its occurrence in New Mexico.

Alcove Bog-Orchid (Platanthera zothecina) is found in seeps associated with hanging gardens
and moist stream sites in Northern Arizona, Utah, and Colorado. No hanging garden habitats occur within the Project Area.

Alcove Rock Daisy (Perityle specuicola) is found in Hanging Gardens in Grand and San Juan
Counties, Utah at elevations between 3,690 and 4,000 ft. The Project Area is more than 2,000 feet higher and no hanging garden habitats area present, so its occurrence there is thought extremely unlikely.

Bluff Phacelia (Phacelia indecora) is known to occur in salt desert scrub vegetation at 4,490 ft.
in San Juan County, Utah. The difference in elevations of the Project Area and vegetation along with the wide geographic separation make this plant extremely unlikely in the study area.

Gooding's Onion (Allium goodingii), occurs in neighboring Apache County, but at much higher
elevation (9,000 to 9,500 ft).

Navajo Bladderpod (Lesquerella navajoensis) is known to occur near Thoreau, New Mexico on
Todilto limestone. The dissmilar geology and great distance from the Project Area make this species extremely unlikely to occur in the Project Area.

Navajo Mountain Penstemon (Penstemon navajoa) occurs in San Juan County, Utah at
elevations between 8,200 and 10,370 ft. amdist ponderosa pine, aspen, and Douglas-fir forests. In addition to occuring at substantially higher elevations than occur in the Project Area, the

moisture conditions implicit in the listed vegetation types are not duplicated anywhere in the Project Area.
Mesa Verde Cactus (Sclerocactus mesa-verdae) is found in salt desert scrub communities in

the Fruitland and Mancos shale formation in San Juan County, New Mexico and Montezuma County, Colorado. The geology of the Project Area does not include such materials and the vegetation is not salt desert scrub, so the occurrence of this species was deemed extremely unlikely.

San Juan Milkweed (Asclepias sanjuanensis) is known to occur in Great Basin Grasslands and

Pinyon Juniper Woodlands between 5,000 and 6,000 ft. It is very similar (if not synonymous) to A. ruthiae, a species previously studied in Utah by the surveyor. None were found during field searches in the Project Area.

Tuba City Milkvetch (Astragalus sophoroides) occurs in eastern Cocconino County, Arizona

between Cameron and The Gap. Information available from the herbarium of Northern Arizona University indicates that the potential distribution of the species is from Leupp to Cameron along the Little Colorado River and then north to The Gap across the Painted Desert. Although the lower reaches of Moenkopi Wash are included in this area, the upper reaches present in the Project Area are more than 30 miles east and approximately 2,000 feet higher than its known occurrences.

Community Comparability For purposes of assessing the similarity of the Project Area vegetation to that described in

previous studies, the sagebrush and pinyon-juniper communities found within the Project Area were determined to be comparable to reference areas previously established at the Black Mesa Mining Complex (J7RASAGE, N7/8RASAGE, N7/8RAPJUN, N14RASAGE, and N14RAPJUN). While no quantitative cover data were collected during the assessment of comparability, it is ESCO's opinion, based on ocular estimate, that total vegetation cover in the Project Area approximates that measured in the reference areas in 1999 and that vegetation is representative of regional sagebrush and pinyon-juniper communities in the existing permit. Total vegetation cover averaged 33.2 percent in the J7, N718, and N14 sagebrush reference areas. Total vegetation cover, including canopy cover, in the N718 and N14 pinyon-juniper

reference areas averaged 31.8 percent; 12.7 percent was the average vegetation cover excluding canopy cover (ESCO 2000). Photos from the sagebrush community (Photos 1 and 2) are compared to the J7 Sagebrush Reference Area shown in photos 3 and 4. Photos from the pinyon-juniper community (Photos 5 and 6) are compared to the N7/8 Pinyon-juniper Reference Area shwon in Photos 7 and 8. During fall 1999 monitoring of the reference areas, 113 species were observed; 112 species were found in the Project Area (Table 2). While individual life forms' species composition varied somewhat between the Project Area and the reference areas, they were quite similar overall. Soils of the project area were generally shallow, sandy, and rocky (coarse fragments greater than 10 percent) in the pinyon-juniper community, and relatively deep, finer-grained, and less rocky (coarse fragments approximately 10 percent or less) in the sagebrush community. The pinyon-juniper soils are derived primarily from sandstone, while those in the sagebrush community are derived from a mixture of sandstone and shale-derived alluvium and loess. A similar situation is present in the reference areas as well as the regional vegetation in the existing permit area.

CONCLUSION

None of the listed species were observed in the Project Area during either the October 1999 or the May 2000 surveys. Of the narrow habitat requirements associated with any of the listed species; none were found (e.g. hanging gardens or specific geologic strata). The sagebrush and pinyon-juniper communities found in the Project Area are comparable in total vegetation cover, species composition, slope, aspect, and soil type, depth and texture to those of the existing permit area region. The existing reference areas will provide an adequate standard against which reclamationlrevegetation success can be evaluated.

LITERATURE CITED
Atwood, D.M., J. Holland, R. Bolander, 6. Franklin, D.E. House, L. Armstrong, K. Thorne, and L. England. 1991. Utah Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant Field Guide. U.S. Forest Service lntermountain region, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Utah Natural Heritage Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency, Navajo Nation, and Skull Valley Goshute Tribe. Beetle, A.A. 1970. Recommended Plant Names. Univ. Wyo. Agr. Expt. Stn. Res. Journal 31, Laramie. Benson, L.B. 1969. The cacti of Arizona. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ. 218 p. Bureau of Land Management. 1995. Endangered, Threatened and Sensitive Plant Field Guide, Farmington District, New Mexico. Prepared by Ecosphere Environmental Services, Inc., Farmington, NM. Cronquist, A., A.H. Holmgren, N.J. Holmgren, J.L. Reval and P.K. Holmgren. 1977. lntermountain Flora Vascular Plants of the lntermountain West, U.S.A.: Vol. 6. York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. ESCO Associates Inc. 2000. 1999 Annual Vegetation Monitoring Report, Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines. Prepared for Peabody Western Coal Company, Flagstaff, AZ. McDougal, W.B. 1973. Seed Plants of Northern Arizona. The Museum of Northern Arizona. Flagstaff. 594 p. Navajo Nation Department of Fish and Wildlife (NDFW). 1997. Navajo Endangered Species List. Produced under authority of 17NNCs507. Navajo Nation Department of Fish and Wildlife (NDFW). 2000. Navajo Endangered Species List. Produced under authority of 17NNCs507. Nickerson, M.F., G.E. Brink, and C. Feddema. 1976. Principal Range Plants of the New

Central and Southern Rocky Mountains: Names and Symbols. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rept. RM-20. Peabody Coal Company. 1985. Mining and Reclamation Plan - Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines. Prepared for USDOI, Office of Surface Mining. Denver, Colorado. SCS U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1979. Common Plant Names list and Scientific Plant Names List. Exhibit 407.1 (a)(6), National Soils Handbook Part II, USDA, Washington, D.C. Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado Rare Plant Field Guide. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program.

APPENDIX I

Species Tables

Table 1. Plant Species Listed by USFWS and NFWD Sought During Surveys of J9 Project Area, Fall 1999 and Spring 2000, Black Mesa Mine Complex, PWCC

Scientific Name Common Name Native Perennial Forbs Aquilegia desertorum desert columbine Astragalus cremnophylax var. crernnophylax sentry milkvetch Astragalus humillimus Mancos milkvetch Asfraaalus naturitensis Naturia milkvetch Astragalus preussii var. cufleri Cutler's milkvetch Native Perennial Cool-Season Grass and Grass-like Plants
G4 Endangered Endangered G4 G3

Status

Succulents Echinocereus triglochidiatus var.arizonica Pediocactus ~eeblesianus var. fickeisoniae Pediocacuts bradyi

I
giant claret-cup hedgehog ~ndangered] Fickeison lai ins cactus G3 I Brady's pincushion cactus Endangered

I

Table 2. Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
Scientific Name NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Arnaranthus retroflexus Aster canescens Chenopodium fremontii Chenopodium graveolens ragleaf goosefoot narrowleaf aoosefoot wavyleaf thistle Rocky Mountain bee plant pinnate tansy-mustard fetid marigold noddina erioaonum wild buckwheat skyrocket gilia NUTTALLIA NUDA blazing star common purslane townsendia
X

Sagebrush
X

Fall 1999

Page 1 of 5

Synonym amaranth pigweed MACHAERANTHERA CANESCENS hoary tansyaster Fremont goosefoot

Common Name

Pinyonjuniper

X X X
X

Chenooodium l e ~ t o ~ h v l u r n Cirsium undulatum Cleome serrulata Descurainia pinnata Dyssodia papposa Erioaonum cernuum Erioaonum rotundifolium lpomopsis aggregata Mentzelia nuda Portulaca oleracea Townsendia incana INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Carduus nutans ssp. macrolepis Chenopodium album Conrinaia orientalis Erodium cicutarium Euphorbia sp. Fumaria occidentalis Melilotus officinalis Salsola iberica Sisvmbrium altissimum NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Munroa squarrosa INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Bromus tectorurn cheatarass false buffalograss spurge fumatory yellow sweetclover russian thistle tumble mustard musk thistle

X X

X X

X

-

-

-

I

I

I

X

X

I
X
X
X

I
common lambsquarters hares ear mustard

X

X
X

X

I

X

1
X

x
X
X

1

X

X

X

X

au!~ead qsnq

snwsoma sn~Kqle1
SEltfOd l V I N N 3 M d a 3 3 n a O t l l N I

X

X

As!ep puno~6

edwsxa e!puasumol eau13303e a w ~ a e u d s

1
x
~ollewaq016 lalJe3s

x
I

1

Table 2. Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
Scientific Name Marrubium vulgare NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool season) Agropyron smithii western wheatgrass slender wheatgrass ground sedge indian ricegrass mutton grass SITANION HYSTRIX bottlebrush sauirreltail Columbia needlegrass needle-and-thread grass X X X X X X X X Agropyron trachycaulum Carex geophila Oryzopsis hymenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion lonnifoliurn Stipa columbiana Stipa cornata INTRODUCED PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool season) Brornus inerrnis NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm season) Aristida fendleriana Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria iamesii Muhlenbergia pungens Sporobolus cryptandrus NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Artemisia frigida Ceratoides lanata Chrysotharnnus depressus Chrvsothamnus areenei Ephedra viridis Eriogonum coryrnbosum Eriogonum rnicrothecum Gutierrezia sarothrae Senecio douglasii var. longilobus NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens big sagebrush four-wing saltbush fringed sagewort winterfat dwarf rabbitbrush areene rabbitbrush mountain ioint-fir buckwheat slenderbush wild buckwheat broom snakeweed threadleaf groundsel X X X X X X
X

Sagebrust X

Fall 1999

Page 3 of 5

Synonym horehound X

Common Name

Pinyon-juniper

smooth brome

I
I

X

I
Fendler's three-awn blue grarna qalleta sandhill muhlv sand dropseed
I

A. PURPUREA VAR. LONGISETA

I
I

X X

I
X

X
X

I

I

X

I

X

I

X

I

X

X

I

X X

I

X X

Table 2. Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
Scientific Name Atriolex confertifolia
- -

Sagebrust

Fall 1999

Page 4 of 5

Synonym shadscale saltbush rubber rabbitbrush PURSHIA STANSBURIANA desert olive rabbitthorn antelooe bitterbrush sauawbush nrav feltthorn small soapweed sticky-leaved rabbitbrush cliff rose

Common Name

I
I I

Pinyon-juniper
X

Chrvsothamnus nauseosus Chrvsothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Forestiera neomexicana Lycium pallidurn Purshia tridentata
-

X X X X

Rhus trilobata

Tetradvmia canescens Yucca nlauca INTRODUCED SHRUBS Tamarix pentandra NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii

I I

X

x

saltcedar

X

I
Utah juniper Colorado pinyon Gambel oak

I

X X
X

LICHENS Parmelia chlorocroa Usnea SQD. Xantho~armeliachlorocroa lichen usnea lichen

I
I
X

Table 2. Species Present in Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
Scientific Name Common Name SUCCULENTS Coryphantha vivipara Echinocereus trialochidiatus var. rnoiavensis
-

-

Fall 1999

Page 5 of 5

Synonym

Pinyon-juniper Sagebrush

purple ballcactus moiave claret-CUD cactus little ~ r i c k l v ~ e a r thickroot pricklvpear whitespine pricklypear plains pricklypear whipple cholla ECHINOCACTUS WHlPPLEl whipple's fishook

I
I

X X

I

X X

Opuntia fra~ilis var. fragilis Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Opuntia polyacantha Opuntia whipplei Sclerocactus whipplei EPIPHYTE(PARAS1TE) Orobanche fasciculata Phoradendron juniperinum MUSHROOMS Mushroom spp. unidentified mushrooms purple broomrape juniper mistletoe

P X I
X

x

-rX
X
X

I

I

X

X

X X

I

I

I
X X

I I

Table 3. Species Present i n J9 Coal Resource Area and J9 Haul Road Corridor, Black Mesa Complex, PWCC, AZ Spring 2000 Scientific Name Synonym Common Name
NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS

-

Page 1 of 2

Amaranthus graecizans Cirsium undulatum Descurainia richardsonii Lappula texana Mentzelia albicaulis Townsendia incana LAPPULA MARGl NATA
INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES

prostrate pigweed wavyleaf thistle richardson tansy-mustard stickseed blazinastar townsendia

Bromus tectorum
NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

cheatgrass

Astragalus calycosus var. scapiosus Brickellia brachyphylla Calochortus kennedyi Calochortus nuttallii Cryptantha flavoculata Cvmo~terus bulbosus Cymopterus purpurascens Eriogonum umbellatum Hymenopappus filifolius Leptodactylon pungens Leucelene ericoides Petradoria pumila Solidaao s~arsiflora Sphaeralcea coccinea Theles~erma meaa~otamicum
NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool)

torrey milkvetch brickell bush desert mariposa lily sea0 lilv cryptantha cvmo~terus spring parsley sulfur wild buckwheat fineleaf bitterweed granite pricklygilia white aster rock goldenrod fewflowered aoldenrod scarlet globemallow navaio tea

Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hymenoides Sitanion longifolium Stipa comata

SITANION HYSTRIX

western wheatgrass indian ricegrass bottlebrush squirreltail needle-and-thread grass

INTRODUCED PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool)

Aaro~vron desertorurn

desert wheatarass

I

Table 3. Species Present in J9 Coal Resource Area and J9 Haul Road Corridor, Black Mesa Complex, PWCC, AZ Spring 2000 Scientific Name Synonym Common Name NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii blue grama galleta

-

Page 2 of 2

Chrysothamnus depressus Chrvsothamnus areenei Ephedra viridis Eriogonum corymbosum Gutierrezia sarothrae
u u

dwarf rabbitbrush areene rabbitbrush mountain joint-fir buckwheat broom snakeweed

I
I
black sagebrush bia saaebrush rubber rabbitbrush parry rabbitbrush sticky-leaved rabbitbrush cliff rose s~anish bavonet

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia arbuscula ssp. nova Artemisia tridentata Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysothamnus parryi Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Yucca anaustissima NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis LICHEN Parmelia chlorocroa SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Opuntia whipplei Sclerocactus parviflorus Sclerocactus whipplei

PURSHIA STANSBURIANA

I

utah juniper colorado pinyon

XANTHOPARMELIA CHLOROCROA

lichen

ECHINOCACTUS WHlPPLEl

thickroot pricklypear pricklypear whipple cholla barrel cactus whipple's fishook

APPENDIX 2 Representative Photos of Sagebrush and Pinyon-juniper Communities

APPENDIX 3
Field Guide to Target Species in the J9 Study Area

Distinguishing Characterlsfics: -111 scented annual. -Sterns 2-11 crn tzll. -5-11 leaflets. 7-12 mm wide. -Racemes 3-17 flowered Frur 2-7mm, stipilate. -Momcarpic+ Largast 12-20 x 7-1Zmn?.

Flower Color; pale white with faint btue tinge !;lowering Period: late March lo early June
Habitat. LVarrn dessft shrub community, 1.700 to 6,000 fl. Grand County IJtah

I !tx&mos3-17-, in our rang not aver I -flowered, the fruiting axis 1-7 ( 9 ) cm long pod stiphtc, the s l i p (2) 3-7 mrn tang: G n y n n l a n d s and Dime-Cowidor seclvms or the Caiorado Plalcau, 11OQ-i6r)O m, Frtm Carban :ind C ! r m r l cos se to e. Ksm Co., Utah and n, hfohave Co. h r ~ z . xv !a s Y w . ,
2 Pfant prennial, he stews funlessdroughi-inhibited)i-4 dm tall; Imfiets o f langc~ bavm either t 7-23, or iF Rwer tbtn either shorter or n t h m * ~ than the next, the longest of a ptant 6 5 x 3 - 4 mm; banner us~telly 1 vivid purplq mnge . var. preurrk @just given . , "., .. . , 2 P f itt monwarpic, the sterns 2-1 I en7 tail; leaflets 8 1 , the 1

and

?K.

Calif.

... . . ..... . .. . .

I~rgest f pkml 12-20 x 7-1 2 mm;# eas wlritish. faintly wa pt l blueting& Copper Clarryan itear mouh of' Sm Juan River,Qwnd Go., Uleh .... ... , ., . .. . var. czltlrai Bsmcby I Racemes (except depauperartt disk1 ctnea) 12-;?j-flowortd, the fmitingaxis f4) 6-23 cm long; pod sessile a r alnrossl w; rare and lo& at 450-750 rn along t h e Virgin and Colorado nvers in se Clark Co. and ad], Moiravc Co Ari? . 10 kc looked for
in the sw, eoincr o f Utah: remowl y riisjuncl on pinyas In sw.
I\.lojwc Descrt. Calif. vnc imrjlor!l~ G r a y A.

A Caasx

Look Alikes: There are no Carex spaclm that nceclr wlth C. yxwJic~Irk? that rssernbies it from the Rocky Mountains I 6 alrala. s .
Flows? Color: Flowering Psrbci: late .iur.ne.Jut y

t-(ahlak Known only from calfectian !war inscrrphon Wuurse, Caconino Cwwrity, Arizona and San J i m Grtmly, Utah. H@strjct&d Navajo Saixlstone seeps-syrir~gs, to pckek. ar hartging gardens, ranging fmm almost inaxxsible sham cliff faces to accessible alcoves from 5.71 0-5,980 in feet

efevatilan.

Flower Color: Ftow~rirqPoriocl:

Rad May

Tw w @nk $em"&$

p&B

@ti@,~ f@ 1 p

apt&@

5ti81@1$8& *n@ttd,

ION& BWQ

1%

1% Qra cirlan,8kk%

rtreighdnt, 6 a $3-d4$~lf$fNi

1m&n

w

1/26 rncl: diamaez, %.;*1zl or hger :a

I:% inch b &amebr-

the pkrash.

r)s?i21 w Wger I k n b the vf1718ntk

SaalReas,ternAri#hc\& Snu(hvtas&n and sat&aerr'xal %sw %aim: nmb31.P$~.$ &%s.
istdflbwestara &xiw.

rlrlxana bat;wn
and Qube,

$uQ~?&c

KEY TO THE SPECIES
Spinas imf sirtangly 8sl:encd, nandlellke, circulsr L ollipiic in crass ssctinn; Qrtws gt&ua

Iar, deprus@sd-globular, abbmid, ~1~-@0:rb~yiindr~ld,their length tittle gM@e$ thqp '@3# dinrneter or rsrt~&1wi@ a& $@@i Starface of tfia spine srnaathi ' W i n 186s polished, tardy finery ~?nnsscant. 3 Sop~loid . parinnth pnrls and Zli@,f&{if awl sclntes an thc superior Itom( tulle eifhar mC nutnly tootfted or tihurl-fi@briat&8 f wtira snd oftm undulate: sead black, Jl16 to 148 inch lmg, pctaloid parianth p s i s pitvksnd wt~tlo.wlrilc, rnagonta, or yellow; sraala not rnorc Ihnn Ir inch in diarn@ler; spiiles slonrler, ;la1 mare lhnn 43'32inoh in dia~nstar. 1 Central spirrerj mna or, 8 [c~ni~?ralYj . present. rigid, gentIy eur?&@a~&Irf@'l b in rrlatvrc plants at lea& d@d1$1 f l t i . td tk brawn ar mddish, fji'16'ta>1&?' %7j inchw long, 1U 2 or 1Wia;"1fB2?beh %I diameter; patalcid pefli%!tb &a+ 'Warginally eithor pink or n@genlti 6 wfflto r with pink middles or wholiy yclhW. 5. Central apinss psessnt {Hcept In jUWnil* planls Dr the lower m?61~s parskb ing on adult stems), strai~ht, to 8 or 6 r I car In young plenls as 19W 8s 3 ) per arecia: ovary with a few sceies; radial spines alrrmsll slraight, ~psprebdlnqirrrtgufarly, KI to "Je or % Inch lang; sbms 1 to 6 or 6 inchas long, 1 ta 4 or 5 inchee in the toothed or ofan short-llmbcfate; soad rrboul 1 112 irtch lung; fruit not stalked; seed !esstrIlat&iluberculela. '1, Padiclc.actrta8~rllpsUhii, pap3 180

@?

,Cu@b a\&@ ?b,aX 4?4xtb or &4ongal@ "?&+ h@bImg; sterns 2 L :, % 2 or- 2% lnchr~sin L ,aniyI y df~dfi&&, of@ 6aply protrudlny aboval grpnp; $ y t l vo L 110r.53l tube mif h ~ hbhly laott@; J@lt bas~lly canstrictcd loto a &ha& slaEK: send vapillato and with larger rn~unds00 the: suctacee 2, Padiocectus Brac'y:. page 181 4. Contra) spines flexible and halrfiks, bending or curving irrrsgutnrly or straiglrl: ur7iiormly aolr~wci.wp;rHlte or ashy g r w 'l;fr,ing R age la &ma#-or CTBBIII-CO!OI i :c, 1 81W T t ~ ~ @ ? f ton& .about l f 9G lo 1 /7:! r lnqb In $ii;lw&r; pi3bloid psrianth paris nh'te~$~41tft niidribs. pint d; P~Jlo~wctufs Parikdlnei, page 181 B Sz~qqbfd Re&a~h pa& and rhr? scales of the I@c& $&&* lan&imbridre: saed gray, 1Ad tci: W!: irlch long: pek&laid porienllr
ratharelout, 1/32 ta 1/24 Inch In diemstar. 1,Pedloc~~~flls aary 183 Srlnr~, 2, Surface af Ika spine and tho t l s s t ~ ? bcncal'i
p\aat%yefiuw or ydllisw wiih maroan wlnr. ateole &Q,v~ T/n Inch ,in diemeter: spinas

5. Central spincla none (or rare); ovary practically lacking smiles: radbl spines sli@%tJy riyqrv$tt, Ilk6 the teelh of a

spongy-fibrot~ius: sepaldid peri~nllrcarts orid the scales of tha ovary, when present scarfous-prst~eglned,newt llrnbrlate 9. Psdloceotus Po~b~sstanus, 184 page I Spines s~o('& !Iattmd, severaI times broader . than thick, puberulent; stems elongale, lhalr length at least 1wIce their tilemeter, 6,P~tdIqcdctai pepyraoanthus, page 186

Disthguishing CF\araclerislir;s: -Stoms soiltary or rarely twa, 3.8-6.2ern long, 2 - 5 4 cm in diarnstsr .Aresles elliptic. donsely white or yelbw-villous -Spines oL?s.asc~rrirrg stem -Flowers borne texmlrrally on or contiguaus with splnrkmus aeroles -Tubricks rtol grooved. -Centrc~I spines none (2 casas reparted I or 2 cerWal spnes uf darker color than radials). -Radial spines while or tan, 1415 par areola, glabrous, smooth, tapering gradually from bulbous bases, nearly circtrlar in cross seclion. -Flower I .5 - 3 crn it? diameter, I , 2 ern long.. 6 -Petdoid perianth pa& pale BZF~W-yellow, ablancwlate, bwer sepalolds green wlth purplish r s d midrib, upper sepaioids with grrer-1mirjrfb and pale yetlaw rnargins. -1s difficult to me as it blends hto r ~ ~ k s ,

-

-May retreat Et ground during dry season. no

Ftower Caiar: Flowering Period:

yellow, h i t green becoming brown
April

Habitat:

Knwm only from type lacaliiy -4000 ft. in Marble Canyon. Cocor~i~lo Coirrrty

Fig. 7: plznt* fnrit.

I:,;
iC

Distir~gttisftrng Chclracl~ristics: -Stern unbranched or with 2-4 branct~es, 10 2.5 5 8crn long, 2.5 3-8 cm in dhmefer, up . -ilighly variable, single, long eenlral spine, ashy white ta pala gray, flsxibla, turned upward. -6and occasionally 7 radial spinw, $tralght, spreading Irregularly, of varying sizes, 3-6 mm long, 0 2 5 - 0 5 mrn In diemetar, -Fruit greenish, changing to tan during dry9ng at rnaturiiy,

-

-

Lmk Alikes: Other P psefdleslmus varieties - see key.
flower Colar: yellow ta yelfowsh-green, sometimes pale or whitr, with a pink or grsen mid-rib Flowering F'c%riad,

Exposed Iayers o rock on the margins o canyons or hills in the desert at aabout f f in elwation. Nwajoan Deisert and the Great Plains Grassland. blorlhern Arizona fr~m northeastern Nltsjave County l the vicinity of the Galorado and Little Col~rado o R~vers the In G r a d Canyon region and muthemWard in Coconina County,
Habitat:
4,000-6,000 feet

Attachment 6 2003 Baseline Vegetation Sampling Report Life of Mine Coal Resource Areas Black Mesa Mining Complex (Includes N12/N99 North/South Study Area)

2003 BASELINE VEGETATION BASELINE SAMPLING REPORT Life of Mine Coal Resource Areas
Black Mesa Mining Complex

November 2003

Prepared by:

ESCO Associates Inc. P.O. Box 18775 Boulder, Colorado 80308 And Peabody Western Coal Company P . 0 Box 650 Kayenta, Arizona 86033

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

......................................................................................................................... 1

METHODS ................................................................................................................................... 1 Sensitive Plant Surveys ......................................................................................................................... I USFWS THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES (50CFR 17.11 AND 17.12, DEC. 1999).....1 2 NAVAJO ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST (NESL) ............................................................................. Qualitative Data Collection .................................................................................................................... Quantitative Vegetation Sampling..........................................................................................................
3 3

COVER SAMPLING ........................................................................................................................... 4 PLANT SPECIES FREQUENCY AND DENSITY MEASUREMENTS................................................. 4 WOODY PLANT DENSITY SAMPLING ............................................................................................. 5 5 LIFEFORMS USED IN DATA PRESENTATION ................................................................................ PLANT SPECIES LISTING ................................................................................................................ 5 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................

6

DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 6 Sagebrush Shrubland............................................................................................................................6 Pinyon-Juniper Woodland ...................................................................................................................... 8 Occurrence of Forbs in the LOMCRA Study Areas .............................................................................. 12 12 Sensitive Plant Survey Results ............................................................................................................ PLANTS FAIRLY COMMONLY SEEN THAT ARE SIMILAR TO TARGET SPECIES ...................... 18 PLANTS OCCASIONALLY ENCOUNTERED THAT ARE SIMILAR TO TARGET SPECIES ...........18
18 Habitats of the Outer Areas .................................................................................................................

LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................... I

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix I Data Tables Table
A Cover Data - J2 LO\ACR, Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 20 Cover Data - J4 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J516 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J8 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J10 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J13114 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J15 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J28 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - N121N99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J2 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J4 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J8 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J10 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J13114 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J15 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - J28 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - N9 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover Data - N10 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - J2 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - J4 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - J516 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ
- 2003

-

Woody Plant Density Data - J8 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - J10 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ

- 2003
Woody Plant Density Data - J13114 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC,

Woody Plant Density Data - J15 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ

- 2003
Woody Plant Density Data - J28 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ

- 2003
Woody Plant Density Data - N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - J2 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - J4 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC,

AZ - 2003
Woody Plant Density Data - J8 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - J10 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC,

AZ - 2003
Woody Plant Density Data - J13114 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - J15 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC,

AZ - 2003
Woody Plant Density Data - J28 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - N9 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Woody Plant Density Data - N10 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Cover and Woody Plant Density Data Summary, LOMCRA Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC,

AZ - 2003
Relative Vegetation Cover by Lifeform Data Summary, LOMCRA Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 Species Density Data Summary, LOMCRA Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003

Appendix 2 Plant Species from The LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas
Table
42. Species Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003

-

Appendix 3 - Black Mesa Mining Complex Field Guide to Potentially Occurring Rare Plants Appendix 4 - Baseline Vegetation Sampling Area Photos, LOMCRA Study Areas, Black Mesa Mining Complex, 2003

LIST OF MAPS Map I 2003 Baseline Vegetation Sampling Map, LOMCRA Study Areas, Black Mesa Mining . Complex

INTRODUCTION
In late May and early June 2003, ESCO Associates conducted a baseline vegetation study of twelve Life of Mine Coal Resource Areas (LOMCRA) within Peabody Western Coal Company's (PWCC) Black Mesa Mining Complex composed of the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines. The purpose of this sampling was to describe species composition, woody plant density, and diversity in the LOMCRA study areas prior to disturbance by mining. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected in the LOMCRA study areas; methods, sample areas, and sample sizes were those specified by PWCC. The vegetation resources in the project areas were similar to those described in previous baseline studies (Peabody Coal Company 1985 and ESCO Associates 2000), consisting of a mosaic of sagebrush and pinyon-juniper vegetation communities. Sampled areas were classified as either sagebrush or pinyon-juniper using aerial photos and previous baseline vegetation maps.

METHODS
Sensitive Plant Survevs A list of sensitive plant species was compiled from the following sources under the following definitions: USFWS THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES (50CFR 17.11 AND 17.12, DEC. 1999) Endangered species: any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range (other than a species of the Class lnsecta as determined by the Secretary to constitute a pest whose protection under the provisions of The Endangered Species Act of 1973 would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man). Threatened species: any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range, as determined by the Secretary.

NAVAJO ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST (NESL) The following definitions are taken from the Navajo Endangered Species List (NESL) issued by the Navajo Nation Department of Fish and WildlifeNNDFWL (2001) Group 1: Those species or subspecies that no longer occur on the Navajo Nation Group 2 (G2) & Group 3 (63): "Endangered" - Any species or subspecies whose prospects of survival or recruitment within the Navajo Nation are in jeopardy or are likely within the forseeable future to become so. G2: A species or subspecies whose prospects of survival or recruitment are in jeopardy. G3: A species or subspecies whose prospects of survival or recruitment are likely to be in jeopardy in the foreseeable future. Group 4: Any species or subspecies for which the Navajo Nation Department of Fish & Wildlife (NNDFWL) does not currently have sufficient information to support their listing as G2 or G3 but has reason to consider them. The NNDFWL will actively seek information on these species to determine if they warrant inclusion in a different group or removal from the list. The final sensitive plant species list (Appendix 3

- Field

Guide to Potentially Occurring

Rare Plants, Black Mesa Mining Complex) was organized by species growth habit and
habitat preferences, and included detailed descriptions and drawings of morphological traits, mention of lookalikes and distinguishing characteristics, habitat requirements, and phenology. A literature review was conducted on those species listed in the above sources to compile this information (see Kearny and Peebles 1960, McDougall 1973, Arizona Rare Plant Committee 2000, Ecosphere 1995, Great Plains Flora Association 1986, Utah TES Plant Interagency Committee 1991, Spahr 1991, Welsh et al. 1993).

The inner boundary (blue) areas shown on Map 1 were traversed on foot to ascertain the presence of the target species. This pedestrian survey took place between May 20 and June I , 2003. As of September 2003, the areas to be included in baseline study increased [see outer (red) boundaries]. Inasmuch as the target species were all most reliably to be identified in the early season, the additional areas could not be inventoried for species presence. Rather, they were visited in September and early October 2003 to determine the comparability of habitats of the outer areas to those of the inner areas that were surveyed in detail in the blooming season. This knowledge of the habitats of the outer areas was used to assess the likelihood of the occurrence there of each target species. Qualitative Data Collection Twelve LOMCRA study areas were surveyed on the Black Mesa Mining Complex for threatened and endangered species. The areas were J2, J4, J516, J8, J10, J13114, J15, J23, J28, N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH, N9, and N10. The vegetation type in J516 was entirely sagebrush whereas the vegetation in N9 and N10 was entirely pinyon-juniper. All other areas comprised a variable mosaic of both vegetation types. Using maps provided by PWCC and plotted over a photographic base with Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) waypoints marking the boundaries, ESCO personnel walked throughout these areas searching for the listed species' habitat requirements. If habitat was found, a more detailed search of the area was performed. During the course of this survey, 'lookalike' species were noted as were 'cultural' species (those of significance to the Navajo and Hopi). Occasionally these specimens were entered into a handheld Global Positioning Device (GPS) for potential seed collecting or salvage purposes. If any species of concern were encountered these would also have been mapped using the GPS and located on the maps provided by PWCC. Quantitative Vegetation Sampling Quantitative data were collected for cover and woody plant density in all areas surveyed for threatened and endangered species (discussed above) except J23 which had previously been quantitatively sampled (Peabody Coal Company 1985). A map with randomly generated sampling points (Map 1) overlaying a photographic base was provided by PWCC for each of the baseline areas to be sampled. This information is included on Map 1. UTM coordinates were also provided for each point which in

conjunction with the use of hand-held GPS units, assisted in objective sample point location. COVER SAMPLING Cover data were collected along randomly oriented 50 m transects using a pointintercept method in which data were recorded as interceptions of a point with a plant species, litter, standing dead plant material, bare soil, or rock. Plant material produced during 2003 and still standing was tallied by species. Litter was considered to be any organic material that had fallen, or begun to fall to the soil surface. Standing dead was any dead plant material that was produced in previous years but which was still standing and had not lodged or broken off to become litter. Inorganic materials greater than 1 cm in diameter were considered rock. The cover sampling points were optically projected using a Cover-Point Optical Point Projection Device developed by ESCO Associates. One hundred points were collected at each transect. The points were evenly distributed; a pair of points collected on opposite sides of every meter mark along the 50 m transect (50 X 2 = 100). First hit interceptions were used to calculate absolute top layer foliar cover by dividing the number of interceptions for a particular species or ground cover type by the total number of points taken (100). First hit relative vegetation cover was calculated by dividing first hit absolute cover for each species by the total first hit vegetation cover. Alllayer absolute cover was calculated by dividing all hits (first-hits and additional-hits) for a particular species by the total number of points taken (100). In addition, all-layer relative cover was calculated using all hits for a particular species divided by the total hits accumulated during sampling of the transect. PLANT SPECIES FREQUENCY AND DENSITY MEASUREMENTS During the course of cover sampling, all plant species occurring within one meter of either side of the cover sample transect were noted as present within each sample. The total number of species (within each lifeform) observed in each 100 sq.m. sample provides a measure of species density, indicating the relative species richness of different areas. Frequency for each plant species observed during sampling was calculated by dividing the number of sample transects in which the species was observed by the total number of samples.

WOODY PLANT DENSITY SAMPLING Woody plant density sampling was undertaken in all sample areas along each transect established for cover. Trees, shrubs, subshrubs, and agavoids with root crowns located within the boundaries of the quadrats (belt transects) were tallied according to species. In pinyon-juniper areas, woody plant density sampling was collected in 4x50 meter plots, 2 meters on either side of the cover transect. In sagebrush areas, woody plants were counted inside the 2x50 meter transects established for cover. The presence of dead individuals was not included in woody plant density calculations. LIFEFORMS USED IN DATA PRESENTATION All data and summary tables are organized by lifeform to facilitate data interpretation and analysis. The lifeform categories that follow reflect growth habit and provenance. Lifeforms Present in 2003 Native Annual & Biennial Forbs Introduced Annual & Biennial Forbs Native Annual Grasses Introduced Annual Grasses Native Perennial Forbs Introduced Perennial Forbs Native Perennial Cool Season Grasses lntroduced Perennial Cool Season Grasses Native Perennial Warm Season Grasses Native Subshrubs Native Shrubs Introduced Shrubs Native Trees Succulents Agavoids Lichens Fungus Algae

Both grasses and graminoids (grass-like plants) are included in the Native Perennial Cool Season Grasses lifeform. PLANT SPECIES LISTING Scientific names used generally follow McDougall (1973) or Kearney and Peebles (1960) while the common names cited are found in Beetle (1970), Nickerson et al. (1976), or Soil Conservation Service (1979). Lichens and mosses were described in Hale (1969) and Conard (1956), respectively. Scientific names for vascular plants not found in the sources listed above were described by either Welsh et al (1993) or Great Plains Flora Association (1986). The table below lists these species with their sources:

Vascular plants not found in McDougail (1973) Great Plains Flora Association or Kearney and Peebles (1960) Arenaria hookeri Bahia oppositifolia Cryptantha flavolculata Elyrnus junceus Erysirnurn asperurn Lygodesrnia juncea Puccinellia distans Stephanomeria runicnata (1986) X

Welsh et al. (1993) X

X X X
X X X X X
X X

X X

During the course of fieldwork, a list of all encountered plant species (quantitative plus incidental observations) was compiled for each area. These lists are summarized in Appendix 2, 'plant Species from the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas', which includes current nomenclature, cross-references to older nomenclature, common name, and the area in which the species was observed.

RESULTS
Tables containing the LOMCRA baseline sampling data are present in Appendix 1. Results of quantitative cover sampling of sagebrush shrubland are presented in Tables 1 through 9, and data from pinyon-juniper woodland are found in Tables 10 through 19. Woody plant density data from sagebrush shrubland are presented in Tables 20 through 28. Woody plant density data from pinyon-juniper woodland are found in Tables 29 through 38. Cover and woody plant density data are summarized in Table 39. Relative cover data organized by lifeform are presented in Table 40. Data on species density separated by lifeform are present in Table 41. A listing of all plant species encountered during quantitative sampling is provided in Table 42. Photographic documentation from representative quantitative sampling locations is available in Photographs 1 through 92, present in Appendix 4.

DISCUSSION
Sagebrush Shrubland Areas mapped as sagebrush shrubland in the baseline sampling areas are for the most part dominated by big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) and blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis). Variations from this general statement were typically in the form of varying and

sometimes substantial presence of other shrubs and subshrubs, especially fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens), Douglas rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus), Greene rabbitbrush (C. greenel), and rubber rabbitbrush (C. nauseosus). Along with blue grama, the grass component of many sagebrush stands included galleta (Hilaria jamesii) and, more occasionally, bottlebrush squirreltail (Sitanion jubatum and S. longifolium), needle and thread (Stipa comata), Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides), and western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii). However, the latter five cool season grasses were almost always less abundant than the warm season grasses blue grama and galleta.

A preponderance of warm season grasses is consistent with

environmental conditions that are strongly characterized by low and variable precipitation concentrated in summer "monsoon" episodes. Major exceptions to the strong presence of big sagebrush in this vegetation occur on shallow soils such as are found in J516 and J13114 where woody plant cover is comprised primarily of Douglas rabbitbrush and shadscale saltbush (Atriplex confertifolia). Total vegetation cover in the Douglas rabbitbrush Ishadscale variants of the sagebrush shrubland type in J516 and J13114 (Table 39) averaged 8.2 and 8.6 percent, respectively. Areas with the greatest sagebrush cover such as J2, J15, J28, and N12199 NORTHISOUTH averaged 14.4, 12.4, 17.2, and 13.8 percent total vegetation cover, respectively. These data suggest that abundance of sagebrush is an indicator of overall soil productivity and that, within the limitations imposed by low annual precipitation, highest cover within the sagebrush type is expectable on the deeper (alluvial 1 colluvial) substrates. Bare soil (Table 39) is very abundant within the sagebrush shrubland vegetation type, averaging from 47 to 75 percent cover, while rock, depending on the site, varied from less than 2 percent cover up to 15 percent cover. Rock cover was predictably highest on J516 and J13114 sites where soils are shallow and more rock is exposed. Standing dead was probably more abundant in 2003 than usual because of the widespread death of sagebrush following the 2000-2002 drought (see below). It varied from about 6 to 15 percent cover in the 2003 sampling and was primarily dead big sagebrush. Relative vegetation cover data (Table 40) show that although shrubs and subshrubs are by far the most abundant lifeforms in the sagebrush shrubland type, warm season grasses in some sampling areas (e.g. J2, J4, J516, J8 and J10) contribute from 14 to 44

percent of total vegetation cover. In J15, J28, and N121N99 NORTHISOUTH they were much less, averaging 2.8 to 5.6 percent of total vegetation cover. With regard to woody plant density, the total density within sampled areas for sagebrush shrubland varied from about 3900 stems per acre to 18,000 stems per acre (Table 39). The highest were present on the shallow soil sites at J516 and J13114. The bulk of the high values at these sites were Douglas rabbitbrush, rubber rabbitbrush, and snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae). Other shrubs that were encountered during sampling include the subshrubs winterfat (Ceratoides lanata), slenderbush wildbuckwheat (Eriogonum microthecum), Drummond goldenweed (Haplopappus drummondi~],granite prickly gilia (Leptodactylon pungens), and threadleaf groundsel (Senecio douglasii var. longilobus), and the shrubs black greasewod (Sarcobatus vermiculatus) and gray feltthorn (Tetradymia canescens). Among the sagebrush shrubland sites with deeper soils, invasion of pinyon pine is widespread (Photographs 25, 77, 78). The pines are most often found directly beneath sagebrush where shading or other protection has apparently provided critical assistance in establishment. That big sagebrush is among the native plants sensitive to moisture deprivation was evident throughout the Black Mesa area in 2003. The effects of serious drought Within the baseline areas conditions of the previous few years were very clear.

examined in 2003, it is estimated that approximately 30% of sagebrush shrubland stands had suffered heavy die-back of sagebrush (e.g. Photographs 2, 6, 14, 36, and 79), while another 50 to 60% had experienced light to moderate die-back (e.g. Photographs 3, 18, 26, and 33). About 10 to 20% of stands had little or no die-back (e.g. Photographs 1, 4, 32, and 35). section. Species density (Table 41) within the sampled sagebrush shrubland stands varied from 12.2 species per 100 sq.m. (J4 area) to 19.2 species per 100 sq.m. (J2 area). Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Although pinyon pine (Pinus edulis) and Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) are by far the most abundant plants on these sites in terms of ground cover and presumably See the discussion of the drought sensitivity of sagebrush in the next

biomass, their abundance is on the low end of the spectrum for this type in the Southwest (Moir and Carleton 1986). With tree canopy cover mostly in the range of 14 to 18 percent (and ranging down to 8 percent), these sites do not meet the UNESCO definition of woodland (> 40 percent tree cover, UNESCO 1973). Pinyon-juniper vegetation at similar elevation (6300 ft) with the same tree dominants in Zion National Park had 38 percent cover (by ocular estimate; Harper 2003). Inasmuch as trees are by far the most abundant lifeform, it is reasonable to continue to refer to these as woodlands. Beyond the tree cover, shrubs are the next most abundant lifeform, being comprised of big sagebrush and either fourwing saltbush or cliffrose (Cowania mexicana). On the shallow soils at J13/14, accompanying shrubs (or subshrubs) include Douglas rabbitbrush and shadscale saltbush. For the most part, herbaceous cover in all the pinyon-juniper vegetation is very sparse. Warm season grass cover is very limited, mostly considerably less than 1 percent (compared with often 2 to 4 percent cover in sagebrush of the same area). Cool season native grasses are more abundant in the pinyon-juniper vegetation type than in the sagebrush shrubland. More commonly observed species include bottlebrush squirreltail, Indian ricegrass, and muttongrass

(Poa fendleriana). Native perennial forbs are more frequently encountered in the pinyonjuniper than in sagebrush shrubland, but still are very minor in the quantitative sense. Some pinyon-juniper stands give the general impression of virtually bare understory (e.g. Photographs 41, 45, 49, and 54), while others have at least moderate presence of shrub cover (e.g. Photographs 38, 43, and 63). Total vegetation cover (Table 39) of as high as 22 percent and as low as 11.6 percent is comparatively sparse for reported pinyon-juniper woodland. Harper (2003) for example, found an average of 62 percent live vegetation cover in his examination of pinyon-juniper woodland at Zion National Park. Rock averaged 17 percent cover over all the stands sampled compared to about 2.5 percent in sagebrush shrubland (exclusive of the shallow soil sites in J5/6 and J13/14). Standing dead of approximately 1 to 5 percent in pinyon-juniper woodland was substantially less than the sagebrush shrubland. Although some pinyon pine did perish as a result of the drought, overall the tree cover was mostly intact. Some of the mortality of pines was indirect, caused by bark beetle infestation of stressed trees.

Study of the ecophysiology of pinyon pine, Utah juniper and sagebrush has shown that the trees have assimilation (carbon-fixation) rates that are more sensitive to drought than sagebrush (DeLucia and Schlesinger 1991), but the trees have higher "water use efficiency" (assimilation rateltranspiration rate). In other words, the trees have much tighter control on transpirative loss, so even though their assimilation drops quickly with drought, they still make a little water go farther per gram of fixed carbon than sagebrush. Flanagan et al. (1992) as cited in Nowak et al. (1999) showed that pinyon pine and Utah juniper are more dependent on summer precipitation than sagebrush. Occasional trees within the pinyon-juniper stands of the study areas have been removed (Photograph 80) presumably for fuelwood. The major residual evidence is the presence of stumps and litter from limbing the bole. In the pinyon-juniper type species density (Table 41) varied from 12.2 to 19.8 species per 100 sq. m., essentially the same range observed in sagebrush shrubland. As in sagebrush shrubland, the distribution of species is fairly even among native perennial forbs, native perennial cool season grasses, native perennial warm season grasses, subshrubs, and shrubs. Native annual forb species were distinctly less numerous in the pinyon-juniper than in the sagebrush shrubland. Compared to the range of vascular plant species density observed elsewhere in pinyon-juniper woodlands of adjacent New Mexico and Utah (Harner and Harper 1976), the LOMCRA study areas fall somewhat below the mean of the 30 sample areas reported there which was about 22 to 23 species per 100 sq.m., and ranged from about 12 to 60 species per 100 sq.m. Throughout the bulk of the pinyon-juniper woodland of the study area, the soil surface is trampled sufficiently frequently by livestock that "cryptobiotic" or "cryptogamic" soil crust is non-existent. In a very few sites, however, this soil crust was found intact (Photographs 81, 82, 83, and 84). The cryptogams involved are predominantly bluegreen algae, mosses (mostly Polytrichum piliferum), and lichens. Evans and Ehlehringer (1994) found that the nitrogen requirements of Utah juniper may be largely met by nitrogen fixation by the cryptobiotic crust. It may be assumed that the absence of a cryptobiotic crust in heavily trampled areas results in a diminished availability of nitrogen from atmospheric fixation.

With regard to woody plant density in the pinyon-juniper woodland type, overall woody plant densities (including subshrubs, shrubs, and trees) are far lower than in the sagebrush shrubland type, ranging from about 650 to 4000 stems per acre (Table 39). Tree densities were only a fraction of the total woody plant densities, ranging from 69 to 339 tree stems per acre. These values are comparable to the lower to middle range of densities reported for pinyon-juniper stands of the Piceance Basin by Welden et al. (1990) and well below the range reported in 1974 (599 trees per acre) and 1984 (629 trees per acre) from permanent plots in northeastern Utah by Austin (1987). In areas J4, J8 and J13114, juniper greatly outnumbered pinyon by as much as 20:l. In J2, J10, J15, and -N12/99 NORTHISOUTH proportions were fairly even, while in J28, N9, and N10 pinyon exceeded juniper by 2:l to 3:l. This would appear to be related to a gradient of increasing elevation and precipitation from south to north. Pinyon pine has shown physiological evidence of having much higher potential rates of carbon fixation than junipers (Lathja and Barnes 1991), but shows less resistance to impacts of water stress on assimilation rate. Measures of the degree-of soil moisture stress at which leaf turgor can no longer be maintained ("permanent wilting point1')is an indication of the relative drought tolerance of a plant species. Wilkins and Klopatek (1987) determined that the "permanent wilting point" for pinyon pine was slightly higher than that for Utah juniper. Breashers et al. (1997) studied the use of soil moisture in spaces between trees

in a pinyon-juniper woodland and determined that one-seeded juniper made more
effective use of shallow soil moisture between trees than pinyon pine. In other words, pinyon pine is, in general, less accommodating of dry conditions than Utah juniper and, when competition for shallow soil moisture is intense, junipers tend to have an advantage over the pines. Lower relative abundance of pinyon pine in the southern part of the LOMCRA study areas, where elevations and precipitation are lower and soils tend to be shallower (and with presumably less moisture-holding capacity), is consistent with what is known of the ecology of these two tree species. Densities of subshrubs were highly variable often driven by the extremely local very dense occurrence of snakeweed. At a somewhat larger scale Douglas rabbitbrush or Greene rabbitbrush could be very dense in a general area perhaps reflecting a combination of substrate and land use history.

Occurrence of Forbs in the LOMCRA Studv Areas Historical grazing use of these lands has been so intense and unrelenting that growth of herbaceous species in general, but especially native perennial forbs, is very restricted. Although the complete absence of native perennial forbs in a randomly sampled 100 sq.m. area was uncommon (no more than 2 of 10 such plots in any of the LOMCRA study areas were totally devoid of g native perennial forbs), the extent of native perennial forb cover extremely limited. In the sagebrush vegetation type, percent cover by native perennial forbs in the various LOMCRA study areas averaged from 0.0 to 0.2 percent, while in the pinyon-juniper woodland, it averaged from 0.0 to 0.4 percent. (0.0 percent cover means less than 0.1 percent cover in most cases, i.e. cover is below the quantitative detection limit). Most frequently comprising (in the 2003 sampling) the very small cover afforded by native perennial forbs were some few of the following: Allium macropetalum, Astragalus wingatanus, Calochortus nuttallii, Cryptantha flavoculata, Cymopterus purpureus, Eriogonum umbellatum, Aster arenosus (Leucelene ericoides), Mirabilis multiflora, Oenothera coronopifolia, Oxybaphus linearis, Pedicularis centrantherum, Penstemon linarioides, Phlox longifolia, Solidago petradoria (Petradoria pumila), Sphaeralcea coccinea, Stanleya pinnata, and/or Townsendia exscapa. Although the spring of 2003 was comparatively favorable with regard to moisture, the extent native annual and biennial forbs was scant, averaging no more than 0.8 percent cover in the sagebrush type and no more than 0.1 percent cover in the pinyon-juniper type. Native annual and biennial species sporadically present included: Aster canescens, Chenopodium fremontii, Chenopodium gigantospermum, Chenopodium leptophyllum, Cryptantha crassicarpa, Descurainia pinnata, Descurainia richardsonii, Gilia aggregata, Gilia pumila, Gilia sinuata, Lappula redowskii ssp., Phacelia crenulata, Plantago patagonica, and/or Townsendia incana. Sensitive Plant Survey Results Survey of the inner (red) areas shown on Map 1 in spring 2003 did not reveal the presence of any of the "target" species (those deemed to have even a small chance of occurrence (see Appendix 3, Field Guide to Potentially Occurring Rare Plants, Black Mesa Mining Complex)).

Notes regarding the potential for the sought for rare plants to occur and the results of the intensive survey for them are summarized below: Amsonia peeblesii - Peebles blue star This plant is known from grasslands and desert scrub communities at elevations from 4,000 to 5,620 ft., in the arc of the Little Colorado River drainage from central Coconino County south and east into southern Navajo County, Arizona. Even the lowest reaches of the LOMCRA study areas are ne-arb 1,000 ft. higher than the uppermost occurrence of this plant. The environs of the Little Colorado River to which this plant is restricted are approximately 50 miles distant. No individuals of Peebles blue star were encountered during the 2003 surveys. Asclepias sanjuanensis - San Juan milkweed This plant is known from sandy benches and hills in pinyon-juniper woodland vegetation near the Chaco and San Juan Rivers in San Juan County, New Mexico at 5,000 to 6,200 feet. The type locality is on the San Juan College campus in Farmington. In terms of sandy substrate and pinyon-juniper woodland vegetation, the LOMCRA study areas would seem to include suitable habitat. However, its nearest occurrence in areas approximately 150 mi. east and at elevations mostly below the LOMCRA study area elevations (6,200 to 7,150 ft.) made its presence unlikely; none was found during the 2003 surveys. Astragalus cremnophylax var. cremnophylax - Sentry milkvetch This milkvetch is known from Grand Canyon National Park on Kaibab limestone, a Permian-age formation. LOMCRA study areas do not include limestones and are far younger (Cretaceous-age). Thus no suitable habitat was found and no sentry rnilkvetch was encountered. Astragalus cutleri (A. preusii var. cutleri)
- Copper

Canyon milkvetch

This plant is an endemic in southern San Juan County, Utah occurring on seleniferous soils derived from the Triassic-age Shinarump Conglomerate member of the Chinle formation at 3,800 ft. The lowest LOMCRA elevations of about 6,200 ft. are substantially higher and no substrates approximating those of the known occurrences are present. No individuals of Copper Canyon milkvetch were encountered during intensive surveys.

Astragalus humillimus - Mancos milkvetch This plant is known from San Juan County, New Mexico and adjacent Montezuma County, Colorado at elevations from about 5,000 to 6,500 ft. in cracks on "slickrock" exposures of the Cretaceous-age Point Lookout sandstone, which is also found in McKinley and Sandoval Counties, New Mexico in close association with the Satan Tongue member of Mancos Shale. In the LOMCRA study areas, Yale Point sandstone, a facies of the Mesa Verde formation of the Black Mesa Basin, forms limited exposures of bare rock. These sandstones are older th-an tho_se of the San Juan Basin, the Cretaceous sea having receded from the Black Mesa Basin before it receded from the San Juan Basin. In addition to the differences in substrates, the LOMCRA study areas are mostly higher in elevation than the known occurrences of Mancos milkvetch. No individuals of Mancos milkvetch were found during intensive searches in 2003. Astragalus naturitensis - Naturita milkvetch This plant is known from sandstone mesas, ledges, crevices, and slopes from 5,000 to 7,000 ft. in McKinley Co., New Mexico, as well as in southern Utah and southwestern Colorado. Such habitats are present in the LOMCRA study areas; those in the intensive survey areas were found not to be occupied. Carex specuicola - Navajo sedge This plant is known to occur in extreme northern Arizona and barely into Utah in seeps and hanging gardens below vertical cliffs of Navajo sandstone at elevations between 4,400 ft and 7,000 ft. No exposures of the lower Jurassic-age Navajo sandstone are present in the LOMCRA study areas. The upper Cretaceous Yale Point sandstone that forms cliffs along washes in the LOMCRA area is generally without development of seepage zones. The very few seepage zones observed during the intensive surveys had extensive crusts of evaporated salt. No individuals of Navajo sedge were observed during the intensive surveys. Clematis hirsutissima var. arizonica - Arizona leather flower Although the known range of elevational occurrence (6,800 to 9,000 ft) overlaps the elevations of many of the LOMCRA study areas, its preferred habitat is moist portions of mountain meadows, open woods, or thickets in ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests on soils derived from limestone. On the Navajo Nation, it is known only from the Chuska Mountains and Defiance Plateau. None of the habitat criteria are met in the

LOMCRA sites, and no Arizona leather flower was encountered in the intensive survey areas. Cystopteris utahensis - Utah bladder-fern Known from Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah at elevations from 4,200 to 8,800 feet, this plant could reasonably occur in the LOMCRA study areas on the very few sites where cracks in sandstones with calcareous cementation are at least slightly seeping. These locations were examined closely (in N121N99 NORTHISOUTH). None were found. Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. arizonicus - Arizona hedgehog cactus This rare cactus is known from central Arizona at elevations from 3,400 to 6,360 ft. on very rocky sites comprised mostly of boulders and cobbles of orthoclase-rich granite of late Cretaceous age. Other substrates on which it has been found include volcanic tuff and mid-Tertiary age dacite. Substrates of the LOMCRA study areas are distinctly unlike these. In addition, the range of elevations within the LOMCRA sites is 6,200 to 7,150 feet, which is, for the most part, substantially higher than the highest known occurrences of the cactus. These facts made the occurrence of this cactus unlikely in the LOMCRA study areas, and, in fact, no individuals of Arizona hedgehog cactus were encountered during the 2003 surveys. Errazurizia rotundata - Round dune-broom This plant is known from an arc of sites within a comparatively narrow elevational range (4,800 to 5,200 ft) from near Tuba City in Coconnino County, Arizona swinging south and east to near Holbrook, in general following the valley of the Little Colorado River. Substrates are of various lithologies, but are apparently coarse and loose. Although the LOMCRA study areas include some loose sands over sandstone, elevations are considerably higher and the LOMCRA sites are about 50 miles east and north from the Little Colorado drainage. No individuals of round dune-broom were encountered during 2003 intensive surveys. Lesquerella navajoensis - Navajo bladderpod Navajo bladderpod is known to occur in McKinley County, New Mexico, Apache County, Arizona, and in Utah on windswept exposures of the Todlito limestone member of the Morrison formation at elevations between 7,200 and 7,600 ft. Upper elevations of the

north-most LOMCRA study areas (N9, N10, N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH) are just below this range, but Morrison formation (Upper Jurassic age) materials are not present at the surface in the Black Mesa Basin. Furthermore the Upper Cretaceous sediments that are present in the LOMCRA study areas do not include limestones. Navajo bladderpod was not considered a likely occurrence in the LOMCRA study areas and none was found during 2003 surveys.

Pediocactus bradyi - Brady pincushion cactus
This narrow endemic is found in Coconino County, Arizona along the rim of Marble Canyon between elevations of 3,400 and 5,200 ft. Substrates are narrowly defined where intermixed Moenkopi and Kaibab formation debris form the soil parent material. LOMCRA study area elevations begin at about 6,200 ft and range upward to about 7,150 ft. Furthermore none of the Upper Cretaceous-age substrates of the LOMCRA areas approximate the Moenkopi or Kaibab formation materials (Upper Triassic to lower Jurassic age). There was almost no chance of finding this cactus, and none were found during 2003 intensive surveys of the LOMCRA study areas.

Pediocactus peeblesianus var. fickeiseniae - Fickeisen plains cactus
The known occurrences of this cactus are in Coconino and Mohave Counties, Arizona on soils derived from Kaibab limestone at elevations between 4,000 and 5,600 ft. LOMCRA study area sites are all well above the known elevational limit and limestonederived soils are not present. Nonetheless, it was sought during the intensive surveys but not found.

Pediocactus peeblesianus var. peeblesianus - Navajo plains cactus
This cactus is known from southern Navajo County at elevations from 5,100 to 5,650 ft. in the upper reaches of the Little Colorado River watershed on thin veneers of gravel that are not replicated in the LOMCRA study areas. The elevations of the LOMCRA study areas are well above the highest known occurrence of this cactus. No individuals of Navajo plains cactus were encountered in the intensive field surveys.

Phlox cluteana - Navajo Mountain Phlox
This plant is known from the northern Chuska Mountains, Navajo Mountain, and Black Rock Mountain on the Navajo Nation, and in adjacent New Mexico and Utah at elevations from 6,000 to 10,400 ft. on sandy soils with leaf litter under ponderosa pine,

Gambel oak, and pinyon - juniper woodland. Although it seems likely that the pinyonjuniper woodland habitat in which it is found represents the opposite end of the moisture spectrum from that found in the LOMCRA pinyon-juniper sites, it was sought in the intensive searches of spring 2003, but not found. Platanthera zothecina - Alcove bog orchid This plant requires the constant flow of moisture usually in hanging garden / alcove environments and is known from small populations at widely scattered locations in central and northeastern Arizona, east-central Utah, and northwestern Colorado. The northeastern Arizona locations include nearby Tsegi and Betatakin Canyons. Although nearby, these locations are in very deep canyons with overhanging cliffs of Navajo sandstone. The much younger Cretaceous-age sandstones (Yale Point member of the Mesa Verde formation) of the LOMCRA study areas form small cliffs along some of the washes of the area, but nowhere are there deep shady well-wetted sites that would support this plant. The very few appearances of moisture on the LOMCRA cliff sites have only enough flow to periodically bring dissolved salts to the surface where rapid evaporation produces extensive salt crusting. Puccinellia parishii - Parish's alkaligrass This rare annual alkaligrass is found on salt-encrusted frequently wet soils at widely disjunct sites from northern and eastern Arizona, to southwestern Colorado and western New Mexico and as far away as San Bernadino County, California. Such microsites are found at a few seepage sites in LOMCRA study area N121N99 NORTHISOUTH and along Wild Ram wash in LOMCRA study area J2. Although alkaligrass is present, it is saltmarsh alkaligrass (Puccinellia fasciculata), an introduced species now found in the northeastern U.S. and in Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico. Careful examination of the LOMCRA alkalinetwet soils revealed only this species. Characteristics distinguishing saltmarsh alkaligrass from Parish's alkaligrass include lemmas glabrous and 2 to 2.5 mm long, panicle branches floriferous to the base, and perennial habit. Sclerocactus mesae-verdae - Mesa Verde Cactus This cactus is known from San Juan County, New Mexico as well as adjacent Montezuma County, Colorado at elevations from 4,900 to 5,500 ft. on very heavy soils derived from Mancos formation shales or from shaley facies of the overlying Mesa Verde formation. Exposures of Mesa Verde formation facies in the northern Black Mesa Basin

and the LOMCRA study areas in general are dominated by the Yale Point sandstone and extensive areas of heavy clay soils are absent. These rocks are age-equivalent to the upper Mancos and lower Mesa Verde rocks of the San Juan Basin but are not marine deposits (the Cretaceous sea having withdrawn from the Black Mesa Basin earlier). No individuals of Mesa Verde cactus were encountered during the 2003 intensive searches in the LOMCRA study areas. PLANTS FAIRLY COMMONLY SEEN THAT ARE SIMILAR TO TARGET SPECIES Asclepias asperula - considerably larger than A. sanjuanensis in all dimensions of herbage and flowers, and with flowers with greenish corolla lobes with purplish hoods. A. sanjuanensis flowers have purplish corolla lobes with whitish hoods. Phlox longifolia - This phlox has easily observed bulging intercostal membranes, unlike
P. cluteana

Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. mojavensis

- Differs

from E. t. arizonicus in color,

length and diameter of central and radial spines. Pediocactus simpsonii - Possesses normal spines rather than the corky spines of P. peeblesianus var. fickeiseniae and P. p. var. peeblesianus. Possesses central spines, unlike P. bradyi. PLANTS OCCASIONALLY ENCOUNTERED THAT ARE SIMILAR TO TARGET SPECIES Asclepias involucrata (Photograph 87) - Differs from A. sanjuanensis in having cream to greenish flowers. Puccinellia fasciculata - Differs from P. parishii in being perennial and having lemmas glabrous and 2 to 2.5 mm long.

Habitats of the Outer Areas
The areas between the red and blue boundaries on Map 1 were examined in fall 2003 for the presence of habitats either different from those of the inner (blue) areas that were

examined in detail in spring 2003 and I or the same as those in the inner areas that had the potential to support sensitive species. Habitats in the outer areas that were as potentially suitable for Asclepias sanjuanensis, Astragalus humillimus, and Astragalus
naturitensis as those in the inner areas were found. It should be noted, of course, that

those same types of potentially suitable habitats were found not to support any of these species in the adjacent inner areas in spring 2003 surveys. No new habitats (i.e. habitats not represented in the inner areas) were found in the fall 2003 examination of the outer areas. No additional wet seepage sites were located. Drainages found in the outer areas were dry and generally heavily trampled by livestock (Photos 88 through 92).

Arizona Rare Plant Committee. 1999. Arizona Rare Plant Field Guide. A Collaboration of Agencies and Organizations. Austin, D. 1987. Plant communitiy changes within a mature pinyon-juniper woodland. Great Basin Naturalist 47(1): 96-99. Beetle, A.A. 1970. Recommended Plant Names. Univ. Wyo. Agr. Expt. Stn. Res. Journal 31, Laramie. Breashers, D.D., O.B. Myers, S.R. Johnson, C.W. Myer, and S.N. Martens. 1997. Differential use of spatially heterogeneous soil moisture by two semiarid woody species: Pinus edulis and Juniperus monosperma. J. Ecol. 85289-299. Conard, H.S. 1956. How to Know the Mosses and Liverworts. WM. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque. 226 p. DeLucia, E.D. and W. H. Schlesinger. 1991. Resource-use efficiency and drought tolerance in adjacent Basin and Sierran plants. Ecology i'XI-58. Ecosphere Environmental Services, Inc. 1995. Endangered, Threatened and Sensitive Plant Field Guide; The Farmington District. Collaboratively prepared by Ecosphere, U.S. Bureau of Land Mangement (BLM), Williams Field Services Co., and El Paso Natural Gas Co. ESCO Associates Inc. 2000. 1999 Baseline Vegetation Report, J23 Conveyor Alternatives, Black Mesa Mining Complex. Prepared for Peabody Western Coal Company, Flagstaff, AZ. Evans, R.D. and J.R. Ehleringer. 1994. Water and nitrogen dynamics in an arid woodland. Oecologia 99:233-242. Flanagan, L.B., J.R. Ehleringer, and J.D. Marshall. 1992. Differential uptake of summer precipitation among co-occurring trees and shrubs in a pinyon-juniper woodland. Plant Cell Environ. l5:831-836. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence. 1392 p. Hale, Mason E. 1969. How to Know the Lichens. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque. 226 p.

Harner, R.F. and K.T. Harper. 1976. The role of area, heterogeneity, and favorability in plant species diversity of pinyon-juniper ecosystems. Ecology 57: 1254-1263. Harper, K.T. 2003. Pinyon-Juniper woodlands in Zion National Park, Utah. Western Amer. Nat. 63(2):189-202. Kearney, T. and R. Peebles. 1960. Arizona Flora. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. Lathja, K. and F.J. Barnes. 1991. Carbon gain and water use in pinyon pine-juniper woodlands of northern New Mexico: field versus phytotron chamber experiments. Tree Physiol. 9:59-67. McDougall, W.B. 1973. Seed Plants of Northern Arizona. The Museum of Northern Arizona. Flagstaff. 594 p. Moir, W.H. and J.O. Carleton. 1986. Classification of pinyon-juniper sites on National Forests in the Southwest. Everett, ed. Proceedeings - Pinyon- Juniper Conference. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station Gen. Tech Rpt. INT-215.

In:

Navajo Natural Heritage Program. 2001. Navajo Nation Endangered Species List: Species Accounts. Navajo Nation Natural Heritage Program Department of Fish and Wildlife, Window Rock. Nickerson, M.F., G.E. Brink, and C. Feddema. 1976. Principal Range Plants of the Central and Southern Rocky Mountains: Names and Symbols. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rept. RM-20. Nowak, R.S., D.J. Moore and R.J. Tausch. 1999. Ecophysiological patterns of pinyon and juniper. In: Monsen, S.B. and R. Stevens, comps. Proceedings: Ecology and management of pinyon-juniper communities within the Interior West; Sept. 15-18, 1999; Provo, UT. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Proc. RMRS-P-9. Peabody Coal Company. 1985. Permit Application Package for the Black Mesa and Kayenta Mines, Chapter 9, Vegetation Resources. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1979. Common Plant Names list and Scientific Plant Names List. Exhibit 407.1 (a)(6), National Soils Handbook Part II, USDA, Washington, D.C.

Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado Rare Plant Field Guide. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. Spahr, R. 1991. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species of the lntermountain Region. Fisheries and Wildlife Management, lntermountain Region, U.S. Forest Service, Ogden, UT. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 1973. International Classification and Mapping of Vegetation. Series 6, Ecology and Conservation. Paris. 93 pp. Utah TES Plant Interagency Committee. 1991. Endangered, Threatened and Sensitive Plant Field Guide. U.S. Forest Service, Ogden; National Park Service, UT; Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Salt Lake City; Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Denver; Navajo Nation, Navajo Natural Heritage Program, Window Rock; Skull Valley Goshute Tribe, Salt Lake City. Welden, C.W., W.L. Slauson, and R.T. Ward. 1990. Spatial pattern and interference in pinon-juniper woodlands of northwest Colorado. Great Basin Naturalist 50(4):313320. Welsh, S.L. et al. 1993. A Utah Flora. Brigham Young University, Provo. 986 p. Wilkins, S.D. and J.M.Klopatek. 1987. Plant water relations in ecotonal areas of pinyonjuniper and semi-arid shrub ecosystems. In: R.L. Everett, compiler. Proceedings Pinyon-Juniper Conference. Jan. 13-16, 1986, Reno, NV. USDA Forest Service, lntermountain Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rpt. INT-GTR-215: 412-417.

APPENDIX 1 DATA TABLES Cover data tables: Both first and additional hit data are presented in these tables. Additional hit data are shown in parentheses.

Woody plant density data tables: Counts of dead shrubs are shown in parentheses but are not included in density totals.

Table I Cover Data 52 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 . PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 1 of 2

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number---(%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5 (%) (%) (%)

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Arenaria hookeri Chaenactis stevioides Chenopodium leptophyllum Cryptantha crassisepala Cryptantha minima Descurainia pinnata Gilia pumila Gilia sinuata Lappula redowskii Lappula texana Linum puberulum Phacelia crenulata Townsendia incana ]TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORB! Chenopodium album Salsola kali INTRO. ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora NATIVE ANN. GRASSES

TOTAL

TOTAL

0.20 0.2

100.00 100.0

1.39 1.4

0.20 0.2

1.39 1.4

P P

P P

P P

l l

P P

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Calochortus nuttallii Cymopterus purpurascens Cymopterus purpureus Delphinium scaposum Euphorbia fendleri Oenothera coronopifolia Phlox longifolia Sphaeralcea coccinea ITOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron srnithii Oryzopsis hymenoides Sitanion jubatum Sitanion longifoliurn Sti~a comata

0.00 0.0

60.00 100.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

P P

P P

P

P P

P

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum aureum Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae Leptodactylon pungens NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

1

1 1

2 P P P

P

P

TOTAL

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus ITOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS

Table 1. Cover Data 52 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%I (%) (Yo)

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover'

TOTAL
MOSS Moss

NATIVE TREES Pinus edulis NATIVE TREES

0.00 0.0 0.80 0.8

20.00 20.0 60.00 60.0

0.00 0.0 5.56 5.6

0.00 0.0 0.80 0.8

0.00 0.0 5.56 5.6

TOTAL MOSS
SUCCULENT Opuntia fragilis var. fragilis [TOTAL SUCCULENT Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0 100.00

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0 8.40 16.00 58.00

0.00 0.0

1 1 I

8.40 16,00

100.00 100.00

58.00

TOTAL VEGETATION COVER

TOTALS

100.0 14.4 (s=3.8) GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Dead 42.0

100.0

100.0 14.4 (s=3.8) 42.0

100.0

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 sq.rn.) I (AVERAGE= 19.2 Std.Dev.= 4.4) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 2. Cover Data J4 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 1 of 2

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number----

TOTAL TOTAL
TOTAL

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chaenactis stevioides Cryptantha crassisepala Descurainia pinnata Gilia pumila Gilia sinuata Lappula redowskii Linum puberulurn Plantago purshii NATIVEANN. & MEN. FORBS NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora NATIVE ANN. GRASSES INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Bromus tectorum INTRO. ANN. GRASSES

0.20 0.6

40.00 100.0

2.17 6.5

0.20 0.6

2.17 6.5

P

I

P

P 1

1 1

1.20 1.2

40.00 40.0

13.04 13.0

1.20 1.2

13.04 13.0

3 3

---

-- -

--P p

3 3

I
0.00 0.0 20.00 20.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0

I
---

I
--- -----

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Calochortus nuttallii Lygodesmia juncea Oenothera coronopifolia Sphaeralcea coccinea NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS INTRODUCED PERENNIAL FORBS Rumex crispus INTRO. PERENNIAL FORBS

0.00 0.2

40.00 80.0

0.00 2.2

0.00 0.2

0.00 2.2

P p

---

P

P P

I

I

TOTAL

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

I
---

P p

I
---

--- ---

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron srnithii Oryzopsis hymenoides Sitanion longifolium

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii Sporobolus cryptandrus [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Eriogonurn aureum Gutierrezia sarothrae Leptodactylon pungens NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

0.00 2.2

20.00 100.0

0.00 23.9

0.00 2.2

0.00 23.9

3

P P

1

3

4

TOTAL

0.00 0.0

20.00 40.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

p

---

---

---

P P

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus )TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma ~ i n u edulis k NATIVE TREES

2.00 4.6

100.00 100.0

21.74 50.0

2.00 4.6

21.74 50.0

2 5

1 1

P 5 2 1 1 0 6

TOTAL

1

I

0.00 0.0

40.00 40.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

---

--- ---

P P

P P

Table 2. Cover Data 54 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003
PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 2 of 2

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number---(%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5 (%) (%) (%)

TOTAL MOSS TOTAL
LICHEN Parmelia chlorochroa LICHEN SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza Sclerocactus parviflorus SUCCULENT Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

Moss

I

TOTAL

TOTAL VEGETATION COVER
GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deac SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 12.2 Std.Dev.= 4.6) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cc ?rtransect, but not quantitatively encountered. 14
8
7

TOTALS

14

18

Table 3 Cover Data 5516 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 . PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (% (%I (%I (%I

-

-

Page 1 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover*

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Lappula redowskii Linurn puberulurn Plantago pushii (TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS

0.40 0.00 0.00 0.4

60.00 20.00 20.00 60.0

4.88 0.00 0.00 4.9

0.40 0.00 0.00 0.4

4.88 0.00 0.00 4.9

TOTAL INTRO. ANN. & BIEN. FORBS
NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Allium macropetalum Aster arenosus Calochortus nuttallii Cryptantha sp. Delphinium scaposum Oenothera coronopifolia Oxybaphus linearis Sphaeralcea coccinea Townsendia exscapa ITOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Oryzopsis hymenoides Stipa comata [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida purpurea Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii Sporobolus airoides NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) P P P P 1 P P P

Kochia scoparia

P

P P P P P l P P P P P P

P P

P P

P P

P P P

---

TOTAL

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae Haplopappus drummondii [TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus Sarcobatus verrniculatus [TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia polyacantha SUCCULENT

TOTAL

P P P

P P

P P P

P 1 l

P P

Table 3. Cover Data J5/6 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 2 of 2

Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

-

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number----

TOTALS -[TOTAL VEGETATION COVER --t GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Dead SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 15.0 Std.Dev.= 3.5) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 4. Cover Data 58 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ PLANT SPECIES

-

- 2003

Page 1of 2

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number--(%) (%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5 (%) (%)

TOTAL

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Gilia sinuata Linurn puberulurn NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS

0.00 0.00 0.0

20.00 20.00 40.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

P

---

p

---

p

P

---

TOTAL

NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora NATIVE ANN. GRASSES

I
0.60 0.6 20.00 20.0 8.57 8.6 0.60 0.6 8.57 8.6

I
---

I
--3 3

---

--P P P

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Aster sp. Calochortus nuttallii Cryptantha sp. Cyrnopterus purpurascens Cyrnopterus purpureus Oenothera coronopifolia Sphaeralcea coccinea Sphaeralcea pawifolia NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

P P P

P P P

P P P

P

P P 0.00 0.2 20.00 100.0 0.00 2.9 0.00 0.2 0.00 2.9
P

l l

P P

P P

P P P

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hymenoides Sitanion longifolium Stipa cornate [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida purpurea Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysotharnnus depressus Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum aureum Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae /TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Lyciurn pallidum Sarcobatus verrniculatus ]TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss

1

0.00 0.0

20.00 40.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

---

P p

p

---

---

0.00 1.40 0.60 2.0

20.00 80.00 80.00 100.0

0.00 20.00 8.57 28.6

0.00 1.40 0.60 2.0

0.00 20.00 8.57 28.6

P

P

2

1

P

I

2

6

1

0.00 0.2

40.00 100.0

0.00 2.9

0.00 0.2

0.00 2.9

P P

P

P l

P

P

0.00 3.4

20.00 100.0

0.00 48.6

0.00 3.4

0.00 48.6

P 7

2

1

P

7

TOTAL

TOTAL MOSS

1

0.20 0.2

20.00 20.0

2.86 2.9

0.20 0.2

2.86 2.9

---

-- -

---

1 1

---

Table 4. Cover Data J8 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 2 of 2

TOTAL
Litter

SUCCULENT Opuntia whipplei SUCCULENT Standing dead

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%I (%) (%I (%) (Yo) 0.00 0.0 20.00 20.0 100.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 11.80 8.40 61.00 0.00 0.0

1

8.40 61.OO

100.00 100.00

Bare ground Rock

TOTALS 100.0 [TOTAL VEGETATION COVER 7.0 (s=1.2) GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+StDead 39.0

100.0

100.0 7.0 (s=1.2) 39.0

100.0

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 13.6 Std.Dev.= 1.9) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 5. Cover Data J10 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, A Z 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (%I (%) (%) (%I

-

-

Page 1 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover' ----Sample Number---1 2 3 4 5

TOTAL

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Gilia pumila Gilia sinuata Lappula redowskii Linanthus aureus Oenothera albicaulis Plantago . - purshii Townsendia incana NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS

I

0.00 0.0

40.00 80.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

P P

P P

---

P

P

NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora [TOTAL NATIVE ANN. GRASSES NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Alliurn macropetalum Aster arenosus Cryptantha sp. Delphinium scaposum Euphorbia fendleri Sphaeralcea coccinea Townsendia exscapa

0.40 0.4

60.00 60.0

3.77 3.8

0.40 0.4

3.70 3.7

P p

P p

-P P

---

2 2

P

P P P P P

P P

P

P P

ITOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS
NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hymenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion longifoliurn Stipa cornata [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Arternisia frigida Chrysotharnnus greenei Eriogonurn aureurn Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae Leptodactylon pungens NATIVE SUBSHRUBS P P P P P P
1 P

P P P P

I P I

P P P P

0.00 0.4

80.00 100.0

0.00 3.8

0.00 0.4

0.00 3.7

P P I

1

2.60 0.40 3.0

80.00 80.00 100.0

24.53 3.77 28.3

2.80 0.40 3.2

25.93 3.70 29.6

5(1) . . P 5(1)

5 P 5

P P P

P

3 2 5

P P P 0.00 0.2 60.00 100.0 P P P P P P 1
P P P 1

I
0.00 1.9 0.00 0.2 0.00 1.9 P

TOTAL

P

P P

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus nauseosus Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus Sarcobatus vermiculatus Tetradymia canescens NATIVE SHRUBS

TOTAL TOTAL

4.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 5.6

100.00 40.00 20.00 60.00 20.00 20.00 100.0

37.74 11.32 0.00 0.00 1.89 1.89 52.8

4.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 5.6

37.04 11.11 0.00 0.00 1.85 1.85 51.9

5

8

3 2 P 1 6

2 4 P P 1 7

2

P

5

8

2

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis NATIVE TREES

I

I

1.00 I.o

60.00 80.0

9.43 9.4

1.OO I .o

9.26 9.3

1

I

P

P P

P P

---

5 5

Table 5. Cover Data J10 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (Ole) (%I W) (Oh) r

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover*

TOTAL TOTAL
Litter

LICHEN Parrnelia chlorochroa LICHEN

--

---

SUCCULENT Opuntia rnacrorhiza SUCCULENT Standing dead

--

Bare ground Rock

TOTAL VEGETATION COVER

TOTALS

--GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Dead

SPECIES DENSITY (# of species/100 sq.rn.) (AVERAGE= 17.6 Std.Dev.= 3.7) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 6. Cover Data J13114 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 1 of 2

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number----

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Cryptantha crassisepala Lappula redowskii Linurn puberulum Townsendia incana NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS

TOTAL

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Calochortus nuttallii Cryptantha sp. Cymopterus purpurascens Cymopterus purpureus Eriogonurn leptophyllum Eriogonum umbellatum Euphorbia fendleri Oxybaphus linearis Sphaeralcea coccinea NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

P P
P P

P

P
P P

P

P P P P P P

P P

P P P

l l

P P

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Oryzopsis hyrnenoides Stipa cornata ]TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida purpurea Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii ~~orobolus airoides NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

P p

---

1 P
1

1 P
1

P
P

TOTAL

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae Haplopappus drurnrnondii Senecio douglasii var. longilobus (TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Sarcobatus verrniculatus [TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma /TOTAL NATIVE TREES SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia whipplei Pediocactus sirnpsonii SUCCULENT

P

P P P P P P

P

P

P

P

TOTAL

Table 6. Cover Data J13114 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (Yo) (%) (%) (%) 9.00 100.00 9.00

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover*

Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

TOTALS (TOTAL VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deac SPECIES DENSITY (# of species/100 s q m ) (AVERAGE= 10.0 Std.Dev.= 5.8) r 'P=Present within 1 m.of either side of the cc 2 transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 7. Cover Data 515 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 1 of 2

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number---COVER COVER FREQUENCY (%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5 (%) (%) (%)
I

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chenopodium berlandieri Descurainia pinnata Gilia pumila Gilia sinuata Lappula redowskii Linum puberulurn (TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORB? Cheno~odium album Tragopogon dubius INTRO. ANN. & BIEN. FORBS

TOTAL

TOTAL

NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora NATIVE ANN. GRASSES

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Calochortus nuttallii Cymopterus purpureus Euphorbia fendleri Oenothera coronopifolia Phlox longifolia Sphaeraicea coccinea NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

P P P

P

P

TOTAL

0.00 0.2

80.00 100.0

0.00 1.6

0.00 0.2

0.00 1.6

P P

P

P P

P l

P P

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron dasystachyum Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hymenoides Sitanion jubatum Stipa comata (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) INTRODUCED PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool Elyrnus junceus (TOTAL INTRO. PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii Sporobolus cryptandrus [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

P P

P P P

P P

P P l

1 P P P

TOTAL

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus nauseosus ~ht$sothamnus viscidiflorus (TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS

Table 7. Cover Data 515 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (%) (%) (%) - (%I

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover*

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis !TOTAL NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss

-

TOTAL MOSS
Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock
. - .. . -

-

TOTAL VEGETATION COVER
GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deac

-

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 s q m ) (AVERAGE= 17.0 Std.Dev.= 4.7) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 8. Cover Data 528 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 1 of 2

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover' AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number---(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Aster canescens Chenopodium glaucum Chenopodium hians Chenopodium leptophyllum Cryptantha crassisepala Descurainia pinnata Descurainia richardsonii Gilia pumila Lappula redowskii /TOTAL NATIVE ANN. BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORB: Chenopodium album Salsola kali Solanum sarachoides INTRO. ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora Munroa squarrosa NATIVE ANN. GRASSES

TOTAL

TOTAL TOTAL

INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Brornus tectorum INTRO. ANN. GRASSES

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Pensternon sp. Phlox longifolia Sphaeralcea coccinea Townsendia exscapa )TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hymenoides Sitanion jubatum Sitanion longifolium Stipa cornata NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c)

0.00 0.0

20.00 100.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

P

P

P

P P

P

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii Sporobolus cryptandrus \TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei ~uierrezia sarothrae ]TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Sarcobatus verrniculatus ITOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS

Table 8. Cover Data 528 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover* ----Sample Number-.

TOTAL
MOSS Moss

NATIVE TREES Pinus edulis NATIVE TREES

TOTAL MOSS TOTAL
LICHEN Parmelia chlorochroa LICHEN

TOTAL
Litter

SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza SUCCULENT

Standing dead

Bare ground Rock

TOTALS VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deac

TOTAL

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 sq.rn.)

Table 9. Cover Data N121N99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, Page 1 of 2 PWCC, AZ 2003 RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sarn~le Number---(%) (%) (%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5 NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS I Aster canescens Chenopodium leptophyllum Descurainia pinnata Gilia sinuata Lappula redowskii 0.60 80.00 4.35 0.60 4.23 P P 3 P (TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS 0.6 100.0 4.3 0.6 4.2 P P 3 P P

-

-

Sisymbrium altissimum (TOTAL INTRO. ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Bahia oppositifolia Calochortus nuttallii Phlox longifolia Sphaeralcea coccinea [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS INTRODUCED PERENNIAL FORBS Corydalis aurea (TOTAL INTRO. PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hymenoides Sitanion longifolium (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c)

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

--- --

P p

---

---

0.00 0.0

80.00 80.0 20.00 20.0 80.00 40.00 60.00 80.0 20.00 20.0 40.00 40.00 20.00 60.0

0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.45 0.00 0.00 1.4 0.00 0.0 1.45 0.00 0.00 1.4

0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.4 0.00 0.0 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.4

0.00 0.0

P p

---

P P

P P

P P

I
0.00 0.0 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.2 0.00 0.0 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.2 0.00 0.0 2.82 0.00 0.00 2.8 0.00 0.0 1.41 1.41 0.00 2.8

I
--- --P p

--P P P

--P P P P

l ( 1 )

P
---

1
P p

P (1)

Poa compressa /TOTAL INTRO. PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii Sporobolus cryptandrus (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Artemisia frigida Chrysothamnus greenei Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae [TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus nauseosus Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus (TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS INTRODUCED SHRUBS Tamarix pentandra (TOTAL INTRODUCED SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Pinus edulis [TOTAL NATIVE TREES

1

IF
P P

---

---

-- -

- -1 (1)

P P

---

---

1(1)

0.00 0.0

20.00 80.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

---

P

P

P P

P

0.20 12.4

60.00 100.0

1.45 89.9

0.20 12.4

1.41 87.3

P 7

18

1 11

8

P 18

1
0.00 0.0 20.00 20.0 60.00 60.0 0.00 0.0 2.90 2.9 0.00 0.0 0.40 0.4 0.00 0.0

I
--P p

---

---

--P

I

1

1
0.40 0.4 2.82 2.8 1 1 1 1

I

---

---

P

Table 9. Cover Data NluN99 NORTHlSOUTH LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 RELATIVE RELATIVE PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%I (%) (%I (%) (%I MOSS Moss MOSS

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover'

TOTAL

LICHEN Parmelia chlorochroa [TOTAL LICHEN SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza [TOTAL SUCCULENT Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

TOTALS (TOTAL VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deac SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 12.4 Std.Dev.= 3.0) *P=Present within 1 m.of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 10. Cover Data 52 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (Yo) (%) (%) (%)

-

-

Page 1 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover'

TOTAL
TOTAL

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Cryptantha crassisepala Descurainia pinnata Lappula redowskii Lappula texana Linurn puberulurn Mentzelia albicaulis Phacelia crenulata Plantago purshii NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora NATIVE ANN. GRASSES

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Asclepias involucrata Aster arenosus Astragalus praelongus Astragalus wingatanus Calochortus nuttallii Cymopterus purpurascens Euphorbia fendleri Haplopappus nuttallii Hymenopappus pauciflorus Oxybaphus linearis Phlox longifolia NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

P P P P P P

P

P P

P P

P

P P P

P
P

TOTAL

P P

P

P

P

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hyrnenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion jubaturn Stipa comata JTOTALNATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida purpurea Bouteloua gracilis
Hilaria iarnesii

P (1 (1)

P

P P P P

P 1 1

P P P P

P P

P P

P P P

P P P

1 P 1

P 1 P 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus depressus Chrysotharnnus greenei Eriogonum aureum Gutierrezia sarothrae Leptodactylon pungens /TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus ~ ~ h e dviridis ra [TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS

P

P P

P P

P P P P

P P P

P

P P

P

P

2 1 P P 3

P

1 P P 1

8

P P

P P

8

Table 10. Cover Data 52 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003
PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) I . / " ( (Yo) (%I I . /"(

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover*

TOTAL

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis NATIVE TREES SUCCULENT Marnrnillaria spp. SUCCULENT

10.00 6.60 16.6

80.00 80.00 100.0

51.02 33.67 84.7

10.00 6.60 16.6

50.51 33.33 83.8

I
0.00 0.0 20.00 20.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0

TOTAL TOTAL
Litter

ALGAE Nostoc flagelliforme ALGAE Standing dead

I
0.00 0.0 20.00 20.0 100.00
4.00

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0 4.00 16.40 51.40

0.00 0.0

1

Bare ground Rock

1
1

100.00 100.00
51.40

TOTAL VEGETATION COVER

TOTALS

100.0 19.6 (s=6.5) 48.6 GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Dead

100.0

100.2 19.8 (s=6.8) 48.8

100.0

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 sq.rn.) (AVERAGE= 16.4 Std.Dev.= 5.0) *P=Present within 1 r . of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered. n

Table 11. Cover Data 54 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

-

-

Page 1 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover* ----Sarnole Number--2 3 4 5 P

1

TOTAL

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Gilia sinuata Linurn puberulurn NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora NATIVE ANN. GRASSES

0.00 0.00 0.0

20.00 20.00 40.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

---

---

P

P P

---

I

TOTAL

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

I

P p

I
-----

--P P

--P

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Cyrnopterus purpurascens Eriogonurn sp. Haplopappus nuttallii Oenothera corono~ifolia Sphaeralcea coccinea \TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Oryzopsis hyrnenoides Sitanion longifolium Stipa cornata (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida purpurea Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

P

P

P P P P P

0.00 0.0 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.2

80.00 80.0 100.00 40.00 40.00 100.0

0.00 0.0 1.41 0.00 0.00 1.4

0.00 0.0 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.4 0.00 0.60 1.20 1.8

0.00 0.0 1.32 0.00 1.32 2.6 0.00 3.95 7.89 11.8

P
p

--P

P P

P P

P

P
P

TOTAL

1

0.00 0.60 0.60 1.2

20.00 100.00 100.00 100.0

0.00 4.23 4.23 8.5

1

P

P

P

I P (1) l(1)

P p P

P

P

1

P 2

I 1

P P

(1) 2(2) l(1) 4(2)

P P P

TOTAL

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysotharnnus depressus Chrysotharnnus greenei Eriogonurn aureurn Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

0.20 0.2

60.00 100.0

1.41 1.4

0.20 0.2

1.32 1.3

1 I

P

P

P P

P P

TOTAL

NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus NATIVE SHRUBS

0.40 0.00 0.40 0.8

100.00 20.00 100.00 100.0

2.82 0.00 2.82 5.6

0.40 0.00 0.40 0.8

2.63 0.00 2.63 5.3

NATIVE TREES Junioerus osteosoerrna Pinus edulis !TOTAL NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss

4.00 11.4

80.00 100.0 40.00 40.0 20.00 40.00 20.00 60.0

28.17 80.3 0.00 0.0 0.00 1.41 0.00 1.4

4.00 11.4 0.20 0.2 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.2

26.32 75.0

10

2 10

5 12

2 1 1 12 13

I

TOTAL MOSS
SUCCULENT Marnrnillaria spp. Opuntia rnacrorhiza Opuntia polyacantha SUCCULENT

0.00 0.0

1.32 1.3

I
(1 (1)

---

---

---

P

P

TOTAL

0.00 0.20 0.00 0.2

0.00 1.32 0.00 1.3

P P P P

P 1

---

1

---

Table 11. Cover Data J4 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover' ----Sample Number----

AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissima Yucca baccata [TOTAL AGAVOIDS Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

TOTALS (TOTAL VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Weg+St.Deac SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 14.8 Std.Dev.= 3.3) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cc ?rtransqt, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 12. Cover Data J8 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 1 of 2

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number---(%) (%) (%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5

TOTAL

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chenopodiurn frernontii ~a~pu1.a redowskii NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS

0.00 0.00 0.0

20.00 20.00 40.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

P p P p

--------P P P P P P P P P P

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Astragalus wingatanus Calochortus nuttallii Cymopterus purpurascens Eriogonurn sp. Sphaeralcea coccinea [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hyrnenoides Sitanion longifolium Stipa cornata NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c)

P P P P P P

P P P P P

P P P P P

0.00 0.0

100.00 100.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

P P

P
P P

P P

P P

P P

TOTAL
TOTAL

0.00 0.0

20.00 100.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

P

P

P

P

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

TOTAL

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus depressus Chrysotharnnus greenei Erioqonurn aureurn Gutierrezia sarothrae NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

1

I

0.00 0.4

60.00 80.0

0.00 2.9

0.00 0.4

0.00 2.9 14.29 0.00 1.43 0.00 15.7

I P

1

P

P

2 l(1)
P P

---

P P

P

NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus Lyciurn pallidurn NATIVE SHRUBS

TOTAL

1.80 0.00 0.20 0.00 2.0

80.00 80.00 100.00 40.00 100.0

13.24 0.00 1.47 0.00 14.7

2.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 2.2

3
P P

1
P P P P I P

4
P P

3

l(1)

2

4

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis /TOTAL NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss

3.60 10.6

60.00 100.0

26.47 77.9 0.00 0.0

3.80 10.8 0.00 0.0

27.14 77.1

11 6(1) 16 17(1) 5

7
P P

1 8
P P

I
0.00 0.0 40.00 40.0 0.00 0.0

I
-----

TOTAL MOSS
SUCCULENT Opuntia rnacrorhiza Opuntia whipplei (TOTAL SUCCULENT

---

I

1

0.00 0.0

20.00 80.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

1

I P

P

---

P P

P

Table 12. Cover Data 58 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover'

Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

TOTALS VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Dea

TOTAL

SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 15.8 Std.Dev.= 3.0) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cc

!r transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 13. Cover Data J10 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 1 of 2

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Lupinus brevicaulus (TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS

1

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number---(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5

I

I

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

---

--P p

P p

---

---

Euphorbia sp. [TOTAL INTRO. ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Cymopterus purpurascens Eriogonum umbellatum Haplopappus sp. Mirabilis multiflora Solidago petradoria Stanleya pinnata [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Orvzopsis hvrnenoides s t h a coma& /TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum aureum Eriogonurn corymbosum Gutierrezia sarothrae NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

---

--- ---

---

0.00 0.4

40.00 80.0

0.00 2.1

0.00 0.4

0.00 2.1

P

P
P P

---

1

1

1

0.00 0.00 0.0

80.00 40.00 80.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

0.00 0.00 0.0

I

P p

--P P P

P P P

P
P

P P P

1

0.20 0.00 0.2

100.00 80.00 100.0

1.03 0.00 I .o

0.20 0.00 0.2

1.03 0.00 I .o

I P
P

1 P I

P P I P P P P

TOTAL

0.00 0.6

80.00 100.0

0.00 3.1

0.00 0.6

0.00 3.1

P P

P P

P l

P l

l

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis Lycium pallidurn Shepherdia rotundifolia ]TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss

0.00 1.4

20.00 100.0

0.00 7.2

0.00 1.4

0.00 7.2

3

P

2

1

P 1

TOTAL

9.80 16.8

100.00 100.0

50.52 86.6

9.80 16.8

50.52 86.6

I
I

TOTAL MOSS
TOTAL
LICHEN Parrnelia chlorochroa LICHEN

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

40.00 40.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

---

---

p p

--P P

P P

SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza [TOTAL SUCCULENT

I
I
0.00 0.0 40.00 40.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0

I
----P P

I
---

Table 13. Cover Data J10 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 2 of 2

AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissima AGAVOIDS

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover' AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number-, 1 2 3 4 (%I (%) (%) (%I

i

TOTAL
Litter

Standing dead

Bare ground Rock

TOTAL VEGETATION COVER
GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deac

TOTALS

inn n

inn n

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 s q m ) (AVERAGE= 13.4 Std.Dev.= 4.8) 'P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 14. Cover Data 513114 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
0.00 0.00 0.0 20.00 20.00 40.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0

-

-

Page 1 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover* ----Sample Number---1 2 3 4 5 P p P p

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Lappula redowskii Linum puberulum [TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Calochortus nuttallii Cymopterus purpurascens Euphorbia fendleri Oxybaphus linearis Phlox sp. Sphaeralcea coccinea Stephanomeria runcinata NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

--------P P P P

P P P P P P P P P P P P P

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Oryzopsis hymenoides Sitanion longifolium Stipa comata (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida purpurea Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii ~~orobolus cryptandrus NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus depressus Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum aureum Gutierrezia sarothrae Haplopappus drummondii Leptodactylon pungens

0.00 0.2

60.00 100.0

0.00 1.7

0.00 0.2

0.00
1.7

I
1

P
1

P
P P P

P
P

TOTAL

P

P P

P

P

1 P P P

P
0.00 0.2 20.00 100.0 0.00 1.7 0.00 0.2 0.00 1.7

P P

P

P

P

I

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Lyciurn pallidum (TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss

TOTAL

5.20 3.20 84

100.00 60.00

inn n

44.83 27.59
72 4

5.20 3.20 R4

44.07 27.12
71 7

7
7

3 7

4
4

4 9
13

8 P
R

in

TOTAL MOSS
SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza 0puntia whipplei (TOTAL SUCCULENT
0.20 0.00 0.2 100.00 20.00 100.0 1.72 0.00 1.7 0.20 0.00 0.2 1.69 0.00 1.7 1 1 P 1 1

I

P P

P P

P P

P P

I

Table 14. Cover Data Jl3114 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (%) (%I (%) (%)

-

-

Page 2 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover*

TOTAL AGAVOIDS
Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

Yucca angustissima

--

IUIHL3

I (TOTAL VEGETATION COVER C GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deal
SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 15.2 Std.Dev.= 4.0) *P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

---

Table 15. Cover Data 515 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003
PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (%) (%I (%I (%I

-

-

Page 1 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover' ----Sample Number---1 2 3 4 5

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Descurainia pinnata Lappula redowskii Linum puberulum JTOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Astragalus calycosus var. scapiosus Astragalus wingatanus Cryptantha flavoculata Cryptantha sp. Cymopterus purpureus Eriogonurn urnbellatum Oxybaphus linearis Sphaeralcea coccinea
~TOTAI NATIVF P F R F N N l A l FORRS

I

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

P p

---

---

-- P

--P P

P

P
P

2 P P P 0.00 0.4 20.00 80.0 0.00 2.3 0.00 0.4 0.00 2.2

P

P
P P P

2

---

P

P

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Oryzopsis hymenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion jubatum Sitanion longifolium Stipa cornata (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida purpurea Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.2

100.00 20.00 40.00 20.00 40.00 100.0

0.00 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 I 1.

0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.2

0.00 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 1. I

P

P

P

P

P 1 P P l

P

P

P

P

P P P

TOTAL

0.20 0.4

100.00 100.0

1.14 2.3

0.20 0.4

1.12 2.2

P I I 2

P P P

P P P

P P P P

P P P

TOTAL

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Eriogonum aureurn Gutierrezia sarothrae Haplopappus drummondii NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

0.00 0.0

40.00 80.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

P P

P P

---

P

P

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis NATIVE SHRUBS

TOTAL

0.00 1.2

20.00 100.0

0.00 6.8

0.00 1.4

0.00 7.9

P P

5

P

1

(1)

TOTAL

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna pinis edulis NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss Polytrichum piliferum MOSS

5.80 14.4

100.00 100.0

32.95 81.8

5.80 14.4

32.58 80.9

6 11

2 1 1 1 9 10 9 13 29

TOTAL

0.20 0.6

20.00 40.0

1.14 3.4

0.20 0.6

1.12 3.4

2

--1 1

---

-- -

1 1

LICHEN Collema tenax Lecidea decipiens Lecidea sp. [TOTAL LICHEN

0.20 0.00 0.20 0.4

60.00 40.00 20.00 60.0

1.14 0.00 1.14 2.3

0.20 0.00 0.20 0.4

1.12 0.00 1.12 2.2

P P p

---

---

P P 1 1

Table 15. Cover Data J15 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 2 of 2

SUCCULENT Opuntia rnacrorhiza Opuntia whipplei ]TOTAL SUCCULENT

-

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number-. 1 2 3 4 5 (%I (%I (%I (%)

Yucca angustissima [TOTAL AGAVOIDS Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

TOTAL VEGETATION COVER
GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deacj

TOTALS

7

-

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 15.6 Std.Dev.= 4.2) 'P=Present within 1 m. of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 16. Cover Data J28 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL

-

-

Page 1 of 2 Percent Foliar Cover* ----Sample Number---

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Aster canescens Chenopodiurn berlandieri Chenopodiurn frernontii Chenopodiurn leptophyllurn Descurainia pinnata Descurainia richardsonii Lappula redowskii (TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORB: Chenopodium album [TOTAL INTRO. ANN. & BIEN. FORBS NATIVE ANNUAL GRASSES Festuca octoflora [TOTAL NATIVE ANN. GRASSES INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Brornus tectorurn [TOTAL INTRO. ANN. GRASSES NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Arabis lignifera Aster arenosus Astragalus wingatanus Cryptantha flavoculata Cyrnopterus purpurascens Euphorbia fendleri Lesquerella interrnedia Mirabilis rnultiflora Mirabilis oxybaphoides Oxybaphus linearis Pedicularis centrantherum Pensternon barbatus Penstemon linarioides Phlox longifolia Solidago petradoria Sphaeralcea coccinea Sphaeralcea parvifolia Townsendia exscapa (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron smithii Oryzopsis hyrnenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion jubatum Sitanion longifolium Stipa cornata NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c)

P P P P P P

P P P

P

P P

P P

P

P P P

P

P P P P

P P

P

P

P P P
P P

TOTAL

P

P

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii ~~orobolus cryptandrus (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

P
1

P

I

P

P

P P P P

P P P

Table 16. Cover Data 528 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 2 of 2

TOTAL

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysotharnnus greenei Eriogonurn aureum Gutierrezia sarothrae Senecio douglasii var. longilobus NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover* AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Nurnber1 2 3 4 (%) (%I . / " ( I (%I (%I 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 80.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

P
P P P P P P P P P P P P

NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus Cowania rnexicana Haplopappus laricifolius . . .. Lyciurn pallidurn [TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis [TOTAL NATIVE TREES MOSS Polytrichurn piliferum MOSS

TOTAL

TOTAL

SUCCULENT Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. rnojavensis Opuntia phaeacantha Pediocactus simpsonii SUCCULENT

Yucca angustissima (TOTAL AGAVOIDS Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

TOTALS ~TOTAL VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deal
- -

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 s q m ) (AVERAGE= 19.8 Std.Dev.= 4.1) *P=Present within 1 rn. of either side of the c c

!r transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 17. Cover Data N12IN99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, Page 1 of 4 PWCC, AZ 2003 RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover' PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (Yo) (%I (%) (Yo) NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chenopodium fremontii Descurainia pinnata Lappula reddwskii NATIVE ANN. BIEN. FORBS

-

-

TOTAL

TOTAL

INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Bromus tectorurn INTRO. ANN. GRASSES

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Astragalus wingatanus Cryptantha flavoculata Cryptantha sp. Cymopterus purpurascens Eriogonum umbellaturn Euphorbia fendleri Mirabilis rnultiflora Pedicularis centrantherurn Penstemon linarioides Psilostrophe sparsiflora Solidago petradoria Stanleya pinnata Streptanthus cordatus NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Carex occidentalis Oryzopsis hymenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion longifolium Stipa cornata /TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria iamesii NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

/TOTAL

P P P

I 1

P P P

1

---

1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Artemisia frigida Eriogonum aureum Eriogonum corymbosum Gutierrezia sarothrae NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

TOTAL

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania rnexicana Ephedra viridis NATIVE SHRUBS

TOTAL

TOTAL

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis NATIVE TREES

Table 17. Cover Data N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, Page 2 of 4 PWCC, AZ 2003 RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover' PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL

-

-

(%I

(%I

(%)

(%)

TOTAL

Moss Polytrichum piliferum MOSS

LICHEN Lecidea sp. Parrnelia chlorochroa [TOTAL LICHEN SUCCULENT Mamrnilaria microcarpa Opuntia rnacrorhiza Opuntia polyacantha Pediocactus simpsonii SUCCULENT

TOTAL

TOTAL AGAVOIDS
Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

Yucca angustissima

TOTALS (TOTAL VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deac SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 12.2 Std.Dev.= 3.6)

Table 17. Cover Data N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Percent Foliar Cover* PLANT SPECIES ----Sample Number----

-

-

Page 3 of 4

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS

TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Bromus tectorum JTOTAL INTRO. ANN. GRASSES NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Astragalus wingatanus Cryptantha flavoculata Cryptantha sp. Cymopterus purpurascens Eriogonum umbellatum Euphorbia fendleri Mirabilis multiflora Pedicularis centrantherum Penstemon linarioides Psilostrophe sparsiflora Solidago petradoria Stanleya pinnata Streptanthus cordatus
PFRFNNIAI FORRS

I
----P p

I
-----

IT~TAI NATIVF

I

I P

P

P

P ( I )

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Carex occidentalis Oryzopsis hyrnenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion longifolium Stipa comata NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c)

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii )TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w) NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Arternisia frigida Eriogonum aureurn Eriogonum coryrnbosum Gutierrezia sarothrae

---

P p

---

---

P P

IT~TAI NATIVF SI IRSHRI

( P
IRS

I

P

P

P
P

P
P

P
P

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania rnexicana Ephedra viridis NATIVE SHRUBS

TOTAL

2

2

2(1)

P I

--7 8 15

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis !TOTAL NATIVE TREES

14 10 24

8 4 2(2) 14(1) 11 7 9(2) 18(1) 19

Table 17. Cover Data N121N99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Percent Foliar Cover* PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 4 of 4

MOSS Moss Polytrichum piliferum (TOTAL MOSS LICHEN Lecidea sp. Parrnelia chlorochroa LICHEN

TOTAL

TOTAL

SUCCULENT Mammilaria microcarpa Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia polyacantha . Pediocactus simpsonii SUCCULENT

Yucca angustissima (TOTAL AGAVOIDS Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

TOTALS )TOTAL VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deas SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 12.2 Std.Dev.= 3.6) 12 15 16 10 12

P=Present within 1 m. of eith !r side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 18. Cover Data N9 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL

-

-

Page 1 of 4 Percent Foliar Cover'

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chenopodium frernontii Cryptantha crassisepala Descurainia pinnata Descurainia richardsonii Draba cuneifolia Draba reptans Gilia aggregata Gilia sp. Lappula redowskii Phacelia crenulata JTOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORB: Chenopodium album Chenopodium sp. (TOTAL INTRO. ANN. BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Bromus tectorum INTRO. ANN. GRASSES

(%I

(%I

(%I

(%I
P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P

P P
P

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Arabis lignifera Asclepias asperula Aster arenosus Astragalus wingatanus Cryptantha sp. Cymopterus purpurascens Eriogonurn alatum Eriogonum sp. Eriogonum urnbellaturn Euphorbia fendleri Haplopappus arrnerioides Haplopappus nuttallii Lygodesmia juncea Mirabilis multiflora Pedicularis centrantherum Pensternon barbatus Pensternon eatoni Pensternon linarioides Psilostrophe sparsiflora Solidago petradoria Sphaeralcea coccinea Stanleya pinnata Streptanthus cordatus Townsendia sp. (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Carex occidentalis Oryzopsis hyrnenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion longifolium [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

P

P

P

1

P

1

P P P

1

P P P P

P P P

P P P

TOTAL

P P
P

P
P

P P
P

P
P

---

Table 18. Cover Data N9 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (%I 0.00 0.00 0.0 10.00 90.00 90.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 P
P

-

-

Page 2 of 4 Percent Foliar Cover*

TOTAL

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Eriogonum aureum Gutierrezia sarothrae NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

P
P

P
P

P
P

P
P

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis Purshia tridentata Shepherdia rotundifolia \TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii \TOTAL NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss \TOTAL MOSS LICHEN Lichen /TOTAL LICHEN SUCCULENT Mammillaria sp. O~untia macrorhiza Opuntia polyacantha (TOTAL SUCCULENT PARASITE Arceuthobium campylopodum PARASITE

0.00 2.5

10.00 100.0

0.00 11.4

0.00 2.9

0.00 12.9

8.00 10.80 0.00 18.8

100.00 100.00 10.00 100.0

36.36 49.09 0.00 85.5

8.00 10.90 0.00 18.9

35.56 48.44 0.00 84.0

0.30 0.3

40.00 40.0

1.36 1.4

0.30 0.3

1.33 1.3

I

0.00 0.0

20.00 20.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

50.00 60.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

I

TOTAL
Litter

0.00 0.0 4.30 12.60

10.00 10.0 100.00 100.00 100.00

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0 4.30 12.60 47.40

0.00 0.0

Standing dead

1

Bare ground Rock

1

47.40

100.0 TOTALS 22.0 (s=5.8) VEGETATION COVER 52.6 GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Dead

TOTAL

100.0

100.5 22.5 (s=5.9) 53.1

100.0

SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 s q m ) (AVERAGE= 18.9 Std.Dev.= 5.3)

Table 18. Cover Data N9 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Percent Foliar Cover' PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 3 of 4

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chenopodium fremontii Cryptantha crassisepala Descurainia pinnata Descurainia richardsonii Draba cuneifolia Draba reptans Gilia aggregata Gilia sp. Lappula redowskii Phacelia crenulata /TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORB: Chenopodium album Chenopodium sp. (TOTAL INTRO. ANN. & BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Bromus tectorum (TOTAL INTRO. ANN. GRASSES NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Arabis lignifera Asclepias asperula Aster arenosus Astragalus wingatanus Cryptantha sp. Cymopterus purpurascens Eriogonum alatum Eriogonum sp. Eriogonum umbellatum Euphorbia fendleri Haplopappus armerioides Haplopappus nuttallii Lygodesrnia juncea Mirabilis multiflora Pedicularis centrantherum Penstemon barbatus Penstemon eatoni Penstemon linarioides Psilostrophe sparsiflora Solidago petradoria Sphaeralcea coccinea Stanleya pinnata Streptanthus cordatus Townsendia sp. NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Carex occidentalis Oryzopsis hymenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion lonaifolium

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii (TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

Table 18. Cover Data N9 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Percent Foliar Cover* PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 4 of 4

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Eriogonum aureum Gutierrezia sarothrae JTOTALNATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus Cowania rnexicana Ephedra viridis Purshia tridentata Shepherdia rotundifolia NATIVE SHRUBS

TOTAL

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii /TOTAL NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss

ITOTAL MOSS

TOTAL

LICHEN Lichen LICHEN

SUCCULENT Marnrnillaria sp. Opuntia rnacrorhiza obuntia polyacantha [TOTAL SUCCULENT PARASITE Arceuthobium carnpylopodurn JTOTALPARASITE Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

TOTALS VEGETATION COVER GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deal

TOTAL

SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 sq.rn.) (AVERAGE= 18.9 Std.Dev.= 5.3)

23

28

14

23

9

'P=Present within 1 rn. of ther side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 19. Cover Data N10 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 1 of 4

RELATIVE RELATIVE Percent Foliar Cover' AVERAGE VEGETATlON AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL ----Sample Number---(%) (%) (%) (%) 1 2 3 4 5

NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chaenactis stevioides Chenopodiurn fremontii Descurainia pinnata Erysirnurn asperurn Gilia sinuata Lappula redowskii (TOTAL NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Brornus tectorurn INTRO. ANN. GRASSES

I

ITOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Astragalus calycosus var. scapiosus Astragalus wingatanus Calochortus nuttallii Cryptantha sp. Cyrnopterus purpurascens Eriogonurn alatum Eriogonurn urnbellatum Haplopappus nuttallii Lithosperrnurn incisurn Mirabilis multiflora Oxybaphus linearis Pedicularis centrantherurn Pensternon barbatus Penstemon linarioides Solidago petradoria Sphaeralcea coccinea Stanleya pinnata Streptanthus cordatus [TOTAL NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Carex occidentalis Oryzopsis hyrnenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion longifoliurn Stipa cornata JTOTALNATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (c) NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

P P

P P P P P

P P P

P

0.00 0.3

10.00 90.0

0.00 2.1

0.00 0.3

0.00 2.1

---

P

P

TOTAL

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysotharnnus greenei Eriogonurn rnicrothecurn Gutierrezia sarothrae [TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis ~a~lopap~us laricifolius (TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS

0.10 0.1

90.00 90.0

0.71 0.7

0.10 0.1

0.69 0.7

---

P P

P P

P P

P P

Table 19. Cover Data N10 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003
PLANT SPECIES RELATIVE RELATIVE AVERAGE VEGETATION AVERAGE VEGETATION COVER FREQUENCY COVER COVER-ALL COVER-ALL (%) (%) (%) (Yo) (04

-

-

Page 2 of 4 Percent Foliar Cover'

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii (TOTAL NATIVE TREES MOSS Moss

6.20 3.90 0.30 10.4

100.00 100.00 10.00 100.0

44.29 27.86 2.14 74.3

6.20 3.90 0.30 10.4

42.76 26.90 2.07 71.7

TOTAL MOSS
TOTAL
LICHEN Parmelia chlorochroa LICHEN SUCCULENT Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. rnojavensis Opuntia polyacantha SUCCULENT

0.00 0.0

30.00 30.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

I
0.00 0.0 40.00 40.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

0.00 0.0

I 1

TOTAL

0.00 0.20 0.2

30.00 50.00 80.0

0.00 1.43 1.4

0.00 0.20 0.2

0.00 1.38 1.4

AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissima Yucca baccata (TOTAL AGAVOIDS Standing dead Litter Bare ground Rock

0.00 0.10 0.1

10.00 40.00 50.0 90.00

0.00 0.71 0.7

0.00 0.10 0.1 3.60 13.10 44.60

0.00 0.69 0.7

11

3.60
100.00 I3.l0 44.60 100.00

100.0 TOTALS 14.0 (s=6.1) [TOTAL VEGETATION COVER 55.4 GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+StDead
SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1100 s q m ) (AVERAGE= 15.7 Std.Dev.= 5.3)

100.0

100.5 14.5 (s=6.2) 55.9

100.0

Table 19. Cover Data N10 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Percent Foliar Cover* PLANT SPECIES ----Sample Number-NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chaenactis stevioides Chenopodium fremontii Descurainia pinnata Erysirnum asperum Gilia sinuata Lappula redowskii NATIVE ANN. & BIEN. FORBS

-

-

Page 3 of 4

TOTAL

ITOTAL

INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSES Bromus tectorum INTRO. ANN. GRASSES

---

--

(I)

--

-

--

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS Aster arenosus Astragalus calycosus var. scapiosus Astragalus wingatanus Calochortus nuttallii Cryptantha sp. Cyrnopterus purpurascens Eriogonurn alatum Eriogonum umbellatum Haplopappus nuttallii Lithospermum incisum Mirabilis multiflora Oxybaphus linearis Pedicularis centrantherum Penstemon barbatus Penstemon linarioides Solidago petradoria Sphaeralcea coccinea Stanleya pinnata Streptanthus cordatus NATIVE PERENNIAL FORBS

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Carex occidentalis Oryzopsis hymenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion longifoliurn Stioa comata

TOTAL

NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jarnesii NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (w)

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum microthecum Gutierrezia sarothrae /TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania rnexicana Ephedra viridis Haplopappus laricifolius NATIVE SHRUBS

TOTAL

Table 19. Cover Data N10 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 Percent Foliar Cover* PLANT SPECIES

-

-

Page 4 of 4

TOTAL

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii NATIVE TREES

MOSS Moss /TOTAL MOSS LICHEN Parmelia chlorochroa JTOTALLICHEN SUCCULENT Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. mojavensis Opuntia polyacantha SUCCULENT

TOTAL
TOTAL
Litter

AGAVOlDS Yucca angustissima Yucca baccata AGAVOIDS Standing dead

Bare ground Rock

TOTAL VEGETATION COVER
GROUND COVER (Litter+Rock+Veg+St.Deac SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 15.7 Std.Dev.= 5.3) 12 19 26 I4 14

TOTALS

1

P=Present within Im, of either side of the cover transect, but not quantitatively encountered.

Table 20. Woody Plant Density Data - J2 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 PLANT SPECIES 1 28 6 3 12 37 7 7 31 2 123 1 157 99 42 141 AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 100 sq.rn.) (per acre) (%) 5.60 29.60 0.40 33.60 1.60 70.8 12 226.6 1,197.9 16.2 1,359.8 64.8 2,865.3 20.00 80.00 20.00 60.00 40.00 100.0 Shrubs per 100 sq.m. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

Page 1 of 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Ceratoides lanata Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum rnicrothecurn Gutierrezia sarothrae Leptodactylon pungens ]TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Tetradymia canescens ]TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS 0.40 112.2 16.2 4,540.7 20.00 100.0 2 102 163 NATIVE TREES Pinus edulis (TOTAL NATIVE TREES 0.60 0.6 24.3 24.3 7,430.3 3,678.7 60.00 60.0
I

71

65

160

I
1
183.6 90.9

1
1 1

I
--1 1 1 1

---

]TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation ( SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 5.0 Std.Dev.= 1.2)

I

1115 5

200 5

229 7 4

73 4

301 1

I

Table 21. Woody Plant Density Data J4 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES
1 36 36 14 5 19

-

-

Page 1 of 1

AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 100 s q m ) (per acre) (%)
10.00 1.OO 11.0 404.7 40.5 445.2 40.00 20.00 40.0

Shrubs per 100 sqm. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Gutierrezia sarothrae Leptodactylon pungens [TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

---

---

--

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS TOTAL NATIVE TREES
[TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 3.2 Std.Dev.= 1.6)
NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis
1.20 2.8 48.6 113.3
I

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus
86.60 149.2 3,504.7 6,038.1 107 165 108 149 100.00 100.0 99 151

73 144

46 137

40.00 40.0

---

---

---

2 2

4 12

I

163.0 22.9

6,596.6 926.8

1

201 3

149 2

151 2

146 3

168 6

I

Table 22. Woody Plant Density Data J5/6 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 100 sq.m.) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 100 sq.m. -----Sample Number-----

-

-

Page 1 of 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Ceratoides lanata Chrysothamnus greenei Gutierrezia sarothrae /TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Sarcobatus vermiculatus

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS
[TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviatior SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 sq.n (AVERAGE= 4.8 Std.Dev.= 1.6)

Table 23. Woody Plant Density Data J8 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 100 sq.m.) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 100 sq.m. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

-

-

Page 1 of 1

TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Lvcium pallidum ~arcobatus vermiculatus

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Ceratoides lanata Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum microthecum Gutierrezia sarothrae

I
I

1

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS
NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis [TOTAL NATIVE TREES SUCCULENT Opuntia whipplei )TOTAL SUCCULENT

)TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviatiofi SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 sq.n (AVERAGE= 6.2 Std.Dev.= 1.6)

Table 24. Woody Plant Density Data - J10 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 100 sq.m.) (per acre) (%) 1 Shrubs per 100 sqm. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

-

Page 1 of 1

TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Sarcobatus vermiculatus Tetradymia canescens (TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Artemisia frigida Ceratoides lanata Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum microthecum Gutierrezia sarothrae Leptodactylon pungens

TOTAL NATIVE TREES
/TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 sq.m (AVERAGE= 6.8 Std.Dev.= 0.8)

Table 25. Woody Plant Density Data 513114 Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 100 sq.m.) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 100 sq.m. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

-

-

Page 1 of 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Ceratoides lanata Chrysotharnnus greenei Gutierrezia sarothrae Haplopappus drumrnondii Leptodactylon pungens Senecio douglasii var. longilobus /TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
1.OO 47.4 40.00 80.0 40.5 1,918.3

I
I

1

--3 1 57 8 65 43 12 12 68

1 223

4 4

7

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS TOTAL NATIVE TREES
]TOTAL DENSITY I Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 sq.rn.) (AVERAGE= 4.4 Std.Dev.= 2.1)
NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma

NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Sarcobatus vermiculatus
0.40 0.40 20.00 253.00 2.40 276.2 16.2 16.2 809.4 10,238.9 97.1 11,177.8 40.00 20.00 40.00 100.00 20.00 100.0

1 2 31 32
***

102

"*

102

I
1.OO 1.O
40.5 40.5 13,136.6 18.272.2 40.00 40.0

I
--65 2

-71 6

3 3 258 7

2 2 1120 4

-109 3

I I

324.6 451.5

Table 27. Woody Plant Density Data - J28 LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES 1 5 AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 100 s q m ) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 100 sq.rn. -----Sample Number---2 3 4

-

Page 1 of 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Gutierrezia sarothrae /TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS 105.40 1.OO 106.4 60.00 60.00 100.0 398 398 124 1 1 2 2 5 2 7 124 4,265.5 40.5 4,306.0 NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Sarcobatus vermiculatus (TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS 9.80 141.2 396.6 5,714.4 30 20.00 100.0 197 89 NATIVE TREES Pinus edulis 0.80 0.8 32.4 32.4 10,052.7 5,074.9 40.00 40.0

I

88

49 302

I
I

I
428 2
1 1

TOTAL NATIVE TREES
[TOTAL DENSITY I Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1100 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 3.8 Std.Dev.= 1.3)

--205 5 213 4

3 3 92 3

-304 5

I

248.4 125.4

I

Table 28. Woody Plant Density Data - Nl2lN99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA Sagebrush Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 PLANT SPECIES 1 AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY :per 100 sq.rn.) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 100 sq.rn. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

Page 1 of 1

TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus nauseosus Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus /TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS INTRODUCED SHRUBS Tarnarix pentandra ]TOTAL INTRODUCED SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Pinus edulis /TOTAL NATIVE TREES ]TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (#of species/100 s q . ~ (AVERAGE= 4.0 Std.Dev.= 0.7)

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Arternisia frigida Chrysotharnnus greenei Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae

Table 29. Woody Plant Density Data J2 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (%) (per 200 sq.m.) (per acre) Shrubs per 200 sq.m. -----Sample Number-----

-

-

Page 1 of 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus depressus Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum aureum Gutierrezia sarothrae Leptodactylon pungens /TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS 0.40 24.4 20.00 100.0 8.09 493.7 NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrvsothamnus viscidiflorus Ephedra viridis 1.OO 55.8 20.24 1,129.1 20.00 100.0

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS
NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis [TOTAL NATIVE TREES 4.00 7.4 80.94 149.7 1,772.6 396.6 60.00 100.0

/TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation I SPECIES DENSITY (# of species/200 sq.m.') (AVERAGE= 6.4 Std.Dev.= 2.1)
87.6 19.6

I

Table 30. Woody Plant Density Data J 4 LOMCRA Pinyon-Juniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES 1 3 2 5 44 2 2 48 AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 200 sq.m.) (per acre) (%) 9.40 0.40 0.80 10.6 190.21 8.09 16.19 214.5 40.00 20.00 40.00 40.0 Shrubs per 200 s q m . -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

-

-

Page 1 of 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysotharnnus depressus Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae [TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

---

---

--15

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS TOTAL NATIVE TREES
TOTAL AGAVOIDS TOTAL
DENSITY I Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1200 sq.rn.) (AVERAGE= 5.2 Std.Dev.= 1.3)
Yucca angustissima 0.40 0.4 8.09 8.1 2,395.8 2.982.6 20.00 20.0 NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis 2.20 8.6 44.52 174.0 100.00 100.0 1 6

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus 8.40 11.20 79.20 98.8 169.97 226.63 1,602.61 1,999.2 6 37 43 21 42 21 46 24 70 60.00 40.00 100.00 100.0

307 322

10 7 17

I
2 11 5 15 2 9 1 2

--54 6

--53 4

-85 4

-379 7

2 2 21 5

I

118.4 147.4

I

Table 31. Woody Plant Density Data J8 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES DENSITY FREQUENCY (per acre) (%) 1 1 1 4.05 8.09 12.1 20.00 20.00 40.0 AVERAGE DENSITY (per 200 sq.m.) Shrubs per 200 sq.m. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

-

-

Page 1 of 1

TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
-----

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus depressus Gutierrezia sarothrae

1
0.20 0.40 0.6

1
--2 2

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS
NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis ]TOTAL NATIVE TREES 4.80 0.20 5.0 97.13 4.05 101.2 100.00 20.00 100.0 SUCCULENT Opuntia macrorhiza 5 5

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Lycium pallidum 5.80 129.0 40.00 100.0 8 79 117.36 2,610.3

21 254

107

128

77

3 3

7 7

7 7

2 1 3

I
I
0.40 0.4 8.09 8.1 2,731.7 1,471.1 135.0 72.7

I
20.00 20.0

TOTAL SUCCULENT
/TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1200 sq.m:) (AVERAGE= 5.0 Std.Dev.= 1.0) I

1

1 -85

2 2 259

--114

--135

--82

Table 32. Woody Plant Density Data - JIO LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES 1 AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 200 sq.rn.) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 200 sq.m. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

-

Page 1 of 1

TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus nauseosus Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Ephedra viridis Lycium pallidurn Shepherdia rotundifolia /TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna pinus edulis JTOTALNATIVE TREES

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysotharnnus greenei Eriogonum aureurn Gutierrezia sarothrae

I

Yucca angustissirna JTOTALAGAVOIDS

(TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (#of speciesROO sq.m (AVERAGE= 6.8 Std.Dev.= 1.9)

Table 33. Woody Plant Density Data - J13114 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES
1 6 5 95 5 5 10 95

-

Page 1 of 1

AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 200 sq.m.) (per acre) (%)
21.20 1.OO 1 .OO 23.2 60.00 20.00 20.00 60.0 428.98 20.24 20.24 469.5

Shrubs per 200 sq.m. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
--11

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Gutierrezia sarothrae Haplopappus drummondii . . .. Leptodactylon pungens

-

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Lycium pallidurn ]TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS
6.40 172.8 20.00 100.0 195 129.50 3,496.6 189 224

32 104

152

TOTAL NATIVE TREES
AGAVOl DS Yucca angustissima (TOTAL AGAVOIDS
2.00 2.0 201.4 24.1 40.47 40.5 4,075.3 487.7

NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis
0.40 3.4 8.09 68.8 40.00 100.0

I
3 2 5 1 3 1 4

60.00 60.0

1 1 199 4

--202 6

7 7 236 3

-202 6

2 2 168 9

TOTAL
DENSITY Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (#of speciesROO sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 5.6 Std.Dev.= 2.3)

I

Table 34. Woody Plant Density Data - J15 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 200 sq.m.) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 200 sq.m. -----Sample Number----2 3 4 5

Page 1 of 1

1 22 16 3 41 38 4 42 4 4

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum aureum Gutierrezia sarothrae Haplopappus drummondii [TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS

4.40 0.80 11.60 1.40 18.2

89.03 16.19 234.73 28.33 368.3

20.00 20.00 60.00 40.00 60.0

---

---

8

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS
NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis ]TOTAL NATIVE TREES

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis

0.80 37.2

16.19 752.7

20.00 100.0

4 36

87

6

48

9

I

3.60 7.2

72.85 145.7

100.00 100.0

5 7

1 6 7

2 4

2 1

8 2

AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissima /TOTAL AGAVOIDS

I
1.20 1.2 63.8 47.0 24.28 24.3 1,291. O 951. O

20.00 20.0

I
---

---

6 6

I
---

---

TOTAL
DENSITY I Standard Deviation 1 SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1200 sq.m.) (AVERAGE= 5.8 Std.Dev.= 1.5)

1
I

84 8

135 6

19 6

52 4

29 5

Table 35. Woody Plant Density Data J28 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY [per 200 sq.rn.) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 200 sqm. -----Sample Number-----

-

-

Page 1 of 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysotharnnus depressus Chrysotharnnus greenei Eriogonurn aureurn Gutierrezia sarothrae Senecio douglasii var. longilobus (TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus nauseosus Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus Cowania rnexicana Haplopappus laricifolius . . .. Lyciurn pallidurn (TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis (TOTAL NATIVE TREES

TOTAL AGAVOIDS
(TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1200 sq.rr (AVERAGE= 6.8 Std.Dev.= 1.6)

Yucca angustissirna

Table 36. Woody Plant Density Data - N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ PLANT SPECIES DENSITY FREQUENCY (per acre) (%)
1 2 3 4

- 2003

Page 1 of 1

AVERAGE DENSITY (per 200 sq.rn.)

Shrubs per 200 sq.rn. -----Sample Number----5 6 7 8

9

1

0

TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis ]TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis ]TOTAL NATIVE TREES AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissirna
0.10 0.1
1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus depressus Eriogonurn aureurn Eriogonum coryrnbosurn Gutierrezia sarothrae

I
I

TOTAL AGAVOIDS TOTAL
DENSITY Standard Deviation I SPECIES DENSITY (#of species1200 sq.rn.) (AVERAGE= 4.5 Std.Dev.= 1.3)
32.5 25.0

2.02 2.0 657.6 505.9

10.00 10.0
I

--121

1 1 24

--I
25 5 7 3

--12 3

--22 6

--45 4

--33 5

--99 4

--17 4

---

1

1

I

27

4

Table 37. Woody Plant Density Data - N9 LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (per 200 sq.m.) (per acre) (%) Shrubs per 200 sq.rn. -----Sample Number-----

-

Page 1 of 1

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysotharnnus depressus

NATIVE SHRUBS Arternisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysotharnnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis Purshia tridentata Shepherdia rotundifolia /TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii

TOTAL NATIVE TREES
/TOTAL DENSITY Standard Deviation SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1200 sq.m (AVERAGE= 5.1 Std.Dev.= 1.1)

Table 38. Woody Plant Density Data - NIO LOMCRA PinyonJuniper Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003 PLANT SPECIES AVERAGE DENSITY DENSITY FREQUENCY (%) (per 200 s q m ) (per acre) Shrubs per 200 sq.m. ----Sample Number-----

-

Page 1 of 1

TOTAL NATIVE SUBSHRUBS
NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis

NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Chrysothamnus greenei Gutierrezia sarothrae

1
6.30 40.60 46.9 127.48 821.54 949.0 20.00 80.00 80.0

TOTAL NATIVE SHRUBS
NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii /TOTAL NATIVE TREES

1.OO 19.6

20.24 396.6

40.00 100.0

2.40 16.8

48.56 339.9

10.00 100.0

TOTAL AGAVOIDS
JTOTAL DENSITY 1 Standard Deviation I SPECIES DENSITY (# of species1200 sq.m.j (AVERAGE= 6.0 Std.Dev.= 1.6)
I

AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissima Yucca baccata

0.60 1.70 85.0 65.2

12.14 34.40 1,720.0 1,319.3

30.00 40.0

I

Table 39. Cover and Woody Plant Density Data Summary, LOMCRA Baseline, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003

-

AREA

TOTAL FOLIAR COVER STANDING DEAD ROCK SOIL
(Yo )

WOODY PLANT DENSITY

("/.)
(%)

(%)

(%)

J2 SAGEBRUSH J2 PINYON-JUNIPER J4 SAGEBRUSH J4 PINYON-JUNIPER J516 SAGEBRUSH J8 SAGEBRUSH J8 PINYON-JUNIPER J10 SAGEBRUSH J10 PINYON-JUNIPER J13114 SAGEBRUSH J13114 PINYON-JUNIPER J15 SAGEBRUSH J15 PINYON-JUNIPER J28 SAGEBRUSH J28 PINYON-JUNIPER N12lN99 SAGEBRUSH NORTHISOUTH N12lN99 PINYON-JUNIPER NORTHISOUTH N9 PINYON-JUNIPER N10 PINYON-JUNIPER 14.4 19.6 9.2 14.2 8.2 7.0 13.6 10.6 19.4 8.6 11.6 12.4 17.6 17.2 20.4 13.8 16.4 22.0 14.0 8.4 4 10.6 2.4 8.0 11.8 5.4 10.4 1.4 9.0 6.4 6.2 0.8 8.2 2.8 15.2 2.9 4.3 3.6 16.0 16.4 3.8 13.2 10.4 8.4 11.8 12.6 16.4 7.6 15.8 17.4 15.6 6.6 24.2 21 20 12.6 13.1 3.2 8.6 1.8 16.6 11.2 11.8 19.4 3.0 17.2 15.4 19.0 1.6 23.8 1.4 6.8 3.2 20.1 13.7 24.7

58.0 51.4 74.6 53.6 62.2 61.0 49.8 63.4 45.6 59.4 47.2 62.4 42.2 66.6 45.8 46.8 40.6 47.4 44.6

(shrubstacre) 7,430.3 1773 6,596.6 2,395.8 18,235.8 3,909.4 2,731.7 6,313.3 1,582.4 13,136.6 4,075.3 4,395.0 1,291. O 10,052.7 3,605.9 7,195.6 657.6 1,173.6 1,720.0

APPENDIX 2 PLANT SPECIES FROM THE LOMCRA BASELINE STUDY, ALL AREAS

Table &. ,pecies

Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Minil., Gomplex, PWCC, AZ 2003

-

SPECIES NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Arenaria hookeri Aster canescens Chaenactis stevioides Chenopodium berlandieri Chenopodium fremontii Chenopodium hians Chenopodium glaucum Chenopodium leptophyllum Cryptantha crassisepala Cryptantha minima Descurainia pinnata Descurainia richardsonii Draba cuneifolia Draba reptans Erysimum asperum Gilia aggregata Gilia pumila Gilia sinuata Gilia sp. Lappula redowskii Lappula texana Linanthus aureus Linum pubemlum Lupinus brevicaulus Mentzelia albicaulis Oenothera albicaulis Phacelia crenulata Plantago purshii Townsendia incana J2 PJUN Hooker sandwort hoary tansyaster pincushion pitseed goosefoot Fremont goosefoot maple-leaved goosefoot oak-leaved goosefoot narrowleaf goosefoot cryptantha small hiddenflower pinnate tansy-mustard Richardson tansy-mustard whitlowgrass whitlowwort wallflower skyrocket gilia gilia floccose gilia gilia bluebur stickseed stickseed yellow gilia yellow flax shortstem lupine blazingstar prairie evening primrose phacelia woolly plantain townsendia Machaeranthera canescens C. hybridum

COMMON NAME SYNONYM

J2 SAGE

J4 PJUN

J4 SAGE

J5/6 SAGE

J10 PJUN

X

X

X

X
X

X X
X X

X

X

lpomopsis pumila G. inconspicua

X X X X
L. marginata Gilia aurea

X

X X X X X
X

~p

X

X

x

X

X

X

X

X X

X X

X

X

INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS common lambsquarter Chenopodium album goosefoot Chenopodium sp. spurge Euphorbia sp. fireweed summercypress Kochia scoparia Russian thistle Salsola kali tumble mustard Sisymbrium altissimum South American nightshade Solanum sarachoides goat's beard Tragopogon dubius

X

X

X

X

X
X

X X

X

X X

sap!oq~a aualamai .y 'wsea e l u ~ a d s o ~ m u

x
X

tpla~yl!lu J J O ~ Jalse a 4 ! 4 ~ paa~yl!lu poowseq p a a ~ y 6u!daa~3 p SSal3y3OJ APOOM U ! O paJaMo~a6Jel OU

~ snso!dms 'JeA snsmAle3 snle6e~lsv snsouale ~ a l s ~ e p ~ m l o ~s e!! d a p s ~ u eln~adse e ! d a p s ~ s e~agu6!1 ! ~ ~ J V S urnlepdo~3elu lun!lpj S8tlOd l V I N N 3 t l 3 d 3A11VN

sse~6~ea43

lun~opa&n u o ~ g s S ~ S S W BIV~NNV a 3 m a o t l l ~ 1 sse~6ole#nq asp4 anxa4 syaaw-x!s X X 33VS Pr N n r d Pr X 33VSZr X N n r d Zr WANONAS 3WVN NOWW03

N n r d Olr

33VS 919-

esol~enbs o ~ u n n e eJouopo e m p a j S 3 S S W 9 1VnNNV 3AIlVN S3133dS

Table 42. apecies Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ - 2003

SPECIES

COMMON NAME

SYNONYM

J2 PJUN

J2 SAGE

J4 PJUN

J4 SAGE

SAGE

J10 PJUN

, ,

..

Stephanomeria runcinata Streptanthus cordatus Townsendia exscapa Townsendia sp. INTRODUCED PERENNIAL FORBS Corydalis aurea Rumex crispus scrambled eggs curly-leaf dock

desert wirelettuce twisfflower ground daisy townsendia

X

X

Poa cornpressa

Table 42. Species Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003

-

Page 4 of 20

SPECIES NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (warm) Aristida purpurea Bouteloua gracilis Hilaria jamesii Sporobolus airoides Sporobolus cryptandrus J2 PJUN X X X purple three-awn blue grama galleta alkali sacaton sand dropseed NATIVE SUBSHRUBS Artemisia frigida Chrysothamnus depressus Chrysothamnus greenei Eriogonum aureum Erioaonum corvmbosum Eurotia lanata Gutierrezia sarothrae Haplopappus drummondii Leptodactylon pungens Polygala subspinosa Senecio douglasii var. longilobus

COMMON NAME SYNONYM

J2 SAGE

X X

X X X

I x l

I

-

fringed sagewort dwarf rabbitbrush Greene rabbitbrush slenderbush wild buckwheat buckwheat winterfat broom snakeweed Drummond goldenweed granite pricklygilia cushion milkwort threadleaf groundsel
E. microthecum

X X X

X X X X X X X

X X X
X X

Ceratoides lanata

NATIVE SHRUBS Artemisia tridentata Atriplex canescens Atriplex confertifolia Chrysothamnus nauseosus Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Cowania mexicana Ephedra viridis Forestiera neornexicana Haplopappus laricifolius Lycium pallidum Purshia tridentata Sarcobatus vermiculatus Shepherdia rotundifolia Tetradymia canescens INTRODUCED SHRUBS Tamarix pentandra

big sagebrush four-wing saltbush shadscale saltbush rubber rabbitbrush sticky-leaved rabbitbrush cliff rose mountain joint-fir desert olive turpentine-bush rabbitthorn antelooe bitterbrush black greasewood roundleaf buffaloberry gray feltthorn

X X X X Purshia stansburiana X Ericameria laricifolius

X

X X

X

X

saltcedar

Table 42. ,pecies

Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Minit,,-uomplex,

PWCC, AZ 2003

-

SPECIES NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperrna Pinus edulis Quercus garnbelii

I
l ~ t a juniper h l~olorado oinvon

COMMON NAME

I

SYNONYM

I
I
X X

I

J2 PJUN

J2SAGE

J4 PJUN

J4 SAGE

J516 SAGE

J10 PJUN

1 Gambel oak

MOSSES Moss Polytrichurn piliferum moss moss LICHENS Collema tenax Lecidea decipiens Lecidea sp. Lichen Parmelia chlorochroa lichen lichen lichen lichen lichen SUCCULENTS Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. rnojavensis Mamrnilaria microcarpa Marnmillaria sp. Opuntia fragilis var. fragilis Oountia macrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Opuntia polyacantha Opuntia whipplei Pediocactus sirnpsonii Sclerocactus parviflorus Mojave claret-cup pincushion cactus pincushion cactus little pricklypear thickroot ~ricklvoear pricklypear (plains pricklypear lwhipple cholla ball cactus barrel cactus

I

I

Xanthoparrnelia chlorochroa

X

1

I

!

I

PARASITES Arceuthobiurn carnpylopodum ALGAE Nostoc flagelliforme AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissima Yucca baccata

dwarf mistletoe

blue green algae

X

Spanish bayonet banana yucca

suaxaue:, e ~ a q l u e ~ a e q 3 e ~

loo~asoo6 paaqd uo!qsnw!d ~alseAsu~ Aeoq VoMpues JayooH 3 9 ~ 0 lr s WANONAS 3WVN NOWW03

sap!o!Aals sgxuaeq3 suaxauw ~ a l s v yayooq eyeua~v

Satlo4 lVINN318 '8 1VnNNV 3AllVN S3133dS

X

PaWWnq Pl!M leawwnq unuo6o!~a pa6u!m JndsYJel ualsa~eq

'ds wnuo60!~3 unllhqdoldal unuo60!~3 wnlele unuobo!q unsodws w n ~ u ~ u d ~ a a

I

33VS Olr

VUANONAS

I

3WVN NOVUW03

S3SSWE) 1VnNNV 3A11VN S3133dS

Table 42. Species Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003

-

Page 8 of 20

SPECIES

COMMON NAME

SYNONYM

J10 SAGE

INTRODUCED PERENNIAL FORBS Corydalis aurea Rumex cris~us NATIVE PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Agropyron dasystachyum Agropyron smithii Carex occidentalis Oryzopsis hymenoides Poa fendleriana Sitanion iubatum Sitanion longifolium Stipa comata

thickspike wheatgrass Western wheatgrass Western sedge Indian ricegrass mutton grass ,bia sauirreltail - . bottlebrush squirreltail needle-and-threadgrass

I

scrambled eggs cudv-leaf dock

X X X
Sitanion hystrix

X X

INTRODUCED PERENNIAL GRASSES (cool) Russian wildrye Elymus junceus Canada bluegrass Poa compressa European alkaligrass Puccinellia distans

X X X

qsnJql!qqeJ JaqqnJ qsnqlles apspeqs qsnqlles ~ U ! M - J ~ O J qsn~qa6es 6!q

snsoasneu s n u w e ~ o s h q 3 e!loypapo3 xald!~lv sua3saum xald!~ly eleluap!q e!s!wavv SBntlHS 3A11VN

Table 42. Species Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003

-

Page 10 of 20

SPECIES NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii Utah juniper Colorado pinyon Gambel oak X X MOSSES Moss Polytrichum piliferum moss moss LICHENS Collema tenax Lecidea decipiens Lecidea sp. Lichen Parmelia chlorochroa lichen lichen lichen lichen lichen SUCCULENTS Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. mojavensis Mammilaria microcaroa Mammillaria sp. Opuntia fragilis var. fragilis Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Opuntia polyacantha Opuntia whipplei Pediocactus simpsonii Sclerocactus parviflorus Mojave claret-cup oincushion cactus pincushion cactus little pricklypear thickroot pricklypear pricklypear plains pricklypear whipple cholla ball cactus barrel cactus PARASITES Arceuthobium campylopodum ALGAE Nostoc flagelliforme AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissima Yucca baccata

COMMON NAME

SYNONYM

J10 SAGE

I

I

I

I

Xanthoparmelia chlorochroa

X

X

dwarf mistletoe

blue green algae

Spanish bayonet banana yucca

Table 42. "pecies Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Minin9 ~ o m p l e x PWCC, AZ 2003 ,

-

Page

, I of 20

SPECIES NATIVE ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Arenaria hookeri Aster canescens Chaenactis stevioides Chenopodium berlandieri Chenopodium fremontii Chenopodium hians Chenopodium glaucum Chenopodium leptophyllum Hooker sandwort hoary tansyaster pincushion pitseed goosefoot Fremont goosefoot maple-leaved goosefoot oak-leaved goosefoot narrowleaf goosefoot Machaeranthera canescens C. hybridum

COMMON NAME

SYNONYM

J13/14 PJUN

J13/14 SAGE

J15 PJUN

J15 SAGE

J28 PJUN

J28 SAGE

X

X

X

X X

X

X X X

Oenothera albicaulis Phacelia crenulata Plantago purshii Townsendia incana

prairie evening primrose phacelia woolly plantain townsendia

X

INTRODUCED ANNUAL & BIENNIAL FORBS Chenopodium album common lambsquarter Chenopodium sp. goosefoot Euphorbia sp. spurge fireweed summercypress Kochia scoparia Salsola kali Russian thistle Sisyrnbrium altissimum tumble mustard Solanum sarachoides South American nightshade Tragopogon dubius goat's beard

X

X

X

-

X

X

X

X

X X
X

X

X

sap!osya aualamal '+sea ~ ~ ~ a d s .V ~ 3 e ~ o

x

qqaAyl!w ~ J J O Jape a y 4 ~ paamyl!w p o o ~ p q p a a m y p 6u!daa~3 SSaJ3y3OJ Apoom UO!UO paJa~o~a6Jel

~ snso!dms 'JeA snso3Alm s n l e 6 e ~ l s ~ snsouaJe JalsV e l e ~ m l o ~se!dapsv u! eln~adse se!dapsy

EJ~J!u~!~ S!qeJV wnlelado~3ewwn!llV

SgtlOd lVINN3M3d 3A11VN

X
X

sse~6~ea~p

l u n ~ o p as n w o ~ g l

S ~ S S W B1vnNNv a 3 3 n a o t l 1 ~ 1

X X X
3 9 V S 8Zr

X

sseJ60lt?~nq asp4 a n x a syaam-x!s ~ 39VS S t r N n r d StT 33VS Nnrd vtmr WANONAS 3WVN NOWW03

~ S O J J eo~unw ~ ~ ~ S

e~oyopo nlsaj m

N n r d 821'

S3SSW9 1VllNNV 3AIlVN S3133dS

vmr

3 3 V S 8Zr

N n r d 8Zr

33VS 9 LT

N n r d 9I.r

39VS PClEtf

Nnrd P1IEI.r

WANONAS

3WVN NOWVz103

S3133dS

Table 42. ,pecies Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Minit., ,ornplex, PWCC, AZ 2003

-

SPECIES NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii Utah juniper Colorado oinvon IGambel oak MOSSES Moss Polytrichum piliferum moss moss LICHENS Collema tenax Lecidea decipiens Lecidea so. Lichen Parmelia chlorochroa lichen lichen lichen lichen lichen SUCCULENTS Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. moiavensis Mammilaria microcarpa Mammillaria sp. Oountia fraailis var. fraailis Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Oountia oolvacantha Opuntia whipplei Pediocactus simpsonii Sclerocactus oarvifloms Mojave claret-cup pincushion cactus pincushion cactus little oricklvnear thickroot pricklypear pricklypear nlains oricklvoear lwhipple cholla

COMMON NAME

SYNONYM

J13114 PJUN

J13/14 SAGE

J15 PJUN

J15SAGE

J28PJUN

J28 SAGE

I

I

I

I

Xanthoparmelia chlorochroa

1 barrel cactus
dwarf mistletoe

1 ball cactus

I
I

PARASITES Arceuthobium camovlo~odum ALGAE Nostoc flagelliforme

blue green algae

Yucca angustissima Yucca baccata

lspanish bayonet (banana yucca

I

S9HOd lVINN31B '8 7VnNNV 3AllVN
N f l r d OtN N n f d 6N 33%

Nnrd

WANONAS

3WVN NOWWO3

S3133dS

X X X X
X

X X
X

X

X

uowapuad l e u uouralsuad uole3 uouratsuad d!lp~eaq Kuolaq poom poMellaJqwn 4ealMoJJeu ~SOJW!J~-~U!U~A~ N n r d 6N 33VS Nnrd WANONAS 3WVN NOWW03

sap!o!~eu!l uowa~suad yolea uowalsuad snleqJeq uotualsuad uruaqlue~lua s!~eln3!pad sueawl snqdeqKx0 e!lo~!douo~m ~ L I ~ O U ~ O ~J

(1~03) SatlOd lVINN3tl3d 3A11VN

N n r d 01N

S3133dS

X

X X X

X eleuel s a p ! o l e ~ a ~ X X wn3aq~o~qw '3

X X

X X

x
X X X X X

X

snqop6uol 'Jeh !!se]6nop opauas laspuno~ti jealpea~q) esou!dsqns ele6Alod ~ O M ~ W uo!qsn3 e!l!6App!~d al!u!?J6 sua6und uolL@?poldal paamuaplo6 puowwnJa !!puowwnJp snddedolde~ a e ~ g o ~e ! z a ~ ~ a ~ n 3 s paamayeus w o o ~ q eleuel e!loJna walu!~ wnsoquhm unuo60!~=~ l e a ~ ~ y ~ wna~ne lunuo60!~3 ~eaqmymq qsnqJapuap P]!M !auaa~6 snuueqloshq3 qsnJqyqqeJ a u a a ~ ~ ) snssa~dap snuueqloshq3 UsnJql!qqeJPeMP voma6es p a 6 ~ ! ~ 4 ep!6!~j e!s!wavV S8ntlHSHflS 3A11VN paasdo~p pues uolwes !(eye elalle6 ewe~6 anlq UM~-aa~q$ ald~nd

X X

X X

I
N n r d 6N 33VS Nflfd WANONAS

( ~ J B M ) 3 S S W 9 lVINN3M3d S

N f l f d OlN

3WVN NOWV\IO3

sn~pueldh:, snloqo~odg sap!oJ!e sn(oqo~odg !!saw@e u e l ! ~ sy3e~6 enolalnog ea~nd~nd ep!lS!JQ 3AllVN S3133dS

Table 42. Species Presence for the LOMCRA Baseline Study, All Areas, Black Mesa Mining Complex, PWCC, AZ 2003

-

Page 20 of 20

SPECIES NATIVE TREES Juniperus osteosperma Pinus edulis Quercus gambelii Utah juniper Colorado pinyon Gambel oak X X MOSSES Moss Polytrichum piliferum moss moss LICHENS Collema tenax Lecidea decipiens Lecidea sp. Lichen Parmelia chlorochroa lichen lichen lichen lichen lichen SUCCULENTS Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. mojavensis Mammilaria microcarpa Mammillaria sp. Opuntia fragilis var. fragilis Opuntia macrorhiza Opuntia phaeacantha Opuntia polyacantha Opuntia whipplei Pediocactus simpsonii Sclerocactus parviflorus Mojave claret-cup pincushion cactus pincushion cactus little pricklypear thickroot pricklypear pricklypear plains pricklypear whipple cholla ball cactus barrel cactus X PARASITES Arceuthobium campylopodum ALGAE Nostoc flagelliforme AGAVOIDS Yucca angustissima Yucca baccata

COMMON NAME

SYNONYM

N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH PJUN

N12lN99 NORTHISOUTH SAGE

N9 PJUN

N10 PJUN

X

X X X

X X X

X X

X

X

X

X Xanthoparmelia chlorochroa X

X

X

X

X

X X X X X

X

X

X

dwarf mistletoe

X

blue green algae

Spanish bayonet banana yucca

X

X X

APPENDIX 3 Black Mesa Mining Complex Field Guide To Potentially Occurring Rare Plants
2003

Black Mesa Mining Complex Field Guide to Potentially Occurring Rare Plants 2003

Table of Contents
Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Species Asclepias sanjuanensis Astragalus humillimus Asfragalus naturitensis Clematis hirsufissima var. arizonica Phlox cluteana

Shrubland Species Amsonia peeblesii Pediocactus peeblesianus var. fickeiseniae Pediocactus peeblesianus var. peeblesianus Seeps, Streams, and Hanging Garden Species Carex specuicola Platanthera zofhecina Puccinellia parishii Cystopteris utahensis

6 7 8

9 10 11 12
Both Shrubland and Pinyon-Juniper Woodland Sclerocactus mesae-verdae

13

Species Very Unlikely to be Seen Astragalus cremnophlyax var. cremnophlax Astragalus cufleri Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. arizonicus Erralzurizia rotundata Lesquerella navajoensis Pediocactus bradyi

14 15 16 18 19 20

PINYONJUNIPER WOODLAND SPECIES Asclepias sanjuanensis - San Juan Milkweed Family: Asclepiadaceae Synonyms: A. unicialis var. ruthiae (debated) Status: Federal, 3B; NN, G4

Asfragalus humillimus - Mancos milkvetch Family: Fabaceae Synonyms: Tragacantha humillima, Phaca humillima Status: Federal, LE; NN, G2

Distinquishinq characteristics Milky white latex in stems and leaves; 2-7 branches, the auricles of the hood are erect, herbage pubescence is sparse, leaf shape lanceolate to broadly lanceolate. Stems: woody taproot, 4-8 cm tall, prostrate to ascending Leaves: 2-4 cm long, oblong-lanceolate, white tomentulose on leaf margins Flower: inflorescence terminal; corolla reddish-violet; follicle 118-114 inch long Blooms: Late Aprilearly May Lookalikes: A. ruthiae usu. has one branch, auricles of the hood not erect, herbage pubescence is dense, leaf shape broadly ovate to broadly lanceolate. A. macrosperma has tomentose herbage, pedicels, and calyx; leaves ovatelanceolate to nearly orbicular; stems 5-15 cm long. Habitat: grows on sandy benches and hills near the Chaco River, NM in pinyonjuniper woodland and Great Basin grassland communities

Distinquishina Characteristics: Tufted perennial forming clumps up to 30 cm across stems:' only ~ s t r a g a l i sn the area with persistent spiny leaf petioles, up to 1 cm i long. Pod: spreading, egg shaped, ellipsoid, 4.5 mm long, 2 mm wide Leaves: crowded, up to 4 cm long, 7-11 oval leaflets, 0.7-2 mm long Flower: branches short, 1-3 flowers, petals lavender to purplish, conspicuous lighter colored spot in the throat of the corolla tube; banner 7-10 mm long; keel and banner petal 6-8 rnm long; calyx, 3mm long Phenology: flowers late april to early may, fruits june to early july. Lookalikes: A. deteriorand A. calycosus var. scaposus have flaccid leaf petioles and longer, oblong, or narrowly ellipsoid pods. A. micromerius doesn't have persistent spiny leaf stalks. Habitat: ledges and mesa tops in slickrock communities Ipinyon-juniper woodlands of the Mesa Verde Group, often in cracks in the sandstone substrate or in shallow pockets of sandy soil. 5,000-5,850 ft in elevation.

Astragalus naturitensis - Naturita m ilkvetch Family: Fabaceae Synonyms: A. arientinus var. stipularis Status: Federal, 3C (more abundant than prev. thought); NN, G4 Distinquishinq Characteristics: Low growing, miniature spreading perennial about 10 cm tall Stems: ascending, 2-6 cm long Calyx: 4-8 mm, cylindrical, mixed white and black pubescent, lobes 1-1.5 mm Pod: leathery, less than 2 cm long, more than twice as long as wide, widely spreading, covered with short, stiff, flat-lying hairs, straight except for beak, usually red mottled. Leaves: basal, pinnate with 9-15 leaflets, leaves 2-7 mm, clustered, obovate to elliptic, mostly folded, often glabrate above, stipules free Peduncles: scapose, 2-7 cm, wiith 4-9 subcapitate or briefly racemose ascending flowers Flowers: 10-15 mm long, bi-color banner white with lilac, keel purple spotted, and wings reddish purple or purple tipped Blooms: April to early June IFruits: late May to June

Clematis hirsutissima var. arizonica Arizona leather flower Family: Ranunculaceae Synonym: C. arizonica, C. h. var. hirsutissima Status: Federal, none, NN, G4

-

Distinquishinq characteristics Herbaceous perennial, 20-70 cm high Fruit: head of achenes, each bearing a 4-6 cm plumose style Flowers: nodding, solitary at the end of ea. Stem, 2-4 cm long No petals, but w14, thick purplish sepals, numerous stamens and pistils branch Stems: erect from a somewhat woody base, -5 cm to lst Leaves: pubescent to nearly glabrous, pinnately compound.w/ 7-13 leaflets, these divisions narrowly linear,, usually 1-2 mm, but rarely up to 12 rnm Blooms: Late April to June, Fruits July to August

.ookalikes: A. deterior has yellow-white flowers, A. desperatus has smaller flowers and loosely hirsute pods of broader and shorter outline, A. monumentalis var. cottamii has firm-walled, dorsiventrally compressed, unilocular pods, A. humillimus has persistent, spiny rachises. Habitat: Sandstone mesas, ledges, crevices and slopes in pinyon-juniper woodlands. 5,000-7,000 ft in elevation.

Lookalikes: other Clematis are vine forming. C. hirsutissima (no variety) has more spreading petioles, narrower almost tiliforrn leaflets (1-2mm wide), and mostly smaller flowers (sepals less than or equal to 2.5 cm long). Habitat: moist mtn meadows, prairies, and open woods and thickets usually in limestone soils of ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests, 6,800 to 9,000 ft

Phlox cluteana Navajo Mountain Phlox Family: Polemoniaceae (Phlox family) Status:

SHRUBLAND SPECIES

Amsonia peeblesii - Peebles blue star Family: Apocynaceae (Dogbane) Status: Federal, none; NN, G4

Distinquishinq Characteristics Robust, herbaceous perennial, glabrous, 40-90 cm tall Seeds: cylindrical, corky, 8-11mm long, 1.5-2.5 mm broad Leaves: upper leaves linear, 1-2 mm wide lower leaves oblong-linear, 4-9 mm wide Flower: corolla trumpet shaped, white or light blue tube 13-19 mm long lobes 5-10 mm long follicle 2-10 cm long Blooms: May to June, leaves turn golden color in fall Lookalikes: Glabrous form of A, tomentosa var. stenophylla has smaller flowers (712 mm long) and the follicles are moderately constricted between the seeds (A. peeblesii has smoothly cylindrical follicles) Habitat: Little Colorado watershed; grows in grasslands and Great Basin desertscrub communities. Subtrate tvDes ranae from stronalv alkaline 4,000-5,62:IS t

I? !

prelai~

disturbance areas.

pev;;sci

il/'?i:(~:

TABLE 8

Hydrology Site ID'S Cross Referenced With Engineering and Reclamation Site ID'S for Permanent Impoundments to be left in tho Final Reclaimed Landscape

Hydrology ID'S* J1-RA-P J1-RB-P J2-A-P J3-D-P J3-E-P J3-G-P J3-PII#l-P J3-PIIH2-P J3-PII#3-P J3-PIIH4-P J3-PII#5-P J7-DAM-P J7-JR-P J7-R-P JIG-A-P JIG-G-P J16-L-P J19-RB-P J2 1-A-P J21-C-P J21-I-P J27-RA-P J27-RB-P J27-RC-P TPF-D-P TPF-E-P

Enqr./ R e d . ID' st* (Jl-RR, Jl-PIHl) (Jl-RB, J1-PI#2) (J2-A) (33-D) (J3-E) (J3-G, J3-G(P1)) (J3-PII#l) (J3-PIIX2) (J3-PII#3) (J3-PII#4) (J3-PII#5) (J7-DAM) (J7-JR) (37-R) (J16-A) (J16-G) (J16-L) (J19-RB) (321-A) (J21-C) (J21-I) (327-RA) (J27-RBI (J27-RC) (TPF-D, TPF-PI#l) (TPF-E)

Hydroloqy ID' s Ml-PII#l-P Ell-PIIH2-P Ill-PA-P Ml-PIIH4-P N1-RB-P Nl-PII#6-P Nl-PIIH7-P M2-RA-P N2-RB-P N2-RC-P N5-A-P NC-L-P N7-D-P M7-E-P 118-RF-P
NlO-Al-P

Enqr. /Reel. ID'S

(1.12-RB) (N2-RC) (MS-A) (N6-L) (M7-D) (Pq-E)

El10-D-P PIlO-G-P M11-A-P N11-G-P M12-C-P M14-D-P N14-F-P M14-G-P 1.114-H-P

* ~ l l site ID'S (not in parentheses) are used in the Hydrology sections and on Exhibits -P 85600 and 93500

**

Corresponding Engineering and Reclamation site ID'S in parentheses and are those shown

on Exhibits 85324 and 85405

TABLE 9

Elevations and Coordinates for Existing And Proposed Permanent Impoundments

UTM

Peabody

Surface Site I.D. Elevation

Northing Coordinate

Easting Coordinate

Northing

Easting

Coordinate Coordinate

Revised 11/21/03

TABLE 9 ( C o n ' t )

Elevations and Coordinates for Existing And Proposed Permanent Impoundments

Surface Site I .D. Coordinate Elevation

Northing Coordinate

Easting Coordinate

Northlng Coordinate

Easting

N10-A1-P N10-D-P N10-G-P N11-A-P N11-G-P N12-C-P N14-D-P N14-F-P N14-G-P N14-H-P TPF-D-P TPF-E-P

The emphasis on permanent impoundment monitoring will shift to focuslng r ~ nthe ezternally draining permanent impoundments adjacent to all current and proposed future mlning.

Exceptions to this will be the continued monitoring of PIIs Jl-R&-P a~nd Jl-RB-P until the bond release application for the parcel draining to these ponds is submitted. Also, PI1

J19-RB-P when completed and its watershed stabilized, and P I 1 J3-G-P will eventually be monitored.

Since bond release will be accomplished through a series of applications over a range of years, there is no need to monitor all externally draining permanent impoundments and the one proposed permanent internal impoundment (Jl9-RB-P) simultaneously.

The

approach

will

be

to

focus

on monitoring

groups

of

ponds

in

time

frames

that

correspond to proposed bond release and/or permanent construction schedules.

impoundment deslgn sulsmittal and

Bond release submittals are proposed to be made appro: